The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1884-01-31
THE FITz JOHN PORTER CASE.

The speech made by Major George w. Steele
in the Fitz John Porter case is of the most
practical, plain, and at the same time conclusive
character. He had made such study of the
matter as to have his facts well in hand, so
that when General Rosecrans and one or two
others ventured to interrupt and cross question
him, they very soon found out they had made
a mistake if they expected to catch Mr.. Steele
mapping. The speech was confined to an in
quiry into the facts as they existed at the time
of the court martial, and an examination of
how these findings were could be affected
by the succeeding ex parte, extra-legal board
of review which affected to examine
into the case, and yet did not even
summon General Pope before them. Mr..
Steele gives in his preliminary statement some
extracts from the orders and correspondence
of General Porter, which show his feelings
toward General Pope, and which afford full
and complete reason for his indifference to
General Pope's orders, and explain to entire
satisfaction why he failed to obey them. With
these the country is well acquainted. The
extracts from the military history Of the
Comte de Paris, an authority in military crit
icism, the impartiality and ability of which
will not be denied by even the warnest friend
of General Porter are of the greatest value.
Writing years afterward, with perfect cool
I'd nd ind
the Count of Paris says, on page 292 of his
history, upon the precise point involved in the
present controversy:
'But neither the impossibility of executing
to the letter the order of the latter [Pope] nor
even demonstrations which Mcdowell may have
given him during the day, afford any excuse
for his having remained inactive SO long iii
the presence of the enefsy, with two fine di
visions, while a great battle was being fought
in his vicinity. In short if the road he had
to follow was barred against hin-if, there
fore, he could not cut the enemys army in
two and secure its defeat-it is equally certain
that vigorous attack made by him upon
Longstreet's right would have drawn out all
the forces of this general, and, by freeing the
rest of the Union line, would probably have
prevented the reverse which the latter sus-
tanned at the close of the day. We cannot
avoid therefore, blaming his inaction at such
time and under such circumstances. This in
difference on the part of Porter to the can
mons appeal, the manner in which he inter
preted the orders of superiors, and the tardi-
ness with which these orders reached him,
were the inevitable consequences of the con
fusion we have already referred to in the
general movement of the army"
It will take much more than the ex parte
whitewash of the Schofeld board of review, or
the partisan appeals of General Slocum, to set
aside this verdict of a military historian and
critic recognized the world over for his fidel-
ity to truth and his educated scientific ability,
and who, in addition, had the advantage of a
personal contact with the events at the time
they occurred The concluding paragraph of
Mr.. Steele's speech is also of much impor-
lance. He says;
''Great stress is laid on what is said by Gen
eral Grant, and well may the people Of the
country pay attention to what that great man
says. But he said no to Porters appeals three
times during the time he was President, and