The Caledonian. [volume] (St. Johnsbury, Vt.) 1837-1867, 1863-02-13
Gen. Mcclellan and the Defense of
Washington.
IMPORTANT LETTER FROM MAJOR GEN.
HITCHCOCK.

IMPORTANT LETTER FROM MAJOR Gen.
HITCHCOCK.
The following letter BY Major Gen f.. A.
Hitchcock, advising general of the war de-
partment, was called out by an erroneous
and inaccurate publication of the testimony
given by him before the Mcdowell court of
inquiry:
To the Editor of the Daily Chronicle.
SIR: The New York Times of Yesterday
contains what was designed to be received
by the public as q report of my testimony
before the Mcdowell court, now in session
in this city, but it is so full of errors and in
accuracies of all sorts, misplacements of whole
passages, and in one material particular di-
rectly reversing my statement, that beg to
request that you will afford space in your
columns for an accurate publication of that
testimony, together with the documents ex-
hibited with it, which can doubtless be had
at the courtroom.
If my testimony was worth publishing at
all,it oughtto have been published as | gave it.
1t was the duty of the court to determine the
questions should be called upon to answer
and mine only to state the truth, as sworn To-
The court asked my opinion touching the re-
sponsibilities in case of disobedience of or
ders BY Gen Mcclellan, in not leaving fol
: the security of Washington the force desig-
/ mated by the four commanders of the four
army corps composing the Army of the Po
tomac.
In answering this question, | placed the
responsibility where the military law and ar
nv usage has always placed it-with the off
Ger who, as wa. assumed in the question, had
disobeyed the order-to wit with Gen Nc
Clellan, and not with the President, who, il
making good his original order by the de-
tention of a part of Mcdowell, corps il
front of Washington, merely took necessary
step to repair mischief committed by Ger
Mcclellan himself, in not attending to tn,
order of the Sth of March, which was reiter
ated through the secretary of war on the 18th
of the same month.
In the Times report of my testimony, thi
portion of it is inverted, and l am put for
ward--I am bound to suppose by accident =
as placing the responsibility with the Presi
dent, and not with Gen Mcclellan.
My opinion was, and was so stated to TIT
court, that Gen Mcclellan, in disobeying the
orders of the President, took upon himsel
the responsibility for all the consequence
that might follow such disobedience. Thi
is plain military principle, which every sol
dier understands.
Twill add here that Gen McClellan's prop
er course, under the orders of the President
was first to obey the orders punctually ant
precisely, and then to consider whether h
had sufficient force left for the execution o
his plan of going to Richmond via yorktown
, and the Peninsula. If not, he should hav
reported to the President before starting OF
his expedition. If in that case, the Presi
: dent had required him to proceed in the ex
: ecution of his plans, all the world woult
| have placed the responsibility at the door o
e the President. Gen Mcclellan did not d
, this.
$ He commenced his expedition "neglecl
ing" the point SO "explicitly" ordered by tn
Presidet, and put large part of his fore
in motion for the Isthmus before the Fresi
e dent knew of that " neglect" and thus tool
l.. upon himself the entire responsibility for a
e that followed.
I A brilliant success has often protected a
officer from the penalty affixed by law-se
the 9th article of War-to disobedience o
= orders; but it will be a new feature in mill
tary history when failure resulted from de
f parture Of plans and orders, shall be visite
> upon the superior, whose plan was not iol
lowed and whose orders were neglected"
: Respectfully, &C., E. A. HITCHCOCK.
a Washington City, d. C., Jan Il, 1863.