New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1864-04-02


that bonbardmen being night and day under fire u
the batteries fully much as Capt Gilmore himself
who was then Benham's Chief Engineer, having no
higher appointment beyond what had been given him
by Gen. Benham's predecessor
Tet In connection with neither Of these affairs does
Gen. Benhams name appear in Headley. And at Car
mick Ferry 1t IL stated that Benham, with his brigade,
was permitted 10 make bold reconnaissance, noting
more Tits is absolutely incorrect. The commanding
General ordered reconnaissance OF one regiment al
near II in the morning and counternanded that order
in very few minutes before the regiment had moved,
an1 about four hours after he ordered Benham forward
on the enemy and Authorized him 10 use his disere
ton," ss was published at the time by one who wit
messed it, then acting az Aid 70 the commanding Con
eraL
JuDsE ADVOCATE GEsEuAL's OFFICE, JAN &c, 1868
To h, Ereceav ABRAHAM LINCOLN Prsndeat cfhe Unitd
Saie.
SIN In compliance with your written direction under date
Of 81 inst have carefully examined tho Of Major Ben
ham, and have the honor submit the following report
The appointment OF Major Benham Brgader General
Volunteers by your order revoked on the Ih OF August
last the Recommendation of MoOrGen. Hsleck Of
date approved by the Secretary of War While in command
bad directed attack esIthwork near secesonvie IN
which his troops bad been repu!sed with severe loss IN
communication addressed 10 the Secretary OF War by Major
Gen Hunter, 9th June iuc0.ing letters om Brig Gems
Wrg, end Stevens explanatory OF this attack and repuse 10
GU win sec from the letters Of Cen Wright and Cen
Stevens that In council Of war held on the evening previous
with Gen Bens and wdTned him that he pas abou! 70
gghtG battle IA rtotGiioH Of or4ers.'
This warning spoken the letter Of Cen stevens
to Major Gen Hunter on The eh jay and TINS reieIred TO-
orders were IA fact orders - hgnt battle In TINS zen
Wil,isms and myself IN express terms concured"
IL will BE- obsefyed that there nothing snd in this warning
as 10 any violation Of orGers Gen. huuter has blended "A
his statement bis conviction with tie language OF Gen
Beha warned that I orders to his Genefss were
IN feet orders to hight battle which be teen Huuer ayerred
violation of b. orders to him. Ills language, howeye
bes readily the Interpretation tat the Generals named had
warned Cen Benhsm that he himself about 70 violate the
orders given him by Gen Hunter Interpretation which
would be total departure from The ac as we clearly aser
tain by the words Of Gen Stevens Upon this
phate declaration Of Gen Hunter without probably esain
Ing the letter OF Cen stevens how fSt asiihed
Gen. Bonhams appointment. no doubt revoked Straug
say this peIseph the letter Of Gen Stevens printed
Hunter lad cted IT, though a diaersnt language II read.
publish ed in that Journal thus;
Gen Wright, moreover, warned Gen. benhGm ina, his
orders were in fact orders not to eight battle In this Cen
"iiisn, and Hysei IN express terms ooncurred" If,
1t viii be that By the Introduction Of the word NOT
the meaning Of the sentence totally changed ard reversed
This publication having met the Of Cen Stevens he on
the 2Gh July addresed note to the editor I Nee iok
Time, the original Of which Is before me- In which lie
says desire 70 correct an error either OF the printer or
copyis my official report 10 Cen Hunter In the copy az
printed In your Issue Of the 18th inst is stated Gen
Wright warned Gen. Benhsm that hi. orders were IN fact
orders not to hsht battle II thould read Gen Wnght
warned Gen Bsnham that bis orders In fact order. to
fight battle" meaning thereby Gen Benhams own orders
to his subodnate in relation 70 the operations the morrow"
and that battle inc vitality result from them and not
Gen Huateys order, 10 Gen Benhan, rhte ree not mat
ter brought b,ore The CoereHes IL thus appears that TIE
principal ground which Gen. Benham wa. dismissed from
The volunteer service total Misrepresentation and mas
been etey away BY the fank ana eLphaic 1se
many OF Gen Stevens.
