The weekly pioneer and Democrat. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn. Territory) 1855-1865, 1863-01-02

| Ans.-Yes, sir, because I could take
the heights with my command, and then
put them in condition of defence. If
had gone there, not man of the enemy
would have come to Fredericksburg, but
they would have gone to some other river
and fortified there if we had given them
time, as etfectually as they have here. I
regard the rebel position on the Rappahan-
mock as strong one; mean the one they
retired to from Manassas. They had the
advantage of two railroads-one to bring
supplies from the West, and the other
from Richmond to bring troops from there
1t is the strongest position they had in Vir-
ginia. The advantages Of this position to
hold against force wishing to cross the
river and attack it, are such as Ihave never
seen before.
The following is from Hallecks testi-
mony:
Ques.-Was there or not any agreement
or understanding between you and Burn
side, that pontoons and army stores, or
either Of them, should be furnished to him
by authorities here, without his looking af-
ter them himself?
Ans.-No.
Ques.-l will say any stores necessary
Tor slm to cross the river and move for
ward for Fredericksburg ?
Ans.-4es. | requested Gen. Meigs
and Gen. HOupt in charge of railroads to
go with me to consult with Burnside, and
| told him every thing was at his DISPOSE
ton; he must make his own acquisitions,
and give his own orders; that would not
/ Interfere except to assist in carrying out
his views as much as | could, whenever
any thing was reported to me as not be-
ing done, that | would render all the as
slstance in my power
Ques.-1Ou recollect whether or not
| there was any discussion when you were
| there as to the point that it was necessary
that pontoons and army should arrive at
Falmouth at the same period of time, so
that the enemy should not know the point
| designated for the crossing?
| Ans.-I do not think that was mention
ed. This matter know was mentioned,
that pontoonS should be there as soon as
| they could after we got possession of the
| road.
Ques.-At any time did Gen Woodbury.
go to you and suggest thai it would be
| impossible to get pontoons or stores at Fol-
mouth as soon as expected, and that was
the reason it would be advisable that the
movement of the army OF Burnside should
be delayed
Ans.-Not to my recollection WOOD
bury, In conversation, spoke of the difficult
ty Ill getting sufficient transportion to go
down, and therefore that the train should
go by land. The transports were required
to get down provisions, and it was suggest
ed that as few as possible should be used
Tor moving pontoon trains.
Cues. Gen. Burnside has been in
command OF the Army Of the Potomac,
have all its movements been made :ccord-
ing to his Judgment and discretion rs far
as you know?
Ans.-Ies, entirely.
CUES i understand You to say that de-
| lay III bridges You think was caused by the
clements and the nefficiency of men. and
that there is nobody to blame that you
know of?
Ans.--i viii not say insufficiency Of
men, but will say this, that Burnside re-
ported to me that the officer in command
OF the land train had not been a.; efficient
as he ought to have been, and he after
wards modified that report. l told him
to arrest any person who had neglect
ed bis duty, and send him to Washington
Immediately
General Meigs testimony is to the effect
that in his opinion there was mistake in
| expecting the pontoons, which he believed
were at the time at Berlin, to be brought
to Falmouth, while the army made two and
q half days more.
General Haups' testimony was taken,
but not submitted with the report