The weekly Lancaster gazette. (Lancaster, Ohio) 1860-1863, 1862-07-03

would probably result in an endless con
flict Of testimony.I will not.pursue it any
further at this time.
There is, however. facts abou! whicl
there can be no controversy. that estsb
fishes the charge OF negligence on the
part Of the officers in command, beyont
citil or controversy.
let. The General 10 command was tel
or twelve miles from the field wien thu
battle commenced, and so iucreduloui
was he as 10 a Battle being in progtess
that ha did not arrive on the field unit
ten O'Clock. when the battle had been ra
ging for four hours.
Cd. Tho enemy encamped in full force
on Saturday night, previous to tho battle
within hearing of our drums and bugles
certainly not more than mile or mile
and half from our camps, and slep
soundly on their arms, without you Oh
any of our commanding officers being a
ware of the ia /.
This fact is established by the con
current testimony of more than fifty
wounded prisoners. who came up with me
on the steamer Magnolia. on the Monday
after the battle. They all regarded thu
attack as perfect and complete surprise.
Cd. Not tree waS cit down. not q
shoveliull of earth was thrown up, or 4
siege gun put 10 position. or any otheI
preparation made 10 protect us from at
lark.
Did you, as commander of the thos
exposed position 10 our army, holding th'
key to our position expect an attack
and not take one single step to guard a
gainst is And what came of your owl
tent and baggage, General? Did it fal
into the hands os theIenemy2 If you ex
pected an attack why did you not send i
to the tears
But you say the mature Of the ground
and the enery's superior strength il
Cavalry prevented us (you) } from breaking
through tie veil IF tie Nth approach to as
certain Their true strength and purpose"
You say of the 54th Regiment, that By
your orders il was under arms at daylight
If my recollection of your official repot
of the battle is not greatly at fault,you say
in il that it was not until 8 o'clock thai
you believed a serious attack upon 'oul
whole force was intended.
This was on the 9th Of April. Tht
sun rose about twenty minutes before elk
il was daylight before FIVE, and the morn
ing was clear and cloudlesa. You hat
been in order of battle nearly three hours
and yet SO little did you know Of the en-
emy's force, or his purpose. that yo'
made no efforts to protect your front un
til tho enemy was upon you iu full force
and it was too late to do anything but re
sist as well as you could with raw troops
the overwhelming numbers that were as
sailing you.
Your complaint that relied upon fugi
tives on Tie tl4et Bank for information
is utterly groundless. You saw me a
General NoCook's quarters. | was i
efery division Of the army, the right, til
lef, wing, and from the river to the lin
of pickets OIL the extreme front. -.
conversed with many Of the superlo
officers, aud especially with the officer
Of the gallant and disciplined army unde
G. neral Buell., who saved you and you
division from total destruction. If 20
wish to know the opinion Of men who al
competent judges Of the question at issu
between US, suppose you enquire Of Col
Halleck. Gen. Buell., Gen. McCook, Gel
Boyle, Gen Cri!tenden, or any other con
mauding officer in the army who was n'
in command oiany division of the arm
at Shiloh, on Sunday. the 9th of Apri
Gross negligence aud misconduct cam
be covered up and smothered down b
any highfaluling defamation about sa
atoga and Yorktown. l know IL hes bet
considered matter Of more important
to save the reputation of an officer 'h'
the lives of thousand men in the rank
But Mot time is past. The po5ple Of th
country feel quite as much interest i'd q
lives and fortunes Of the men who are
the ranks, as for the officers who col
mand them. If Gen. Grant was guilty
, misconduct in the battle of Shiloh. he
. comes it that Gen. Halleck has quietl
but efIectually. deprived him ofany col
= tnand?
t The truth is, that pearly all the dist
Q ,ers that bave befallen US in this war,
, attributable 10 the blundering Of inco
D petent or careless officers.
I You have made capital mistake in
raipning me in the coarse and otfensi
o style you have adopted, foi expressing
II opinion Of the officers in command at Il
9 battle.
Q More than ten. thousand men fell V
= Tins to the iucompetency and mismana
. ment Of somebody on that terrible d
" Is it not the privilege Of the people. VIII
sons and brothers have been The aic
10 Of calamity. TO enquire who is ,espor
.s ble for It. and if possible avoid similar
l. antilles in the future?
II By what warrant, then, do you talk
y bout holding me or anybody else ''respo
y ible" for expressing Sn honest opini
81 or criticising your conduct on that Oc
20 sion? / do not know precisely what
o. mean by ''holding me TO an account"
10 what have said or written on the Q
NJ ect, nor is it a matter Of much col
n auence. L trust L shall always be abl
render such an account as will be 81
10 factory to every one whose good opir
er is worth preserviug,weather it is salts
= tory to ypG or not
W. This / believe is the first time in
be history Of this country that an office
I'D command Of an army in the field, has '
an - A. s....:l =. .:k;ooa .nd khpaoio