Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1882-11-29

the truth. But the truth is, instead OF Pc,
: ter engaging Lopgstreet's atteat
Gen. Stuart's report shows clearly tina
few cavalrymen engaged Porter's atten
ton.
In Porter's report of that days opera
tons he says that the dust on the road il
his front was so heavy that it was eviden
to his mind large force was movin,
against him.
Stuart a confederate generaD says i
his report, land it seems that Genera
Grant takes the statements of confeder
ates for their numbers, and he ought con
sequently to accept all they say that h
fooled Porter that day, and kept him from
attacking Longstreet's right flank, b,
having some brush tied to mules tails ant
dragging them up and down tho road t,
make dust, and this dust was the ''largt
force' that Porter found in his front OF
the road leading from Manassas Station t.
Gainesville.
WHERE GEN. GRANT IS MISTAKEN.
1t seems that Gen. Grant has fallen into
the same error by insisting i'll his article
that Longstreet's force was in front OF
Porter, when it was not at any time in
his front. or near his front, or facing his
front.
| Gen. Grant says that the court-martial
| that tried Porter made a mistake. He
| says that the 4:30 order ordering Porter to
| attack at once contemplated the attacking
of Jackson's forces on the right flank, and
"that no doubt this was in the mind of the
court and of the commanding general"
Gen. Grant falls into an error here again.
Gen. Pope had the information at 8 O'Clock
in the morning that force had passed
through Gainesville Fifteen regiments of
infantry and 500 cavalry, and when he is
sued the order to Porter in the morning it
was to meet the force that he knew to be
coming in that direction, but whether he
knew it when he issued his order in the
morning is immaterial. as he had the in
formation early that daY.
After receiving this information, as a
general he knew that the force coming
down the road was coming to Jackson's
right and rear so as to attack him on the
left flank; and when he issued the 1870
order, how can Gen. Grant say that he
(Pope) had not contemplated the attack of
Longstreet on the right 2ank, when he
claims that Porter himself knew that
Longstreet was resting his right flank in
his (Porter's) direction, and there was
nothing III sight that he could attack ex-
cept the right flank of Longstreet.
Gen. Grant makes a plan, draws lines,
and put Jackson's $4,000 men facing
Pope's $4,000, and places on this line Por-
ter squarely fronting Longstreet's $4,000
men, when he must know, if he has exam
ined The evidence, that no such positions
ia1 hot Iox, Nv &ho
forces of Longstreet and Porter.
Gen. Grant says: ''As shown by this
diagram. Porter was not in position to
attack the right flank OF jackson because
he was at least three miles away and not
across his flank, as shown in the first dia-
gram. With Longstreet's presence, to have
obeyed that order he would have been
obliged with 10000 men to have defeated
$4,000 men in chosen position before he
could have moved upon the flank of the
enemy, as the order directed"
Thus Gen. Grant pats Porter s9uarely in
front of Longstreet with his $4,000 men,
and says that he could not have obeyed
the order without first whipping Long
streets $4,000 with 10000 men. He would
have had to have done that and then turned
around and attacked Jackson on the right
flank. I admit this would have been re-
curing too much of man whose move
ments were like those OF Gen. Porter; but
/ would ask Gen. Grant to explain how it
is that Longstreet shows that he had seven
brigades at this time attacking Pope's left
flank, yet he (Grant) says that Porter
would have had to whip the whole $4,000.
He Porter was certainly not required
to whip any one. He was only required
to attack the right flank of the enemy,
and the right flank of the enemy was the
right flank of Longstreet's command. He
was part of the enemy, his flank being in
the direction of Porter.
Gen. Grant says: 'He was three miles
away from Jackson's flank
If so, why not attack Longstreet, whose
flank was sticking out in air where Porter
could have attacked it, as it was the only
flank that presented itself where he could
attack. How, then, was he to construe the
order! Was he to order his men to attack
Jackson, when the order did not say So?
Was he to say, ''Longstreet's flank is stick
ing out there, can see it, but am not to
attack that! He is not the enemy! The
order says to attack the enemy?" Will he
say that does not mean to attack Long
street?
This is the logic of Gen. Grants posi-
ton.
Gen. Grant also assumes that to have
attacked under that order would have tax
en- Porter until o'clock, inasmuch as he
would have to make disposition of some
Of his troops, issue orders, etc.
How is it possible that it would have re-
quired so much time when he was sent out
there that morning for the purpose of
fighting? What orders would he have
been obliged to issue except to move the
troops forward to the position of the flank
and put them in line? And, as he moved
up the road, with his troops following, one
regiment right after the other, and faced
them to the flank Of the enemy, he would
have been in line ready for battle.
These men lay there the whole day pre-
pared las Grant says at IL o'clock for the
attack on the enemy. Does Gen. Grant
come in now and say it would have taken
him from until o'clock to have made
an attack, when his troops were in readi-
ness to do so, as Porter himself claims
they were at II o'clock on that day, and as
Gen. Grant also claims?
PORTER & MCDOWELL.
Let US contrast also the action Of Porter