Notes and Queries.
“did General R. E. Lee descend from Robert, the Bruce King of Scotland?” --Professor William Winston Fontaine, in a paper read before the Louisville branch of the Southern Historical Society March 29th, 1881, which we hope before long to find space to publish in full, has shown very conclusively that through the Carters and Spotswoods our “King of men” was descended from the noble King Robert Bruce of Scotland; and that “of the five heroes who particularly distinguished themselves on the glorious field of Bannockburn, in driving back the invader of their beloved country, Lee, through the same channel, was the direct descendant of four--namely: King Robert; Thomas Randolph, Earl of Moray; Walter, the High Steward; and Sir Robert de Keith, Great Marischal of Scotland.” Professor Fontaine cites a number of authorities, and deserves great credit for the industry he has shown in bringing out these interesting links in the lineage of our great chief, who was in himself the peer of any Lord, or King, or noble civilian the world ever saw.
“ was Lieutenant Meigs, of General Sheridan's staff, killed in fair combat?” --The conclusive testimony on this point which we published in our February number was an end to all controversy, and we were not surprised to learn that Quartermaster-General Meigs (with whom we have deeply sympathized as not only losing a gallant son, but believing that he was foully murdered instead of having met a soldier's fate in fair fight) has written to a friend that he is “fully satisfied that this is a correct account of the sad affair.”
If General Sheridan had investigated the matter, and enquired of General Early concerning it, instead of receiving the report of the man who ran off and left his officer and his comrade to their fate, the friends of Lieutenant Meigs would have been spared this cruel suspicion, innocent people might have been relieved of the cruel wrong of burning their houses, and the record of General Sheridan have been free from this foul stain.
“were the Dahlgren Papers, as published in the Richmond Papers, authentic, or were they Forgeries?”
We have been carefully collecting the testimony, and shall before long publish the most incontrovertible evidence that the papers published were taken from the person of Colonel Dahlgren; that they were not altered in any way, and that the charge of forgery is utterly [191] groundless, since there was no opportunity to forge them, even if there had been the inclination.
Meantime, as we wish to make our paper so conclusive that it cannot be answered, we beg any of our friends who may have facts bearing on the question to send them forward at once.
“Jeb.” Stuart's correspondence at Lewinsville we quoted from a version we had at the time of its occurrence, but we are very much gratified to receive from our friend, Major McClellan, the following exact copy of the original:
J. E. B. Stuart, Esq., Commanding cavalry near Fall's Church.
“In care of whoever finds this. Please answer both the note and Griffin's invitation.”
Upon the back of this sheet is the following in Stuart's own hand-writing:
[192]
We print the following letter in the hope that some one will be able to send the information desired by the gallant soldier who writes it:
