Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1870-07-25

|, and who was the Colonel of that nam'
f so faEoFably mentioned Ia Genera
: Johnston's report Of the bsttle of the
} 21st of July, was urgent for an imme
I diate pressing forward to Washington
} Some think his views were right
, My own opinion, from the reports o
both General Johnston and Genera
| Beauregard, as well as from 0thel
sources, is, that such movement al
that time, was altogether impractica
I, BILE. AS 20 the state Of things af
terWard, that is Q diherenl
question. All I know upon thai
point, is, that General Johnston
did wish to make some movement
8 Of the sort in the early part of the tail
when he was better prepared. Not
however, with the forces he then had
for they did not exceed forty thousand
effective men, while McClelland had
/ over fifty thousand when he TOOK
command at Washington on the 9th
OF July. Johnson's plan was to con-
eentrate, as quickly as possible, at that
place, a force sufficient for this pur-
4 pose, which could be done only by
leaving bare remote points, then de-
Tended. For this object a council OF
war was held at Manassas Mr.. Davis
went up from Richmond. he met
Generals Johnston, Beauregard and
General Gustavus w. Smith in this
council. General Beauregard had
been promoted to the rank OF full Gen.
eral for his gallantry, and great servi-
ces On the 2lst of July. Gen. Smith,
at the time, commanded a division of
| this army, with the rank of Major
! General. He was q graduate Of West
/ Point, and recognized as an officer of
great merit. ,-f
The result of the council of war 80
held, was the disapproval by Mr..
Davis, of the policy suggested. Upon
! the merits of the views presented, for
or against its adoption, / have no
! speculative opinions to express. OF
course, all that could now be said on
the subject would amount to nothing
but speculations. General Beaure-
gard was, not very long afterwards,
| transferred to a command in the
West. This is all the explanation 1
can give of the matter you inquire
about. !"
The foregoing extract (which con-
tains all that is said in the book on
the subject Of your special comments
in the article referred toy have had
made, and verified from the work
Itself, and send it to you with re-
! quest that you will present it, with
this letter, to your readers. I deeply
regret that 1 have not a spare copy Of
the volume to send you, that YOU
may have the entire work before you
! In making any future comments upon
this, or any other part OF it. In COM
batting any statement or position of
mine, when truth is the object, il is
essential to refer to the text itself and
not to the commentaries of others
upon it. 1s -eaa .eseeEs t- a
In this instance, I think, you viii
readily admit there is no error in the
statement as it staAds in the book.
There is certainly not the slightest
inconsistency, or discrepancy between
it and any fact brought to light by the
correspondence you published for the
first. time, between President Davis and
General Joseph E. Johnson. The facts
in this instance, as in all others, as
understand them, are exactly as /
have stated them, and so I think you
will find them to be upon close exam
ination and full Investigation.
OF one thing you may rest assured,
the great object with me throughout
the work, was the vindieation OF the
truth of history; and if it be shown
that I have fallen into error upon any
point, however small or minor, il will
be most cheerfully corrected in all
subsequent editions.
Yours, most respectfully, -
ALEXANDER II. STEPHENS.
REPLY.
b -.r ---. JACKSON, July 10, 1870.
Hon. A. H. Stephens:
Dear Hir:-I have cheerfuIly COM
piled with your request to publish
your letter, and also the extract en-
closed, from your forthcoming (2d)
volume.
Finding in newspaper, published
in your State, what purpOrted to be
sketch authorized by you, of your
work, on the subject alluded to, l
reasonably inferred that you had been
correctly reported. And as the news
papers and public generally, were re-
ceivfng as an unchallenged truth the
statement thus apparently endorsed,
that President Davis prevented the
General in command of the COnfed-
crate forces from pursuing the enemy
from the field of Manassas to Wash
ingtOn City, l deemed the occasion
proper to produce the unpublished
correspondence between President
Davis and General J. +. Johnston, for
ever putting the statement at rest. A
similar charge had been made in the
Confederate Congress (in secret ses-
sion) and the correspondence was then
employed to disproVe it.
You will thus see that the response
bility of creating an apparent issue in
order TO IS vindicate the truth of his
tory" did not rest with me. / have
no taste for controversy on the subject,
and acted solely from a sense of duty
to correct, with the means in my pOss-
essiOn, an injustice (Which l did not
suppose to be Intentionally to Mr.
Davis, who during the war was silent
under misrepresentation anu un-
merited reproach; and who, by the
of his friends, has MAIN
tanned a strict silence since lis close,
but whose fame, nevertheless, Is the
property of his countrymen. and is
especially dear to the people of his
own State. .r-
It is evident from the extract which
you have enclosed that you were mis-
reported by the Augusta Constitution
aList, but regret to find that the issue
is changed from the statement that
President Davis prevented the Con-
federate troops from following the
enemy directly into Washington City
from the battlefield, to a statement
that three months thereafter, the fruits
of the victory, which had then passed
into history, were net reaped by the
Generals In consequence of his disap-
proval.
Cand0r eompels nae respectfully to
dissent from your opinion that there
is mo error, in the statement as it
stands in the book, nor discrepancy
between it and the facts brought to
light by the correspondence" Your
language conveys a meaning widely
apart from the statement of General
Johnston. The extract produces the
impression that the President disap-
proved the policy of activity and an
advance movement, when in truth
he favored such plan, and it was not
carried out because of his inability to
furnish the troops declared to be es-
sential by the Generals entrusted
with command. In reply to his in
quiry whether he had prevented the
troops from following up the rout at
Manassas, General Johnston answered,
No. And in reply to his inquiry
whether che had eper objected to an
advance, or other active operations
which it was feasible for the army to
undertake." General Johnston re-