New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1893-06-15
NEW PUBLICATIONS.
GENERAL. SMITHS REPLY TO BUTLER.

GENERAL SMITHS REPLY TO BUTLER.
FROM CHATTANOOGA TO PETERSBURG UNDER
GENERALS CRAM AND BUTLER. Contribu,
ton to the History Of the War and fG pToWst
MajorGcncra United states Army and Int Ma MAO!
General Of voan1e s,cD W Mai,n maps Co. ana p'
When the Iam.nted Irwin reviewed General But
Ier,s hook in The Tribune he took occasion to inquire
what Badyn smith would have to say ABOUT .h"'
work. The present volume answers the question:
General Smith does take the humorous VIC" VI
the matter which would be easy Tor man "s'
deeply interested. But, though serious eho"e"' I
manner OF carrying on controversy largely pe'9o,.
is marked BY restraint and moderator "'e'
Butler had censured him particularly Tor his cohu"o'
nj Petersburg In 1864 This had also been m"'ter
alluded TO In the memoirs OF General Grant ~
these criticisms General smith makes r'p! III "n'en
his purpose Is show that up 10 Tue uie Va '
assault Oh Petersburg, June 10, loo4 ne hau c''os
an unusual share Of Grants confidence while On io
other hand Buffers reputation as military ieaoer
in the field was BY no means haterlhg anu '"' 'ne
anair st Petersburg was studiousy msrePfese"'e"'
lie gives brief history OF bis services at ana near
(battanooga under Thomas and Grant, o~eihR par
ticularly on the movements by which inc arm. VI 'e
Cumberland in October 1868. obtained coh'ro oi 'n'
Tennessee River and saved from starVauoh u!
the reopening OF communication with Its base OF sup
plies bridgeport General smith as CHIEF engineer Oh
the Army OF the Cumberland proposed the pini' ap-
proved by Thomas and afterward by Grant, wni0h
brought about this result. Grant put Gehera o"n'n
In command OF the expedition, which was successful
and which the latter asserts opened the way ior "
mans force to reach Chattanooga and mace po'''o,
the victory OF Missionary Ridge. Grant pfoho'eu
General smith at once to the place OF chel ehsioei
NJ the military Division Of the Mississippi ana re-
peatediy recommended him to the Secretary oil war
for q major generalship. When he went 10 "''"'ne
ton TO become lieutenant general ne lhVl''u "c''i"'
Smith 10 accompany him. The latter no" seen's "
be OF the opinion that his services IN tennessee anu
the commentator which he had received from Grant
sherman and Thomas to his personal oe'rinleh''
since they resulted in his being assigned at Guer
request to the Department Of Virginia ana Nor'h
Carolina which Butler commanded
Doc,mcn,s are auoted to show that Buffers plan
Of campaign In the spring and summer Oh ioof WIS
IN violation OF the orders Of Grant and That Ms army
at Bermuda Hundred safe and as useless as II
II had been ain bottle. strongly corked' ana 'nat
1t was Grants intention to place General enith ID
command OF the department Grant pressed 'he
matter so far that finally the President Prni'.e" an
order 10 issue which would have placed bu'ier Ill
oractcal retirement at Fort Monroe. But THIS oruel
was never carried out. General smith insists that
Us withdrawal due TO BRIEF WISH NIUE ny
Butler 10 Grants headquarters. and he goes Hto
Gonna detail for the purpose OF showing that Grants
one great defect and the fear Of public accusation
threatened by Butler led him TO act against MS oe
,,,ora,o judgement There Is necessarily hiatus
in General smiths argument at this point lie can
show by the records that Butler went TO Grants
Headquarters and that he come back triumphant
But he can only infer from some incidents "Hhih
his own knowledge and from the tenor OF certain
CORRESPONDENCE between himself and General Rawhhs
the means used by Butler to retain his command
His Inference however. is supported by an extremely
frank letter from General /. J. WStar, written IN
January OF the present year, -Ad p'blShcd III Inc
appendix TO this book.
General Smith relates the history Of his successlm
assault June Is, 1854, the forcations at Peters
burg. quoting documents TO support his contention
that the criticisms OF Grant IN the General Report
of the War In 1865 were incorrect and UNJUST he
replies in detail the assertions made by butter
covering not only the action AT Petersburg, but the
whole period while he in the Department OF VII
ppia and North Carolina. and after adding that there
are other attacks which he cannot reply he con
cudes with the words 81 do net ask the puDhc
TO apply strictly the legal maxim, False In one
thing false in ALL but do think am 1usuhed IN
believing that where many OF General Buffers
statements are shown By the records to be Wliuly
false no confidence Will he placed In anything resting
lpon his mere assertions