The weekly clarion. [volume] (Jackson, Miss.) 1863-1882, 1870-07-28
CONFEDERATE WAR HISTORY
CORRESPONDENCE.
Letter from Yice-Presidenf Ste
phens and Reply.
LIBERTY Hall

1
LIBERTY HALL. .
CRAwFoRDsvILLK, GA, 9th July, 1905
Hon. z. BarksdaLe:
DEAR SIR: In TIE CLARION see an edito
rial headed The Battle Of Manassas, &c :
which requires a notice from me.
You will pardon me, 1 trust, for saying
that feel quite sure if you had seen wha
is stated in the I'd volume of my book upoI
the war, now being issued from the press
you would not have expressed yourself a
you did in this article; and that you MAJ
know exactly what my statement in th'
Book is, upon the subject of the advance o
the Confederate Army, after the Battle O
Manassas, send You an accurate extrac
from it (pages 4sS4s9) as follows:
"Major Hester. One thing, Mr.. Stephens
Il should like to know just at this point anC
shat is, why Generals Johnston and Beau.
regard remained entirely inactive at Ma.
''nassas, during the whole fall. after
1.-THE rout of General McDowelrs army on
1.-THE 2lst July? Why did they not push OF
| ''to Washington? They must have had 8
very large force early in the fall, and flush.
led with victory as they were, it has Away,
"been a mystery to me- why they stood sc
| perfectly quiet until McClelIan's new army
twas organized almost within their sight
"Can you explain this?
Mr.. Stephens do not know that can
with the Military operations, as have
''said before, it is not my purpose to deal,
''except in so far as they bear upon the ques-
"tions which we have directly in hand. A
great deal has been said and written upon
she subject ofyour enquiry. 1t has been said
that Thomas J. Jackson, who afterwards
became so famous under the appellation
''of ''Stonewall," and who was the Colonel
"of that name so favorably mentioned in
General Johnston's report of the battle OF
1.-THE 21st of July, was urgent for an imme-
"diate pressing forward to Washington
''Somo think his views were right. My own
"opinion, from the reports of both General
Johnston and General Beauregard, as well
las from other sources, is, that such a move
~ment at that time, was altogether imprac-
'ticable. As to The state of things after
wards, that is different question. All
"know upon that point, is, that General
Johnston did wish to make some movement
ofthe sort in the early part of the fall, when
"he was better prepared. Not, however, with
"the forces he then had, for they did not ex-
''ceed forty thousand effective men, while
Mcclellan had over fifty thousand when
"he took command at Washington on the
''27th of July. Johnston's plan was to con-
.'centrate, as quickly as possible, at that
place, force sufficient for this purpos e,
which could be done only by leaving bare re-
mote points then defended. For this objecta
e I. i
Davis went up from Richmond. He met
Generals Johnston, Beauregard and Gen.
"eral Gustavus w. Smith i'm this council
General Beauregard had been promoted to
''the rank of full General, for his gallantry,
"and great services on the 2lst of July
General Smith, at the time, commanded a
"Division of this army, with the rank of
sMajor- General He was n graduate of
"West Point, and recognized as an officer of
"great merit.
THE result Of the council of war so held,
''was the disapproval by Mr.. Davis, of the
"policy suggested. Upon the merits of the
"yiews presented, for against its adop-
''tion, l have no speculative opinions to ex-
''press. OF course, all that could now be
''said on the subject would amount to moth
''was, not very long afterwards, transferred
''to command in the West. This is all the
can give of the matter you
enquire about"
The foregoing extract, (Which contains
all that is said in the Book on the subject of
your special comments in the article refer
red toy have had made, and verified from
the work itself; and send it 20 you with
request that you will present it, with this
letter, to your readers. / deeply regret that
have not spare copy of the volume to
send you, that you may have the entire
work before you in making any future COM
ments upon this, or any other part of it. In
combating any statement, or position of
mine, when truth is the object, it is essential
to refer to the tert itself and not to the COM
of others upon it.
In this instance think you Will readily
admit there is no error in the statement as
it stands in the Book. There is certainly
not the slightest inconsistency, or discrep
ancy between it and any fact brought to
light by the correspondence you published,
for the first time, between President Davis
and Gen. Joseph z. Johnston. The facts in
this instance, as in all others, as l under
stand them are exactly as 1 have stated
them and so think you will find them to
be upon close examination and full investi-
CATION.
OF one thing you may rest assured, the
great object with ME throughout the work,
was the vindication of the truth of History
and If it be shown that | have fallen into
error upon any point, however small or mil
nor, it will be most cheerfully corrected in
all subsequent editions.
Yours, most respectfully,
ALEXANDER II. STEPHENS.