The weekly clarion. [volume] (Jackson, Miss.) 1863-1882, 1874-04-09
coyFEDERArE WAR HISTORY
Gen. u NE -TOl1Hsfon anI Ex-Pre-i-
aPEAf sss4Vis.


against either to CRAFTY, and disrelish a
wrangle among Confederate over the
grave Of the lost cause, have been pinned
e. Iaarn that Gen joins ton has written
book Cor the assailment Of Mr.. Davis
in consequence Of Official differences be
tween them during the war From the
extracts which partizans Of Gen. John
ston have furnished t. tie press with one
sided comments, in advance Of its publ
cation, we infer that the work is con
ceived in very vindictive and preju-
diced spirit, and must necessarily lead to
controversies Of the most unpleasant ma
ture.
Mr. Davis partiality for Gen. John
ston was shown in his assignment of him
to the most important command in the
army at the beginning Of the war Gen.
Johnston's grievance IS that he Was not
continued Gin this command in Virginia
to the exclusion OF Gen Lee, and espec-
tally that he was removed from the com
mand in Georgia after he had retreated
to Atlanta, and signified to the President
that he intended TO abandon that position
also PROFESSIONALLY ali the facts of
that campaign, and Of the removal Of
the General who conducted it, will now
be brought to light.
In reference to the removal OF Gen.
Johnston, Elk G. ). Senator, b. H. Hill,
who was in position TO be familiar with
the subject, and, being n Georgian, was
especially interested in it, made the fol
lowing statement in a recent address
We will preface it by remarking that
Mr. Hills antecadents were those of II
Union Wing before the war; and that he
was no partizan of Mr.. Davis under the
Confederacy;
am speaking in Atlanta, and it is all
the me re proper, therefore, that | should
speak for the first time in public Of the
removal of Gen. Johnston from the com
mand OF the army Of the Tennessee.
have heard it said, tn | advised that
removal This is not uu-. / gave no
advice upon the su5iec. because | was
not military man. You nave ali heard
it said that Mr. Davis was moved by
personal hostility to Johnston in making
this removal. This is not only not true,
but is exceedingly false. l do know much
on the subject Of this removal | was
the bearer of messages from General
Johnston to the President, and was in
Richmond, and sometimes present at the
discussions on the subject | never saw
as much agony Oh Mr.. Davis face as dis
tOrted it when the possible necessity for
this removal was suggested to him. |
never heard an eulogy pronounced upon
General Johnston by his best friends,
equal to that which | heard from Mr.
Davis during these discussions. | know
he consulted with General Lee fully, ear
nesky and anxiously before this, perhaps,
unfortunate 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 for removed was determ-
ined on, but | received it Immediately
from Il member OF the Cabinet, and do
nos doubt its truth that Mr.. Davis was
the very last man who gave his assent to
that removal.
On the subject of the causes of the
failure of the Contederacy, from the ex-
tracts we have seen, we infer that Gen
Johnston's book is rehash of the diet
on which soreheads and malcontents fed,
during the struggle. He assumed that
the chief mistake Of the Confederate au-
thorities was their failure to ship the cot
ton crop of 1861, to Europe, and make
it the source of supplying arms, and
other sinews of war. See how effectually
this assumption is disposed of, in half
dozen lines, by Mr. Memminger, Secre-
tary Of the Treasury during the greater
period of the Confederacy:
g The confederate government was or
ganized in February, the blockade was
instituted in May, thus leaving period
of three months in which the whole cot
ton crop on hand, say four millions Of
bales, ought, according to the military fl
nancier, to have been got into the hands
of the Confederate government, and 70
have been shipped abroad. This would
have required fleet OF four thousand ships
allowing one thousand balesto the ship.
Where would these vessels have been
procured in the face of the notification
of the blockade? And was not as much
of the cotton shipped by private enter
prise as could have been shipped by the
government"
Mr.. Geo. A. Trenholm, who succeeded
Mr.. Memminger in the Treasury depart
ment, has also made publication which
in still stronger light exposes the absur-
dity of Gen. Johnston's theory
:" Let us examine the facts upon
which this theory rests, and without the
support OF which it must necessa rity fall
to the ground. The crop of cotton
available for this scheme must necessari-
Iy have been that of 1S60-6I 1t could
not have been the crop of which the
seed was not yet put in the ground when
the government was formed at Montgom-
cry. What was then the crop of 1860
81? Was it 400, 900, 900 or 500, 900, 900
bales, and was it accessible for immedi-
ate expectation?
The crop of lS6O-Gi was officially
stated At 3,sl9 900
OF this quantity tin consumption
OF the South TN S-atas took of 1913 900 !
leaving tor rxporta'ioa 3656Ooo
Let US now see what proportion of this
quantity was available in the way de- 4
scribed by General Johnston.
Up to the 2Sth of February, the month
that gave birth to the infant government. /
3, 900, 900 bales had been received at the /
and the great bulk of it had |