New Orleans daily crescent. [volume] ([New Orleans, La.]) 1851-1866, 1866-07-10
THE BURNING OF COLUMBIA.

THE BURNING OF COLUMBIA.
The question Of the burning Of Columbia is
still debated with good deal Of acrimony
throughout the country. Each of the distin-
guished persons on whom the responsibility
is charged unqualifedly repudiates the accusa-
ton, and just as emphatically imputes the
blame to the other. General Sherman, in an
official report, charged General Hampton with
the burning, and has, recently, written a let
ter to one Benz. Rawls, in which he reiterates
the statement. As between the two officers
concerned, perhaps the outside world might
be embarrassed in forming Judgment But,
whilst public opinion in one section seems to
yield purely partisan credence to General
Shernan's assertions, in the South, and every
where that General Hampton is known, that
gentleman's declarations are received With
out question and without regard to political
OF sectional preferences. Apart from this,
however, the weight of evidence is entirely
on the side Of General Hampton, and if more
were wanting, it would be abundantly sup
Piled in the following correspondence, which
is published in the Columbia papers
APRIL %.
General Sherman having charged me in his off
eial report with the destruction of Columbia and
having reiterated the some falsehood in a recent
letter to Benz. Rawls of that city, may I beg you
to state such facts in reference to this matter as
are in your possession. fyou recollect, Iadvised
you on the morning the Yankees came in not to
burn the cotton as this would endanger the town.
stated that as they had destroyed the railroad
they could not remove the cotton. Upon this rep
resenation you directed me to issue an order that
the cotton should not be burned. This did at
once, and there was not bale on fire when the
Yankees came into town. You saw the cotton as
you left the city and YOU can state that none was
on fire, Very respectfully yours, WI.
NEW ORLEANS, May ?, 1896.
The above statement of General Hampton rela-
tive to the order issued by me at Columbia, South
Carolina, not to burn the cotton in that city is per
feetly true and correct. The only thing on fire at
the time Of the evacuation was the depot build
ing of the S. G. R. R.. which caught fire acclen-
tally from the explosion of some ammunition
ordered to be sent towards Charlotte, N. G.
G. Il. BEAUREG4RD.
But after all it is difficult to understand
why this charge should be repealed so earnestly
by General Sherman and his friends. 1t is
plain enough to see that General Hampton
would wish to relieve himself from the odium of
having deliberately destroyed city to which |
he was bound by all the ties of friendship, of
association, and of patriotic sympathy It is |
almost absurd to suppose that he would seek
to aggraYate those miseries which already /
pressed SO heavily on his people by destroy
ing their habitations, and throwing them
houseless and foodless on the cold charity of |
an invading enemy, especially when no mil |
itary or political object was to be gained by
the sacrifice But as to General Sherman the
case is entirely different What would have
been adsurdly unreasonable in General Hamp-
ton, was with General Sherman the logical |
of opinions which that officer
had stoutly proclaimed and energetically car
RED into practice After the cool deliberation
with which he destroyed Atlanta, it is per-
feetly useless for him to pretend Indignation
1t the charge of burning Columbia. The
or1ner act he defended in private letters and
,fioial correspondence, and all of the reasons
which he alleged in that case are equally APP
olicable to the other. In this light it is almost
uperiuous to treat the subject as a simple
question Of historical fact We know very
veil that if General Sherman did not burn
Columbia, he thought he had right to burn
I, and would have burned it if he had chosen
o do SO. We know likewise that if he did
ommit this act, which seems now to be pretty
veil settled, it cannot in the slightest degree
fleet his character-because his status, in
hat respect had already been-~definitely set
led. He accepted all the responsibilities of
he act in advance. He thought it right to
'urn cities he did burn cities why then
should he display plainly simulated indig-
latlon when charged with burning Columbia
1fEthat charge, We may say with the Italians.
u non e zero ben trovato-=it is so like the
ruth that it might just as wen be true.
The Mobile Register of the sth says there
Fas rumor in Florence, Ala, on the 4tb,
hat Colonel N. G. Galloway, of the Memphis
-yalanche and Colonel Thomas Jordan, of the j
-ppeal had hostile meeting on Monday I
eek, and that Jordan was killed. The rumor
probably false. Ii
In Louisville on the 9TH a Bagon-load of ne l
roes were caPsi4ed while being rapidly driven. :
wo men and Que baby were instantly killed, !
wing then, neolSs broken, Three more per-
ms had broken Limbs.
[
On the 9Th the weather was extremely warm
indianapolis, and there were many cases of
lolera morbus in that city st.s n