Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1882-11-21
North American Review

martial was Convened in the city of Wash
lngton for the trial Of Major-General Fit,
John Porter, OF the volunteer force. TIL
court consisted of nine members and
Judge advocate-the juage-advocate gene
raj Of the army.
The charges against General Porte
were:
First Disobedience OF orders unde
the ninth article of war.
Second-Misbehavior before the enemy
under the fifty second article of war.
Under the first charge there were thre,
specifications of which the court fount
Porter guilty. These we're, substantially
Ft,st-Disobaaienc TO the order G.
August II, requiring him to march frou
Warrentoa Junction AZ 1 o'clock on the
morning OF the 18th and be at Bristoe
station BY daylight.
SscoaG-Disob edience on Augrst 81
while il front Of the enemy, to The JOIN;
order to Mcdowell aud Porter, directing
them 10 march towards Gainesville and
establish communication with the other
corps.
Thjsd-Disooedienc on August %
while in front Of the enemy, to what is
known as the ''t:30 p. n. Order" requiring
Porter 10 attack the eneny's flank and
rear.
Under the second charge the specifca-
tions upon which Porter was tried and
convicted were IL substance:
FJsst-5aa.nefg1i disobedienco to the 80
p. III. order 0: Aug. %, while in sight of
the field ;iaj in full hearing of It's artillery;
and retreat from advancing forces of the
enemy. without Attempting to engage
them o. 10 aid the troops who were fight
ing greatly superior numbers, and who
would ..3ve secured decisive victory and
captured the eaeny's army but for Por-
ters neglect TO attack and his shameful
disobedience.
Sero.3I -Eai!1r3 OF Porter all tllat la~
to briaC his forces on the field when within
sound OF the guns and in presence Of the
enemy and knowing that a severe action
of great consequence was being fought
and that the aid OF his corps was greatly
needed and his shameful falling back and
retreat from the advance of unknown
forces OF the enemy without attempting to
give them battle.
Third-Shameful failure of Porter on
the same day, while a severe action was
fought, to go to the aid of General Popes
troops, when he believed that they were
being defeated and were retiring from the
field, AID his shameful retreat and falling
back under these circumstances. leaving
the army to The disasters of presumed
defeat; ana failure, by any attempt to at
tack the enemy, to aid III averting disas-
ter which would have endangered The cap
ital.
These are the accusations that were
made against Gen. Porter for his part and
failure in the battles generally known as
those CT the second Bull Run campaign.
The court found him guilty of the charges
and specifications. If he was Sc guilty the
punishment awarded was not conmensur-
ate with the oifense committed. I believe
lawyers have taken exception to the forma-
ton Of The court and to some Of its technl-
cal rulings; but neither at the time nor
since has Gen. Porter attempted to evade
the consequences of his acts by any special
pleadings. or by taking advantage of any
technical error in the composition of the
court or tie method Of its being ordered,
but has relied entirely upan his innocence
of all the charges and specifications, and
would not be satisfied with an acquittal on
any other ground thar that of his entire
innocence.
1t will be seen from the foregoing that
General Porter's alleged misconduct was
embraced in three separate cases of DISC
bedience of orders; one on the 9th of
August; and in having retreated unneces-
sarily from the enemy, by that act en-
dangering other portions of the army with
which he was cooperating.
1t will be seen that, though these ofenses
were alleged to have been committed in
August, 1862, he was continued in the com
mand of an army corps until some time in
November following. taking an active part
IN the battles of the day following the date
of the last charge, and in command of the
defenses of Washington on the west bank
OF The Potomac, and also at the battle of
En.letam, some weeks later. II would
look at first very singular that an officer 50
wautonly derelict in the performance of his
duty, as Gen. Porter was alleged to have
beer on the 9th and 29th of August,
aEouid have been continued in so impor-
tapt !. place as the command of an army
was On the 3oth of August, and in the e.
fersss of Washington and in the later bat
ties in Maryland, when the invasion of the
North was threatened. These facts would
.a-.icate to an unprecedented mind that the
-cnarges against Porter were an after
thought. to shift the responsibilities of
failure from other shoulders and to place
them upon HIM.
In regard to his disobedience Of the
order of the 9th of August he is alleged
to have without justification deferred his
march from Warrenton junction TO Bristoe
Station from / o'clock until of the morn
ing of the 18th. 1t was about 10 O'Clock
on the night Of the 9th when Porter re-
ceived the following order:
HEADQUARTERS ARMY OF VIRGINIA,
"BEIsroE STATION, Aug. 81, 1882, $50 P. N.
GENERAL: The major-gsneral COM
manding directs that you start at o'clock
and come forward with your whole corps,
or such part of it as IS with you, SO rs to
be here by daylight tomorrow morning.
Hooker has had very severe action with
the enemy, with a loss of about 300 killed
and wounded. The enemy has been driven
back, but is retiring along the railroad.