My gg-grandfather A. J. Lacy was a Brevet 2nd Lt. in Co. C of the Eighth (Dibrell's) Tennessee Cavalry. In June 1863 he submitted his resignation (for reasons unknown, possibly health-related) to take effect July 1. The resignation was approved by Lt. Col. Daugherty, Col. Dibrell, and Gen. Armstrong. Dibrell noted on the letter that "Lt Lacy is not qualified for the office to hold," while Gen. Armstrong noted "This officer is not competent to hold the position."

Before officials back at Bragg's headquarters in Shelbyville could act on this, Rosecrans began the Tullahoma Campaign and Lacy moved with his regiment to Chattanooga. In late July 1863, Lt. Col. Daugherty and Col. Dibrell approved a pass to allow Lacy to go home to his family in Jackson County. But then Bragg's staff disapproved the pass, saying "this man is liable to conscription". And the next day, the Eighth Cavalry was ordered back to Sparta to keep an eye on Rosecrans. Years later it was Dibrell's recollection that Lt. Lacy's resignation was effective August 15, 1863. This was while the regiment was still in Sparta, facing multiple attacks by Federal forces under Minty while many of the regiment were on furlough to gather up clothing and supplies and horses. Adding to the chaos going on, it is said that many guerrillas on both sides were "infesting" the region. Lacy never made it home, his fate unknown. There are no further records of him.

To this day, we don't know how it is that the family came to have all his letters (both to him and from him, most of which are in my possession) AND his pass. We don't believe he intended to quit fighting, as in one of his last letters to his family he mentioned getting cloth to have a new uniform made. Although this letter was written the day after his letter of resignation, he didn't mention his resignation to his family.

Here's my question: is it appropriate to apply a modern interpretation to the wording that Lacy was "not qualified for the office to hold", or "not competent to hold the position"? There was no indication that there was anything wrong with Lacy's conduct or service. In his letter of resignation he said there were no charges against him, and in fact it appears that his brevetting came about during Forrest's raid into western Tennessee the previous December. We do know he was sick for several weeks, a couple of months before his resignation, and still not feeling well at the time he wrote the letter of resignation. Would an inability to perform one's duties as an officer because of lingering effects of illness lead to an endorsement on a resignation that an officer was not "qualified" or "competent"?