The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1858-01-10

and then surrendering all the advantages won by
the blood of so many brave men under his command.
would only show that acting under his influence,
had sanctioned his fatal error and his corrupt con-
Duct but is could not relieve him from the respon-
sibility Of conduct belonging to his position-not
nine. In other words, it might prove that General
Scott possessed and exercised an influence over my
opinions and Judgment inconsistent with the proper
Ascharge of my duties in the relation bore to this
mission. That such was the fact may well be infer
red from the history of the negotiations as given by
myself In that address. But however much may
have erred in agreeing at the private conference to
suspend my opposition to this negotiation for refec-
tion my opinions of the character OF the transaction
were not changed by the views given by Gen. Scott;
but apprchending rupture with him, agreed to
suspend my Opposition, IN Me hope S tnas the nego,
rupture be thus avoided.
This meeting of general officers took place the
night after the conference at Mr. rrists quarters.
l knew nothing of the intended meeting until was
summoned to attend it; nor did know its object I'M
bill that was explained by Gen. Scott to the officers
present.
Having, at the private conference agreed to sus-
pend my opposition for reflection should have vio-
officers opposed the nego iation. When, therefore,
Unexpectedly called upon by Gen. Scott for my OPT
Mon (which he already well knew, did, as Gen.
Quitman states latter some pause" or hesitation,
kef that was in favor of the negotiation. He doubt
less gives the impression made upon his mind
in his own language; but the position | took
was about ths-that though / thought the pro-
posed measures were wrong yet supposed that in
agreeing to them, were choosing the least OF evils.
That, at the meeting of general officers was under
stood az giving the measure my sanction, have
never denied. On the contrary, in my sworn state
nent before the Court of Inquiry while in the city
Of Mexico, and likewise in my letter in reply to Gen.
Hitchcock, l stated that l had agreed with Gen.
Scott temporarily to suspend my opposition, and
that at the meeting of general officers did so.
false position for early next morning went to Gen.
Scott-told him my original opinions were unchanged
and opposed the whole matter with 80 much
warmth aud earnestness that he thanked me for the
manly manner in which expressed myself, and said
he would abandon the whole negotiation; and after
wards did read me from the book into which the
original had been copied letter intended to relieve
himself from the part he had borne in the matter.
though l do not now remember to have said to
Gen. Quitman that / had changed my views-as
he says did-yet, desiring to place myself
night IN bis estimation, after what occurred at
the meeting Of general officers, and not being
al liberty to explain 70 him the relations bore to
the government or the Trist mission nor the position
had taken at the private cenference-it is quite
probable did say to him afterwards that had
changed my views. In the situation in which was
placed that was the only course left me. Neither
General Quitmsn any other officer at that meet
ing Except General Scott, had any knowledge OF
my connection with that mission. General Scott,
however, did know it; and ] indignantly repel the
imputation made by General Hitchcock, and repeat
ed by General Scott, of being "spy upon General
Scott, or Mr.. Trist," as base SANDER. How could
have been called to the private conference with
Mr.. Trist and General Scott, and consulted about
these very negotiations, without General Scott
knowing my connection with this mission, and the
relations l bore to the government Why was
invited to it, if was not known to occupy semi
official relations with Mr.. Trist?" Knowing these
facts, what right has he to say was spy upon
him and Mr.. Tristl" The statement is untrue, and
the facts stated clearly prove that he knew it to be
untrue when he made it.
In my address stated that opposed the arms
tce-which was the first evidence had that Gen.
Scott acting upon and carrying into effect the,
Puebla negotiations. His reference to the statements
q Gen. Quitman, that sanctioned his views at the
meeting Of general officers, intended to discredt
ny statement of opposition TO the armistice One OF
Ais charges against me, which was investigated be-
lore the Court Of Inquiry, was that was in favor OF
This armstice before it was granted and opposed to
Il afterwards. He vainly sought to establish this
charge by proof At the very time he made this
charge against me, he had in bis possession written
sote from me, delivered to him by Gen. Pierce, one
Of the Commssioners,) in which i urged him, as
nodestly as could, and in language N little Often
sve TO his feelings possible, not to grant the ar
nisce thout the surrender OF the city; and in any
event. and at all hazards TO require the surrender OF
two personal interviews with Gen. Scott-one on
the battle field of Churubusco, and Immediately
after hating the army under his orders-the
other, at Tucabaya next day, in conjunction
purpose OF granting an armistice. Finding him inn
movable in his purpose and being then satisfied that
he Was carrying into effect the Puebla negotiations
| addressed him the following note, which Gen.
Pierce proved he delivered before the commission
vas organized, to fix upon the terms of the armis-
August %, 1si7
Ny DEAR GESrRA1--You viii, am sure, appreciate nay
motives when your friend fast ard true, ask you
could modify the terms OF the proposed armisce
70 authorize friendly intercourse OF the OH ers ard
IN lrnfta tanf nd
c.rs) with the city. so far am concerned, care
Hohng about IT. but your gallant army, which has suffer
I'd 70 much and endured SO mucb and which nov vene
rate your name, will, know, be greatly mortified and
aeApponted at beng excluded rom the city Sth your
sanction. were the commanding general OF the army,
iAnxsous am for peace,) should demand the surren
der Of the city But any event, and at all hazards
shculd require the surrender OF Chaputcpec and the
above suggested rights Of intercourse with the city ~
yot friend cannot, in justice 10 nay feelings withhold
this expression OF my opinion Yours, truly, -
GID. j. PILLOW.
To Gen. SCOTT.
Upon the investigation before the Court of Inqui-
ry Cen Scott denied that he had received any such
note from me- Gen. Pierce proved that he had de-
hvered IL. The Court made an order requiring Gen.
Scott 20 produce it, aud II produced and read In
that case and Is copied from the record of that
investigations; yet he refers to my supposed ap-
prevail OF the Pueba negotiations, to prove that
was in favor of this very armstlce. In this expos
tion of Gen. SCOTS assertions and conduct the pubkc
have the means Of determining what credit IL due TO
his statements.
Gen. Scott, in his second card, says
The Mexican newspapers learn, have recently been
Aed with notices of Gen. Pillows Remuneration Of santa
Anna mixed up with t5e inquiry "Who Is the most mia
NOUS he who receives the bride, or the funconary who
N violation Of his and his countrys honor, dseloses
Ne name Of the uatorf''
Gen. Scott has entirely misapprehended the arti
cles in the Mexican newspapers. Their inquiry is
Who 10 most infamous, he who receives the brhc, or
the functonary who. violation Of his and his coun
uy's honor, administers ir
The answer 10 this inquiry, by the casusist would
be- that the parties were equally corrupt In the
eye of the law they are equally guilty, and would
both be punished Seons The msipprehension,
however OF the inquiry Of the Mexican newspapers,
on the part Of General Scott, is very natural one
era Qutman,) that IL was both moral" and fright"
10 resort to the of brides to effect great good
ss procuring peace.
A a special commissioner, associated with Mr.
Trist, confded in by my government, and required