......... Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
https://apnews.com/afs:Content:9009420680
>
>
> CLAIM: Gen. Robert E. Lee, who led the Confederate
> States Army in the Civil War, “opposed both
> secession and slavery.” He did not own slaves.
>
> AP’S ASSESSMENT: False. According to historians,
> not only did Lee own slaves, but he also fought in
> court to keep working slaves from his
> father-in-law’s estate. Claims casting Lee as an
> anti-slavery figure are tied to a false narrative
> known as the Lost Cause, which says the
> Confederate experience in the Civil War was not
> about slavery, but state’s rights
AP's Assessment is so misleading that to say it is wrong is being charitable. It fails to draw a distinction between owning slaves as the executor and owning slaves outright. It fails to discuss the intricacies of Virginia estate administration law as it existed in the 19th century, especially regarding slaves. It fails to discuss the specifics of George Washington Parke Custis's estate. Why did they conveniently ignore these points? Was it because those making the assessments were grossly ignorant of how these issues impacted the claim that Lee was a slave owner? Or was it because those making the assessments were deliberately trying to skew the results?
Lee did not own slaves outright like Grant did. As executor Lee had far less control over the fate of Arlington's slaves than Sherman had over the fate of the slaves owned by the school Sherman was running in Louisiana (the future LSU). This does not mean that Lee was one of the good guys. While he was serving as a soldier in the U.S. army his lifestyle was supported by slave labor through his father in law. However a great many northerners also profited from slave labor.