The Atlanta constitution. [volume] (Atlanta, Ga.) 1885-19??, 1888-07-10

cation of troops that took place that night could
been in condition to make the obstinate head which
it did on the next day. against Grant and Buells
combined armies, up tothe moment in the afternoon
when it was withdrawn carrying off so considerable
part Of the enenys artillery and in such good or
der that Buell. and Grants armies did not venture
to follow. -(Milltary operations of General Beau
My summary of so much of the published
official documents as bear at all upon the
question of the alleged ''lost opportunity" re-
vived so strenuously in sheer assertion by Mr..
Davis and his aide-de-camp is now concluded.
It's fullness will be justified to the rejecting.
as it could not be shortened without falling IA
tally short, also, of the real object which
has melted me to write my papers:
that is, to present so vigorous an an
alysiS and exposition of the unquestionable
documentary official history of certain mooted
phases of the campaign and battle of Shiloh
as must leave no foundation hereafter for two
honestly entertained opinions among those
who in the pursuit of the truth of history OF
from any other cause may have been at the
pains, after reading my papers, to compare
their citations with the documents from which
they are taken. Without at least as minute an
inquistton, the discussion thus recently
revived by Mr.. Davis and Colonel Johnston,
would be as endless as any human affair can
be. Colonel Johnston has asserted explicitly
that it was ''the opinion of almost all the Off
GERS and men at the front, the victory was won
and would have been conSummated bv the
capture of Grants army without any order of
advance from General Beauregard, by the
generals actually there, and therefore it was
his order of withdrawal which broke up
and disntegrated the victorious bat
tie array, as night was
given for the reinforeements of Buell.
and Lew Wallace to come up"
Such statement becomes simply shameful
under the light of the closely contenporancous
statements of every division commander ex-
cept one (Withers), of all the brigade and
reSimental commanders of each confederate
corps, including the reserve whose reports
have reached the light; that is, of nearly
all commanders present i'll the battle. 1t is
also shameful to ignore as lie has done the rev.
Citations of the reports of Generals Buell.,
Nelson and Colonel Ammens diary, as also
the disclosure of the available federal deTen-
sive resources at the time to be found in the
reports of Generals Hurlbut and Nc
Clernand. Amy student of history, of
soldier, who may follow the same
line of research that | have, will see that nv
summary is essentially judicial because il sets
forth i'll its integrity all that is officially re-
ported contemporaneouSly on either side Of the
question, and [ challenge the production of
word that have omitted which can be said to
run counter to the unbroken chain of docu-
mentary proof which l have adduced. Into
the discussion of the further matters relating
to General A. S. JohnSton's connection with
the campaign and battle of Shiloh, asserted
and reaSSerted by his son Colonel JohnSton)so
persistently, it is not my purpose to follow him.
unless made unavoidable hereafter.
| will say. however, that it were very easy to
demonstrate that his story, that i'll the month
of January, 1862, General A. S, Johnston had
in his possession map with "Shiloh church,
marked upon it by the engineers, and had
pointed out to Colonel Bowen that there 1.-THE
great battle of the southwest will be fought"
is not one whit more historical or less imagi-
nary than the ancient fable OF the voyage of
Arion to Parnassus on the back OF q music
loving dolphin. may also say that Colonel
Johnston seems to aim to present his father as
exercising brawny physical power and infiu-
ence upon the battle of Shiloh not unlike that
ascribed to Marlborough at the battle of Ben-
heim by the English poetaster, Philips, in
these lines:
"Churchel viewing where
The violence of Tallard most prevailed,
Come to oppose his Strengthening arms. With speed
Precipitate he rode urging his way
Der hills Of gasp;ns heroes, and fallen steeds
Rolling in death. Destruction grim with blood,
ATTENDS his FURIOUS course. around his head
The glowing balls play innocent while he
Win due impe:uous sway deals fatal blows
Amoung the flying Gauls. In Gallic blood
He dyes his reeking sword, and stTews the ground
With headiess ranks. What can they do? Or how
Withstand his wide destroying swordY
And now in conclusion, challenge those
who have brought on this discussion to make
up the issue tangbly as one purely of histori-
cal and military import and concem-that is,
Invested Of all family vanities and personal
ambitions, Tor submission in effect, TO the
judicial decision of few such men as Judge
Campbell, Secretary Lamar, Senators
Vance, Pueh, Colqutt and Eustis,
Governor liaygood, General E. p.
Alexander, or many score of such other gentle
men of the south whom could name as capa-
bic of deciding according to the clear docu-
mentary evidence. But let the issue be made
so broad as to embrace several subjects which
have not been touched upon in my papers; for
example, to begin with: Was the military
situation on the part of the confederates in the
department under the command of General A.
S. Johnston such as to make the loss
of Fort Donelson an inevitable result?
Or, in other words, was it not
in the power of General Johnston, in
February, 1862, with the resources of men
and transportation at his position, Immediate
ly after General Grant invested Fort Henry,
to have readily concentrated upon and over
come him with descively superior force? Or
in fact, did not the failure on the part of Cen
eral Johnston to essay such an enterprise, as
carly the 18th of February, 1862, cause the
loss of Fort Donelson from the outset with the
ten ousand troops sent thither after the cap
ture of Fort Henry, and thus make
the immediate abandonment of Bowling
Greene and Columbus absolutely a
necessary consequence. with the early
abandonment also of Nashville and
Middle Tennessee? Let the issue also embrace
the question, whether there not such tar
diness and hesitancy on the part OF the con-
fCderate movement from Murfreesboro to
Corinth, that the junction of johnston forces
with those of Beauregard at that point, late
in March 1862 was a sheer casualty due TO the
want of enterprise the part of the federal
general to so interpose the forces at his dispo-
sition, between the divided fragments of his
adversary as to make their concentration at
Cornth an impossibiltty. That is to say was
it not in the power of the confederate COM
mander-in-chief to have assembled his forces
a week earlier than he did, and therefore been
in the condition to fight General Grant at
latest on the first instead of the 9th of April,
1862? THOMAS JORDAN.
81 Broadway, New York, September 1,
1887.