Daily national Republican. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1862-1866, 1862-12-06
COURT MARTIAL OF GEN. PORTER.

COURT MARTIAL OF GEN. PoRTER.
| FRIDAY. DECEMBER 8.
] The court met at II o'clock. "a
The protest submitted she day previous against
the ruling Of the court deciding tho following
question rs irrelevant, was read VI III
"If, as you have stated, You were ofthe opin
ion that the army under your command had
been defeated and In danger Of still greater de
feat, and the capital of the country In danger
Of capture by the enemy, and you thought these
calamities could have been obviated II General
Porter had obeyed your orders, why was II that
you doubted on the cd ofSeptember whether
you would or would not take action against
himi" H..#
Gen. Pope signifed his willingness to answer
the question, though he claimed his right to OBJ
ject to such questions In the future.
The court, without taking any action on
the protest, allowed the question to be put. The
witness then made the following statement;
on the night of the eeth of August, when ]
found that Gen. Porter did not make his appear.
ance upon the field, and saw the dispatch which
he had written to Gems. Mcdowell and King,
stating that he was about to fall back to Manas.
sas Junction, determined to arrest him and
had commenced to dictate the order for that
purpose, when was persuaded not to do SO by
Gems. Roberts, Mcdowell. Hooker and Heintzel.
man, who were shout me at the time, and
| changed the order into the one which appears
In one Of the specifications of these charges.
| OF the conversation which took place between
the accused and myself at Fairfax Court House,
/ now remember portion which could not
recall yesterday.
said to Gen. Porter that had received in
formation from friends Of mine In Washington
| h. had I.ts.
a dispatch TO Gen. Burnside, dated before he
had Joined me, which criticised very severely
my military conduct and the campaign which
/ was conducting, and exhibited an exceedingly
unkind spirit. asked Gen. P. whether he did
not consider il unfair to me and unjust for him
to write such letter before he had seen me,
before he knew the orders under which was
acting, before he knew the condition of the
army, the disposition Of IL, or the army Of the
enemy, before in fact he knew anything about
! the plan Of campaign, so far as was concerned.
/ He seemed surprised at learning that his let
ter had become known, and stated to me that II
was private letter to Gen. Burnside, which he
had never intended should go any further. He
added that Gen. Kearney had expressed opin-
| ions opposite to his own on the subject of the
campaign, and, therefore, both sides of the ques-
tion would now be heard. He expressed his
regret that he had written the letter, under the
circumstances, without knowing the facts.
After this remark, ! told Gen. Porter that was
satisfied that he had not intended, In writing
this letter, TO hold from cooperation with me,
but was merely the expression of his private
opinion In a private letter to another officer.
], therefore, told him, although ! considered II
unjust and unfair, yet, as he had expressed his
regret at having written il, and not believing
at that time that Gen. Porter had purposely
withheld his command from my army, that
did not intend taking any action In the matter
/ .at II EraV. I.at..
and slow to entertain suspicion of so grave a
character against an officer. Although had
been warned by Gen. Roberts and Lieut.. Col.
Smith that Gen. Porter would be sure to fail
me, did not believe 1t at the time.
Gen. p. could not have believed when stated
! to him that intended TO take no act against
him, that l did not design In my official report
of the operations OF the army, to set forth all
the facts as they had transpired on the field.
This Is all that have yet done. 1t was not
until j came to Washington, on the 4th or 5th
of September, that was informed by the Presi-
dent of the United States that he had seen
several dispatches or letters from Gen. Porter
to Gen. Burnside, dated day or two previous
\ TO those battles, which had oc occasioned him very
grave apprehensions that General Porter would
fail to do his duty. This communication of
the President to me opened my eyes TO many
matters, which Twas 10th to believe before, and
which cannot yet bring myself to believe.
Cross-erdnined. Many persons spoke to him
of Porter's unreliableness. He had never told
General Porter that he had intended to put him
under arrest.
Q. State, II you can remember, If the accused
proposed to answer the dispatch of Major
General Mcclellan by telegraph, whether he
was or was not permitted TO use the telegram,
and II this paper (handing him the dispatch
subjoined) is the one presented to him:
| FAIRFAX, c. H., 10 a. M, Sept. 2, 1862,
! u
You may rest assured that all of your friends,
as well as every lover Of his country, will ever
give, as they ever have given, to General Pope
their cordial cooperation and constant support
in the execution Of all orders and plans. Our
killed, wounded, and enfeebled troops attest
our devoted duty. F. j. PORTER,
Maj. Gen. U. 8. A.
A. am not sure that read this dispatch
think did not, but i remember that General
Porter said something to me, or asked permis-
sion from me to send a telegraphic dispatch, I
think, in reply to the dispatch of General Nc
Clellan's. | stated to him that had, many
days previous, received positive orders from
General Halleck TO allow no dispatch to pass
over the teiegraphic line except official dis
patches signed by myself. ] had never permit.
ted anybody to send such dispatches unless
eountersigned by me, on official business, nor
had !, myself, taken the liberty of sending any
dispatches except official dispatches, on army
business.
The cross-examination was continued some
time, but no new facts were elected.
The court, at 3 O'Clock, adjourned until this
morning at II O'Clock.
THE MCDOWELL COURT OF INQUIRY
FRIDAY, Dec. 8, 1862.
The court met at IL O'Clock. Col. Ruggles
was the first witness sworn. His testimony re
lated chiefly to the character and position
Of the witness examined the day before-Col
r. d. Goodwin. He charged him with imbecil
ity and dishonesty; but this portion of the ties
timony was ruled out by the court.
Gen. Mcdowell then presented the following
protest:
II am and have been 10th to consume the
time and tax the patience of the court in tn,
matter Of the character of X. d. Goodwin.
have thought In this case, which the court has
already ruled was an exceptional one, ] coult
show what ] am assured and believe il tn,
fact, that the witness has attempted to pas
forged papers on the Government, and has beer
an inmate Of one of the New York penitentia
ries. am not acquainted with the practice O
civil courts, and have felt In this case such act
must be sufficient 10 dscredit the witness among
military men;
[Signed] IRWIN Mcdowell.
December 5, 1892
81