Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1874-04-01

did the advantage of getting Sherman as
far as possible frUm his base Of operations.
1t seenls that Johnstoa's army was at one
time discouraged. Everything was in
volved in uncertainty. Johnston,s plan, it
appears, was not fully understood by the
administration His relations to the
President probably restrained him from
full and EEL communication. He did not
express confidence in the plan he was pur-
suing, as lie was expected to do. To this
he replied that confident language by mil
isary commander was not usually regarded
as an evidence of competence There can
be no doubt that an expression OF confidence
would have been a consolation to the adj
ministration as well as the country.
Gen. Johnston very satisfactorily answers
the charges still familiar to the country
which were alleged as the grounds of his
removal. His and the Presidents ideas
were in this campaign as wide apart as the
ssNarratiye' proves them ever to have been.
Ii was a fundamental difference of opinion.
If history give the palm TO Johnston's mil
itary intellect, it need not charge the ex-
| ecutive with incompetency. There were
many occasions on which the latter exhib-
tied admirable military ingenuity. The
ssNarrative" itself shows that the Command
er-in-Chief, Notwithstanding the feud, re-
posed the highest confidence in Gen.
Jo~hnston's ability. That confidence rose
almost to extravaganza during the contem-
poraneous campaigns of Mississippi and
Tennessee. The important duties imposed
upon him prove this. However disliked
personally, Gen. Johnston was till the final
rupture, certainly regarded as a right man
by the administration. and reason concludes
that it was more a conflict of military
ideas than anything else p that
caused the removal. The Pres
ident had suffered this conflict to go against
him for more than two months, and his i'm
patience could endure no longer. The Of
fensiye must be assumed. Personal hostil-
ity could not have primarily actuated the
President, who had always trusted so much
to Johnston's skill. This view is corrobo-
rated by what follows. Benz. II. Hill, an
ex-member Of the Confederate Senate, in a
recent address, which, along with the "Nar-
rative," will 90 into the archives of the
Southern Historical Society, said!
e.You have all heard it said that Mr.. Davis
was moved BY personal hostility TO Johnston in
making this removal. This is not only not true,
but il exceedingly false. / do know much on
the subject Of this removal. was the bearer OF
messages from Gen. Johnston to the President,
and was in Richmond, and sometimes present, at
the discussions on the subject / never saw as
much agony in Mr.. Davis face as actually dis
torted it when the possible necessity for this re-
moval was first suggested to him. Ineyer heard
an eulOgy pronounced upon Gen. Johnston by
his best friends, eqnal TO that which 1 heard
from Mr.. Davis during these discussions. L
know he consulted with Gen. Lee fully, earnest
" and anxi0usly before this, perhaps unfortu=
nate, removal. / know that those WHO pressed
the removal, first and most earnestly, in the
Cabinet, were those who had been most earnest
for Gen. JOhnstOn's original appointment TO that
command. All these things / do personally
know. was not present when the order of re-
mOval was determined on, but / received it i'm
mediately after from a member of the Cabinet,
and DO not doubt its truth that Mr.. Davis was
the very last man who gave his assent TO that
removal"
Here is a hint that the radical difference
Of opinion, which we have shown to have
existed, extended not onlyto the President,
but 10 a commander whose renownf ills the
World