The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1848-04-30

and ardent desire for active service you took from him
me command OF his own regiment, devolved it on Of
his junior officers and ordered him back 10 Gen Tayors
Inc 70 look Tor what was not inappopraely denominaed
an imaginary command" Outraged in his feelings and
injured IN his rights, he respectfully demonstrated his
appeal to your sense OF justice unavang Neither
10 inns gallant officer 10 the President did you assign
any suceht or even plausible for this extraor-
binary proceeding. The whole army, believe and the
whole country, when the transaction became known,
entef'aihed put one oplnon on ihe snb;ect-and that
was, mai you had inflicted injury and an outrage
upon brave and meritorous officer Such an act
almost The hfst on your assuming communicated
disastrous consequences to the public service, and de-
voved upon the President the duty of nteposne TO pro-
tect the injured officer This interposon YOU have
made grave matter OF accusation against the head of the
var department and have characterized it as censure
and rebuke. 1t may imply both, and still, being merit
ed may leave you without preence for complaint The
Presidents after abiding to his duty TO sustain the rights
OF the Officers under your command, well your own
rights informed you that he did not discover in the case
as you had presented It,, sufficient cause for such an or
der; that IN his opinion, Col Harvey had Just cause to
complains and that he hoped the matter had been recon
sdeed by you and the colonel restored to his appropriate
command. Your own subsequent course in this case
demonstrates the unreasonableness of your complaint
and indicates the correctness of the Presidents proceed
ings lou mad really rebuked and censured your own
conducts for even before you had received the Presidents
views, you had, as he hoped you would reconsdered
me matter become convinced of your error, reversed
your own order, and restored Col Harvey to his com
mand thus giving the strongest evidence in favor of the
propney and correctness OF all the President had done in
the case give you too much credit for steadness of
purpose, to suspect that you reaced your steps from
mere caprice or for any other than conviction
mat you had fallen into After the matter had thus
.enaieu, appears pnaccouniabe 10 me that you who
above all others should wish it TO pass into oblivion
nave again called attention TO by making an item in
your arrangement of the War Department
You struggle In vain to vindlcate your in this
case, by referring to your acts in the campaign of
lol4 You then sent away, as you aege, against their
wishes, 'three senior field officers of many regiments
who were infrm uninst,ucted and inefficient, favor
anutU tho uheoo
OF Major General Brown, and the head OF the War
Department. This precedent does not, in my udg-
ment, change the aspect of the present Colonel
Harvey was not "inrm, uninstruced and inefficient"
You did not assign, and in Difference to the known opn
ION OF the army and country, you did not venture to
assign that reason Tor deposng him. | do not under
stand the force OF your logical deduction, that because
you, on former OCCASION had deprived officers under
you of their commands for good and sufficient reasons
with subsequent approval you may and at any time,
40 the same thing without any reason whatever; and
the President nteposes TO correct the procedure
have just cause to complain of an indgnity, and a
right to arragn the War Department
AS your anmadversion upon the tone of my letter is
probably not blow aimed at much more conspicuous
object to be reached through me- ought perhaps pass
without notice On revision of that letter. cannot per-
ceve that It is not entirely respectful in and Ian
guage The views of the President therein confident
" expressed because they confidently entertained
seemed to be admitted by you that eff dictated TO the
greenest general OF the recent appointments the letter
would not have been eXceptonable | was not aware
that was my duty to modify and graduate my style,
as to meet according to your asdlous views, the vari
Gus degrees OF genness and rpeness OF the generals
whom am required TO convey the orders OF the Presi
dent; and for any such defect in my official communca
tons have no apology TO offer.
In the same letter. wherein you complain of being
sured tor your in relation to Colonel Harvey you
say am now rebuked for the unavodable-nay, wise
the prisoners taken at Cerro Gordo, before one
word OF commentator from government had reached
" this army on account of lis gallant conduct in the cap
6 ture of those prisoners" Accident alone-not any
m rf---h1 pIypn ha
parent advantage of the aggravaton which you have art
fully thrown into this charge. My letter commenting
the glorious achievement Cerro Gordo was written and
sent to you the 10th of Mayeleven days before that
which you are pleased to consider containing rebuke
You never were rebuked for discargng the prisoners ia
ken at Ceo Gordo This issue be tried by the record
All that was ever said on the subject is contained in the
following extract from my letter of the 31s OF May:
Your course hitherto in relation to prisoners of war
both and officers, in dschargng them parole, has
been liberal and kind; but whether ought to be still
longer continued or in some respects changed has been
under the consideration Of the President and he has direct
ed me to communicate to you his views the subject
ton the sending OF them the United States would
casion but SO far relates to the officers he thinks they
viii probably be found expedient send them or most Of
them to the United States You will nor therefore, except
for special particular cases. discharge the Off
who may be taken prisoners but detan them with
YOU send them to the United States, you shall deem
most eXpedient" .fsl 1.
this language which, by fair interpretation be made
to express or imply rebuke cannot conceive that any
mind other than of diseased constituencies, over
anxious to discover for complaint and accusation
could imagine that anything like a rebuke was contained
ia this extract yet this unsubstanal basis alone rests
the charge, over and again presented that you
rebuked by the War Department for dscharging the
prisoners captured al Cerro Gordo IT, in case where it
easy TO be right, and difficult get wrong you
could fall into such an obvious mistake, what may not be
expected from you in other matters where your perverted
feelings have a freer and wider range?
Before considering your complaints for not having been
supplied with sufficient of transportation for the
expedition against Vera Cruz, will notice your " four
memorials" TO the War Department in which you demon
basis of operations, and that the enemys capital could
not probably be reached from the Rio Grande"
cannot discover the pertinenCy OF your aluson to
these four memorials, except it be to put forth claim
TO the merit of originating the expedition against Vera
Cruz, and of being the first to discover that the most
practicable route to the city Of Mexico was from that
point on the gulf but your known adherence Tor a
pruency of fame not earned" ought to shield you
from the suspicion of such an infrmity
am sure you are not Ignorant of the fac-but if You
are it nevertheless truehat the expedition against
Vera Cruz had been for time under consideration
that great pains had been taken 10 get information to
the deences of that city, the strength of the CASTLE and
the difficulties which would attend the debarcaton of
troops that maps had been procured and carefully ex-
amned that persons who had resided there and officers
of the army and navy had been consulted on the subject
and the enterprise actually resolved before the date of
your first memoir. and before you thought of to
conduct it.
As early the 9th of July, 1916, within two months
after the declaration OF and before the main body Of
operations considerate attention had been given that
subject On that day. letter from This deparment