Weekly national intelligencer. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1841-1869, 1863-04-30
GEN. ROCKERS TESTIMONY.

oont OF one OF the New OK papers announced
that Gen. Hooker, in giving his testimony before
the Congressional Committee on the Conduct of
the War, had avowed the opinion that the failure
Of the Peninsula campaign was due to want Of
generalship ON the part of the Commander of the
Army of the Potomac.
This allegation, allowed to transpire in advance
OF the publication of the committees report, was
denied at the time by contemporary in this city,
which believed itself to have good authority for
saying that Gen. Hooker had made no such state
ment before the committee The denial, as re-
lating to topic Of interesting personal and military
concern, was reproduced in our columns.
Now that We have before us the report Of the
evidence taken by the committee-at least Of SO
much as they have thought proper to give, for
in one part we discern the marks Of suppress
sion-it is incumbent on us to say that the state
ment ascribed to Gen. Hooker was genuine, how
ever surrepttiously promulgated. The opening
words Of his testimony are reported by the COM
mittee as follows
WASHINGTON, WEDNESDAY, MARCH II, 1863
Major General Joseph Hooker. sworn and examined by
the Chairman:
Question To what do you attribute the failure of the
Answer do not hesitate to say that it is to be atrbu
ted to the want Of generalshp the part Of
mander."
Having made this correction to remove an erro-
neous impression which might otherwise remain
on the minds of our readers as to the opinions Of
Gen. Hooker, it may be proper for us to add that
in the body Of his testimony he makes no attempt
to conceal his humble estimate of the military ca
pacity Of both Gen. Mcclellan and Gen. Burnside,
by whom the Army Of the Potomac had the mis-
fortune to be commanded before the Government
discovered his superior abilities Speaking of
Gen. McClellan's dilatory motions Immediately
after the battle Of Williamsburg Gen. Hooker says
Answer. think we could have moved right on, and
got into Richmond By the second day after that battle
without another gun being fred.
Question What was done?
Answer. We moved on in q manner never did under
stand losing tine II there was any necessity for that
have yet appreciated it, SO far the best nfsrma
ton have goes the enemy had abandoned the idea of
defending Richmond and it was only when they the
assitude and necency Of our army that they concluded
to make q stand there"
The Committee on the Conduct of the War seem
to have thrown some inferential discredit on this
branch of the Generals testimony, for their report
of the battle Of Williamsburg is as follows:
"The principal fighting was done by the troops under
Gen. Hooker his division sustaining loss Of about 100
Before be reinforced his troops obliged
to hold their position with the bayonet and such ammnn
ton the men could obtain from the bodies of those who
had fallen, the roads being muddy that impossible
to bring up fresh ammunition"
As the distance from williamsburg to Richmond
is about sixty miles, and as the roads at that time
were so muddy that it was impossible to bring up
fresh ammunition while the fight was going on, it
may occur to some minds that the same causes
which detained the ammunition wagons may have
delayed the general advance of the entire army
from Williamsburg; for, if these ammunition wa
CONS could not be brought up few miles, it might
have been equally impossible to advance at the rate
of twenty-five thirty miles per day from Williams
burg to Richmond with all the artillery and material
of the Army of the Potomac.
We believe General Hooker to be very ener-
getic commander, but we question whether any
generalship" was quite equal to the achieve
ment which he exacted under this head at the
hands Of his commander How mud and bad
weather may suffice to keep the most active
General out of Richmond he has himself illus
trated for many weeks past by remaining motion
less at about the same distance from that city
as Williamsburg is Now that these causes are
supposed no longer to exist, or to exist only in
degree which is comparatively inappreciable, we
may at least rejoice that his testimony gives host
ages in pledge of his purpose to demonstrate ca
pacity to impress on the Army of the Potomac that
CELEBRITY of movement which it has heretofore lack
ed, for other than the incapacity, as Gen
Hooker conceves, of the two commanders who pre-
ceded him.
The New York Tribune, in reproducing the tes-
timony Of Gen. Hooker, with special reference to
the condemnation he pronounces' on Gen. McClel-
Ian, accompanies it with the following useful OBJ
servation
Aside from its historical value Gen. Rockers eyi.
dence has special interest at this moment when he s in
command Of the Army of the Potomac, and supposed to
be nearly ready to begin what is meant to be final
psgn 1t is not merely account Of what he did while
holding subordinate command it is Track declaration
Of what he thought his General Chief ought to have
done it s criticism not less than history The nation
which has trusted him with ts chief army will look to this
record for standard by which to his perform
ance it will expect to discover 10 him those sodery
qualities and the ability for command which Mcclellan had
cpate the display Of that courage and genius which will
lead the Army Of the Potomac to victory and to Rich
mond"
This is quite true. The country will also ex-
pect to discover in Gen. Hooker those soldierly