, 1863-03-06
CASE OF GEN. MCDOWELL
Ftnd1ngs and Opinions of tho Court
Of Inquiry.


COURTROOM, WASHINGTON. D.C,
Saturday, Feb. II, 1858.
1nc INQUIRY directed in this case is Of a
e19mplenesnslye o9ap en- and unusual character. No
nE: T,iarEes had been preferred against Gen. Nc
Dowcil. and no--liylng accuser had presentel 1I
i nlmsen to make the slightest Complaint
against him nevertheless. lie f}pcrned = ~, ,
gortant that his whole conduct os Gene,
D1accr SHOULD be made the subject OF judicial
31nfes11gat1on and in his letter requesting a
court o. INQUIRY, he discloscs the existence
u sucn extreme dissatisfaction, as to int1uce
dying officer to imrute tLc loss of h;s liz
"McDowells treachery. 10 specif5e H. act aa,t
Of treason was indicated by that officer NV
~ must have been forcscen, in view of tile
hlgh command iutrustcd to Gen. Mcdowell
nor.nGt nnr.ng tne present rebellion, aud the i'm
support II, that an investigation into bis
whole conduct would opcn vide field Of IN
quiry- Notwithstanding the presence of ciyi1
war, and the difficulty Of detailing officers
and q Witnesses HE g to conduct such an inycs.isa-
tlon. the Government has Judged it eynrdien+
to direct this Court to make It.
II tile LITTER requesting tho INQUIRY. Gen
Mcdowell publishes the following invitation:
beg that all officers, soldiers or civilians.
who know or think they know Of any net Of
n,ne nao!e 10 the charge in question, bc al-
Court. In thus inviting proceeiinr in
Tnlca be confronts the whole world, the
Court constituted to conduct it, is placed in
IN aIttude to assume that Gen. Mcdowell
y vas the object Of widespread discontcnt in
INC army and among civilians.
The investigation would scarcely he cnm.
nietc which did not seek after some solution
1or such general dissatisfaction at least If Il
could be found within the appropriate limits
OF "a }aulcial inquiry by pertinent testimony.
70 TINS end much testimony has been re-
eslsee; G.', dm1seuss3ng the particular conduct Of
ucn. Mc!oWeH since he WAS assigned to the
command Of division in the army Of the Po-
tomac' under Gen. Mcclellan, on fho 9th day
Of AngraI, 1861.
IT. is not deemed necessary to furnish IN
.aDstract of the testimony In this report, ex-
eGpt u q few instances, where It appears Do,
nna11e ios an Intelligent understanding OF thc
inefe 1olo"s an analysis Of the charges and tha
e'1uenee n' taken thereon in chronological o,der.1
g Ihe Court also feels bound to rcnort tba
iact ,"1 mat his commanding officer. Gen Pone ne
noI only omitted to hold him culpable for i; this
SSh1t,ons Ssho1a non put enphatica1y commended his
"1thont II 9 exception Or qualification.
~ 1ne conrse OF the investigation, Gen. Mr.
~ Uo"cil manifested a just and proper scusibil
", to the dissemination against him If
orTnke1ncss m as well rs disioyalfy.
ofl3ccT caafe OF Of, o. alsloyaty was made by m
tally wounded In battle. 1t yas made IN ran,
eral el terms, without defining any spcciflc act.
The accuscr Is dead, and the Court does mi
leGi al liberty to SAY more Of it than that it is
Lauf destitute Of any foundation in fact;
nat It is utterly disproyed by MI the evidence
bearing on the point, and that the dying OIL
,er, who made 1t, must have been the sIbiect
of dcplerab1c misapprehension, ike many
others, who nave formed opinions from cal
1mn1ons rumors and presentations.