The question still remains to be determined whether the
attack on the earthwok was In fact violation Of Cen
Hunters order 10 Gen Benham This orderthe only one
issued the subeet-bears date on board u - transport
Delaware, Stone River . c. June TO- ebI and Is IN these
In leaving the stono River return to Hilton Head
desire m ny arrangements that you may make for the dpo
sl' q Nlcnlty
sempt TO advance Charleston or attack Fort Johnson
until largely REINFORCED until you receive speche lnsTuc
tiols nom these headquarters to that effect
You Gill; hotssr pTotide fo' secure nf'erohef encdrp
unboats rom the Stone on the le aud the from the
Folly River the right glance at the map when ac
tia, The attempt capture the esrhworx at Secession
vile not al advance on ChaTes'on distant ten nor
" an attack on Fort johnson" distant seven miles
Cen Benha had located hi, ntreuohed enesmpmen" 80
the conditions OF the ortc, by placing "n the
protection of,he sgnboa. from stone River on the e' ard
ever, that covered by The IRE OF the eaIthWoA
secesonvie immediately in nj. 'front.' from whish shot and
she'll. we're thrown tn. camps both Of Gems Stevens and
Wright To render his encamPmeut therefore, ~ the ian
guass Of the order secure and indeed TO ensoe hum 70
continue It's occupation. absolutely that
the earthwork should be taken. The enterprise was not
deemed difficult, or II. 'ucees. at all Doubtful . ,
II was believed by Gen. Benham then, snd Is believed by
him now that the movement not only no, violation OF
Gen Hunters orders but that in sct compliance with
was placed military necessity" II must be ADMITTED at
least that tho order susceptible OF the Interpretation -
n.n, he should .uulsrily dismissed and degraded
Gen Hunter La, preferred no ehse. aSanst Gen benham
from single expression E Of his letter. to the secretary
Of War that he LessIted me ~ s,Son o. .o5 n
plan or purpose actually ny nm pIs ina.
violation 2, 5ny PST9' .uceessS siganed
The question dobedsnce Of the order mentioned being
elf ell. Ssce Of sah .. 70 or Ss.p.sy
Government In stripping Cen Benhsm OF h' commission
Nothing Is found The record which would warrant an a
native response 10 this inquiry The eahwoft was eeiended
by but about COO Gen, Benham had some hiteen 70
meu,s aud two batteries with which to assault H. and ne
knowledge that BE- had that the work was being nldly
strengthened urged hun to prompt action The plan aud az
the arrangements for the movement though bold appear to
have ws msurrd and Justified The confident eI2ecia
ton OF favorable The cause II the failure which fo
lowed sufficiently sppear ffou the statement OF Col wiley
who commanded brigade the occasion and was Ia TIE
font
Ills detailed explanations which illustrated by map,
leave doubt that had the officer charged with con
duc,ing the assault, arrived intended he should
earlier. and directed personally and IN proper order the marc
Of the troops In their advance and bed lie not ordered tie
troop. under Col Hasley M back the attack would have
been suceessfu When this order 10 Retreat gwen, our
roops though suffering severely advancing steadily
and within "one hundred yards OF the WORK Oens
stevens and Wright sege that IN The council which was held
the evening before they expressed openly their opposition to
the attack being made Gen stevens certainly preferred tat
IL should be made in oIsn daylight end both he and Gen
Wrght NAV have ie the opposition announced AFTER the die
aster occurred but Capt Dyton OF the L. > navy! $40 was
de.cr be their bearing and conversation in the follow
nz words: "n the meeting referred cannot recoect
any opposition 10 proposed edynnce on vac
ooSa. noss snseR IS; yog 6 9T d4Ss i nn h
afternoon. Although. however, no direct objections were
made Judged from series Of questions which were PIT TO
Gen Stevens by Cen Wright IN regard to the effect produced
likely TO be produced on the enemys WORKS py he oHet
Of latter ormer that he not In favor Of Toward
movement at the present time 49,,
The mrre.,on was made on ne by the general tone Of
the conversation that while expressing every desire 70 ui
ther your 10 the utmost Of their power the thTee on
above named (Gens Stevens and Wright ana e.l wa
iams) were scarce in favor OF the movement N0fe 81
them erer said muoh tbs and Cen Wright did on
that We could take the battery, he thought A.
The affidavit Of VIM. OConner proves thu: on me nght
previous to attack in reply 10 question Of Cen behhan
den Stevens oppressed tic pnion that they could succeed
Whatever oppo.on however may have been e or manifest
ed these oc r. Cen Benham was not boundo yled 70
Military men may and often should hear the opinions Of their
subordlnates but their privilege and times necones
their dn,y disregard them think en- justified IN holding
that the attack on the eahwork not IN fact and ceriain
NI-- ~ d -. u l.rn. a !