Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1873-05-08

| command OF the Confederate troops WDen
Sherman entered 6oluluhizs lefE-the-
city just before he occupied It, and you gave
iiorders not only as to the movements OF
troops, but as to the disposition OF all the
public property, as well as Of the cotton
which was IN, the city. You were therefore
fully cognizxnt of all the facts relating to
the burning of the city, and yon can state
with entire certainty who is answerable for
this atrocious kcrime. / am, very respect
fully yours Y WADE HAMPTON.
On the above letter Gen. Beauregsrd
wrote the following Endorsement:
p New ORLEANS, May 2, 1e66.-The
above statement of Gen. Wade Hampton
i relative to the orders issued by me st Co
lumbia, S. c., not to burn cotton IN that
city, is perfectly. true and correct Tbs on
| iy thing on fire at The time Of the evacua-
ton was the depot building CT the South
/ Carolina Railroad, which caught fire acct
dentallv from the explosion of some ammu-
milton ordered to be sent toward Charlotte,
N. G. ,--v G. 7. BEAUREGARD.
GEN. HowARD's TROOPS THE INcEND1A-
Bsing questioned as to the peace and
quiet Of the city OF Columbia prior to the
entry of Gen. Sherman's army. Gen.
Hampton said the city was perfectly order
| ly; that there was not The slightest difficult
ty ia maintaining order in the city that
there was no Burning or marauding going
on in the streets; that the negroes were
Quietly working on their for
tifcations, and that there were no
disorderly elements TO disturb the peace
and quiet of the cty. He said that he had
not the least idea that Gen. Sherman or
any one else would have denied that the
| Federal troops had burnt the city until he
saw Gen. Sherman's official report, in which
4 he states that the cotton which Hampton
had ordered TO be piled in the streets, and
which had been fired 10y him (Hampton),
| had fred the town. The citizens OF Col
umbia were very indignant at this charge
of Gen. Sherman, and they called public
meeting and appointed very large commit
| tee, of which Chancellor Carroll was made
! Chairman, to collect testimony as to the
facts. They did collect facts from Mayor
| Goodwin and other leading citizens.
| Among Others who testified in regard
| to this matter was negro named
! William Beverly Nash, at present
| Senator from Richmond county, and
who was a delegate to the Philadelphia
! Convention which renominated Gen. Grant.
! BE makes an affidavit that the Federal
| troops did fire the City Of Columbia, and
that Gen. Hampton had nothing to do with
! it. In the published correspondence of
| Gen. Sherman, there is letter from Gen.
| Halleck in which he expresses wish that
| if Sherman took Charleston, by some ac-
| cident the city should be destroyed, and
! that il Sherman would sow it with salt it.
might prevent the growth of future crops of
notification and secession, to which Gen.
| Sherman replied that he had noticed what
| Gen. Halleck had said about Charleston,
| snd that, when he entered that city the
| Fifteenth Corps would be on the right wing
and SO enter the city first; and if Gen. Hal
leck had observed the course of that corps
during the war, be must have noticed that
! it generally did its work pretty well, and be
| did no. think an assault would be necessary,
that he thought Columbia was as bad as
! Charleston, and he doubted if he would
spare the public buildings there.
Gen. Hampton in bis testimony quoted
passage from Mr.. Whitelaw Reid's
works "Ohio in the War;" in relation to
the burning of Columbia:
CAT niehtfan there suddenly
came cries of alarm from different quarters.
The city was on fire in as many places.
Before morning large portion OF
| the city was in ruins; thousands of helpless
women and children were suddenly made
| homeless-in an hour, in the night, in the
| Winter. 1t was the most monstrous bar
! barity ofthe bsrbarous march. There is no
reason to think that Gen. Sherman knew
any hing of the purpose to burn the city
which had been freely talked about among
the soldiers through The afternoon, but
there is reason to think that be knew well
enough who did it, that he never rebuked
! it, and made no effort to punish it. In
stead, he sought, indeed, TO show that the
enemy biInself had bu ned his own city,
mot with malicious intent, but from folly
and want of sense Yet in the same para
! graph be admits everything except the orig
| ina starting If the first fire. Officers and
men not on duty, including the officers
who had long been imprisoned there, may
have assisted in spreading the file after it
| had once begun, and may have INDUCED in
unconcealed joy at seeing the ruin of the
capital of South Carolina"
| Gen. Hampton went on to state that, in
a conversation with Gen. o. o. Howard,
the latter said that his (Howard's) troops
! burned the city. This conversation took
place in the executive office of the Hon.
James l.. Orr, who is now United States
Minister to Russia, Tdead since this article
was written] but who was then Gov
ernor of South Carolina. Gen. Howard
introduced the subject of the burning Of
Columbia, and expressed great regret that
it had been done. He sad that he did all
he could to prevent it, and that no one was
certainly authorized to say that "our troops
did not set fire to it, for saw them do 50
myself"
Gen. Howard further stated that Sher-
man knew perfectly we'll that Hampton did
not burn Columbia. At this interview with
Gen. Howard, there were present Gov Orr,
Gen. John S. Preston, Gen. Scott, who was
afterward Governor of South Carolina, and
Mr. De Fontaine.
gIn support of this statement, General
Hampton produced letters from Gov. Orr, |
Gen. Preston and others. Gov. Orr's letter |
is as follows:
WASHINGTON, Dec. %, 1672.-Desr Sir: |
l have received your letter, inquiriDg as to |
my recollection of q conversation that oc-
CURED in the Executive Office in Columbia, |
in 1867, between yourself and Gen. How
ard, of the United States army, as to the |
burning of Columbia. l do not remember |
all that was said, but Gen. Howard said in |
substance that the city was burned by |
United States troops; that he saw them fire |
many houses, and that he tried to arrest the
confagration, and that he regretted the de-
struction of the city. Without undertaking
to give his words, the foregoing contains
the substance of what he said relative to
the destruction of Columbia. Very re-
spectfully, JAMES L. ORR.
COLUMBIA, Jan. 2, 1873.-My Dear Sir:
have your note asking me to state my re-
collection Of the conversation between
Wade Hampton and Gen. Howard, in the
presence of Gov. Orr, myself, and others.
The substance of the conversation was that
Gen. Howard said, and reiterated it, that
no one was authorized to say that the Fed
eral troops did not burn Columbia, and he
saw them doing so in numerous instances
aud in various localities in the town. The
conversation was almost exclusively be-
tween Gen. Hampton and Gen. Howard,
the other persons present saying bat very
little. Very truly yours,
JOHN f. PRESTON.
DIR. Trezavante.
GEN. SHERMAN'S ADMISSIONS.
DR.. Goodwin, the Mayor of Colu pbia at
the time of its occupation by the Federal
troops, in his affidavit testified thai with
number IT leading citizens he called upoD |