Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 4.
Reverend J. William Jones, Ed.

“ [90] the first Generals of his century. There is but one man to whom I can compare him — a venerable General who, like Lee, is by his devotion to duty, the first soldier of his country.”

We cannot in this brief critique enter into any special view of the different chapters of Major Scheibert's book. We are glad to learn that it will be translated into English by an accomplished lady — the widow of a distinguished General of Engineers in the Army of Northern Virginia. It is a most readable book, and at the same time it will make an admirable text-book of war for West Point or the Virginia Military Institute. Distinguished Northern generals have expressed their opinion that it could be adopted with advantage at West Point if some parts, which, from their point of view, do not do full justice to the North, might be corrected by notes.

We would respectfully suggest to the translator that notes from some of our distinguished officers, as General Early and others, would be very valuable. And we might venture to make a particular suggestion — a full note on the torpedo service of the Confederate States in Charleston harbor and elsewhere would be of permanent value.

Major Scheibert's book appeared in Germany at a most opportune time. It was just after the issue of the work of the Comte de Paris from the press, with its one-sided view of the war and its tissue of singularly incorrect statements with regard to many of the most signal operations of the war. Major Scheibert's book, with its simple, clear statements of an honest, true and brave soldier, who writes without prejudice, and knows whereof he writes, was a complete refutation to the magnificent corps of Prussian officers of the Comte's slip-shod misrepresentations. And now that Captain Bonnecque, of the French Engineers, has paid Major Scheibert the distinguished compliment of forgetting his national hatred of the Germans for the time being, and translating his excellent book into French, it may serve to show Frenchmen that the distinguished Orleanist is a partisan, or at least, that he has not sought accuracy with that devotion to truth with which