Rutland weekly herald. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1859-1877, 1865-01-05
RUTLAND HERALD.
THURSDAY, JANUARY 3, 1866,
Thc Failure al Wilmington.

slS,uAuSb w "AAO AAS As'l -
a question which the newspapers have
made their usual haste to determine.
The data are as yet too meagre for re
liable opinion, and the newspapers, of
course, disagree in their conclusions.
Meanwhile the people will do we'll to
wait until the facts are more fully made
known, by an Official investigation or
otherwise, before fixing the responsible
by definitely and entirely npon Admiral
Porter or General Butler, or any one
else connected with the expedition.
We have letter, 1t is true, written by
Gen. Butler, and another by Admiral
Porter, Gen. Butler says the lombard
ment effected little, that the works were
substantially intact and were too strong
10 be carried by direct assault. Admiral
Porter in reply refers to the statement
that few soldiers entered the works,
shot a dispatch bearer, etc, and in
Inmates that where they went, the main
body OF Buffers soldiers might have fol-
lowed; and it is claimed that the naval
bombardment had silenced the guns Of
the fort and driven the garrison to the
shelter OF the bombproofs, and that the
army had only TO march in, take possess
sion and secure the prisoners.
On the other hand it is stated that
nearly all of the few Union soldiers who
entered the fort were wounded by the
1fe Of our feet; and that If an assault
ing column had advanced one Of two
things would have happened, either it
would have been destroyed by the same
IRE from our feet, or if that had been
suspended the rebel garrison would have
Immediately swarmed back into the fort
from the bomb proofs and with the guns
Of the fort swept the ground over which
the assaulting column was advancing.
binder these circumstances Gen. Weitzel,
an eminent engineer pronounced the
stOrming Of such a work imprac:icable.
Gen, Butler accepted Gen. Weitzel's re-
port and the contemplated attack was
abandoned.
Col. John Clark, editor Of the Norfolk
New Regime Gen. Buffers organ, and
who accompanied the latter on the ex-
petition in question, publishes an &C
count Of the affair, in which he says that
when Gen. Weitzel reached the northern
front of Fort Fisher he found seventeen
OF the guns in range Of him; that some
Of them opened on him and the musket-
GERS joined the cannoneers; that he dis
covered from the rebel prisoners taken,
LIST that there were eight hundred men
and nearly sixty guns in the fort, and
I'd, that Hoke's division had set out on
the Tuesday previous (the landing was
On Sunday from Richmond, and one
brigade OF it was already encamped
hin mile of the fort; and further
that In confirmation Of this latter story
came an attack behind him upon the
troops which were landing. Col. Clark
also denies the statement that any OF
eur men entered the fort. The rebel
dispatch bearer, he says, was shot out
side.
But other accounts say that Hoke's
troops were not in the vicinity, and the
net that five hundred of our men re-
NAMED unmolested on the beach for two
days after the others had re-embarked
is mentioned as showing that the rebels
had no such force in the neighborhoot
as the rebel prisoners reported. Bragg
telegram to Richmond, also, that NOR
OF our men might have been captured
his re-inforcements had arrived sooner
tends to confirm the statement that sucl
rein forcements did not reach the vici
nifty Of the fort till two days or more al
ter the re- embarkation Of Buffers force
commenced. Surprising this true, ther
still remains the question whether tn
assault was practicable against the gar
Yison and guns of the fort alone.
1t is difficult in the outset, and wit
our present information, to understan
why Admiral Porter should have e1
ploded the torpedo boat and opened tn
Sembardment so long before the arrive
Of the land forces. It is supposed thS
the object OF the explosion of the to,
pedo boat was TO demorahze the Carr
son and that the assault by the Ian
forces was to follow Immediately befoI
the garrison should have time to reco'
or from their confusion. If so the e,
plosion was necessarily useless, as
was made by the Admiral before the
were any land forces present to maj
the assault.
On the. other hand all the navy alo
could have been expected to do was
silence the guns Of the fort. The lal
forces must in any event take possessi
Eft. The feet seems to have accol
plished its part in this spect. t
failure of the land attack cannot
charged to the feet, except so far as
premature explosion of the torpedo be
and opening of the bombardment m
nave deranged the general plan.