The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1897-12-19
THE FIGHT AT FRANKLIN
GEN. STANLEY REPLIES TO THE MAR
RATIVE OF GEN. j. ID. cox.
He COntrOverts the Lntter's State
ments and Cites Authorities in Sup
port of His Contention.
en-. d. S. Stanley, in New York Sun.


| Jacob d. Cox, late major general, L. s.
| ". is before the public with another book,
| this time named THE Battle of Franklin"
Like his former book THE March to the
| Sea, Franklin and Nashville" this book
| is given to show that Cox is a great gen
| eral, and, in short, much of d hero and
! to do this he has had to clear the ground,
| as it were, of the commander of the Fourth
| Corps, who seemed to stand in his way.
The controverted points, he terms
them, are simply these: That General Stan
ley had 10 command over the troops which
! fought in the line of battle at Franklin,
| but that he, Cox, commanded the whole
| line; and, secondly, that General Stanley
was wounded early in the battle and retired
| entirely from the scene, and had nothing
| more to do with the matter. This latter
| proposition is included in the first, for if
General Stanley had command the in
| cident of his being wounded or what be-
came of him is wholly irrelevant.
Coxs long argument is well put and
worthy of the late dean of the Cincinnati
Law School. My answer shall be brief
| Ii any one will turn to the War Records,
Vol. XIV, Part /, serial No. SO, he will
| find three reports by General Cox: First,
dated Nashville, Dec. 2, 1864; Major Gen
forenoon, came up with Opdyke's brigade
| and assumed command of the Fourth
| Corps"
Again: Nashville, Tenn, Jan. 10, 1866.
Major General Stanley, commanding the
Fourth Corps, who had been ill the great
| part of the day, came on the field on hear
| ing the sound of battle, and arrived in
| time to take active part in the effort to
| rally Wagner's men, but was soon wounded
and his horse shot from under him.
Again Nashville, Tenn, Jan. Il, 1865.
| IL took no command of the Fourth Corps,
| excepting Opdyke's brigade, after General
Stanley came on the field, and have no Of
! fetal report of this part of the engage
ment."
Now 1 would be thoroughly willing to
rest the case right here, solely on Cox S
evidence but / must call attention to the
comic aspect of a man, thirty-three years
| after the event, writing a book of $50 pages
| to prove that his own official reports mace
! at that time are false.
The report of Dec. 2 now in the Record
Office and in Cox's own handwriting not
copied by clerk) was honest, and meant
for the truth There is no fault to find
| with it except the words assumed COM
mand of the Fourth Corps" | commanded
| the Fourth Corps all the time and had
| nothing to assume.
His second report, of JAM TO- 1864, is ir-
1
| ton. Cox by this time had evidently
| thought out scheme of rascality and was
clearing the field The report of the 18th
| of January is true, excepting the words
"Opdyke's brigade" / will explain this fur
| Their on. Cox is literary man of ability,
and 1 believed in him for many years. He
Is a man that you have to be educated UP
| to- and 1t takes just such an experience
as mine to learn his tricks. When he wrote
believed in Cox. / had been then fourteen
| years on the frontier and had lost all
| thought of the war. noticed his statement
that he commanded Opdyke's. brigade and
| that he met Opdyke's brigade advancing
| when he rode to the pike. But ] cared lit
tie about the matter then. / had ridden
in front of Opdyke's brigade as it went to
the fight, and the empty honor of command
ing it after was so small that if it pleased
nine propositions The scheme is cunningly
| laid, and l will refer to it hereafter.
SCHOFIELD'S LETTER.
When Cox's book, March to the Sea,
Franklin and Nashville" came out, l be-
gan to understand General Cox, and when
! General Stones article in the war papers
series came out, wholly taken from infor-
nation given by Cox, 1 determined to set
tie the matter for all time to come. / wrote
to General Schofeld, then in New York city,
and received the following answer:
headquarters, Division of the Atlantic,
| Governors Island,
| New York City, Sept. 5, 1887.
Gen. d. S. Stanley, Department of Texas,
San Antonio Tex;
Dear General-Your letter of Aug. 30
was received here Sept. 3. From my best
reconections and from examination of my
records, | have no doubt Gen. Cox quotes
! IN the appendix to his Franklin and
Nashville the only orders given by me at
Franklin which could be construed as
! placing any part of your corps the Fourth,
| under his command. These orders directed
| General Kimball, commanding your leading
division, and Captain Bridger, with four
batteries artillery n
| Cox for position on the line.
These orders were given in the morning
| when you were understood by me to be
| with your rear guard retarding the advance
| of the enemy, and hence not at the head of
| your column. My recollection is and infer
the same from their language, that the
! orders have reference solely to the posting
of the troops on the designated line as they
arrived at Franklin, under the direction
| of General Cox. who was the senior officer
| then present at that point. How those
orders were construed by General Cox, [
| fers to himself the commandant upon
| that line. by which / suppose he may mean
simply the senior officer actually present
there at the moment.
"Of course, it was not intended by me to
| deprive you at any time of the command
| of any portion of your corps which might
| be within reach of your orders. But you
viii doubtless recall the fact that the move
mt of the enemy which we had the most
reason to guard against was not a direct
attack in front at Franklin but one to
| strike our flank and rear by crossing the
MARI etH dpONS lHdt punt, anu IL was HeCSS-
sary to be prepared for either or both of
those attacks. Hence it could not have
| been known in the morning, when those
| orders were issued, whether you would be
| in the afternoon on the line south of
| Franklin with Cox, or on the north side
| of the river and several miles from Frank
| lin with Wilson, resisting Hoods attempt
| to cross the river; nor what portion of your
| corps would, in the latter case be witt.
| you, and what portion would have to re-
main with Cox. Therefore the orders given
relative to the temporary parting of your
| troops in the morning could have had moth
ing to do with the question of your COM
! occur, or might have occurred, in the after
| noon. The latter question would have been
| determined in either case by the 1920 arti-
| Gle of war, which is applicable to all such
cases.
LAS the enemy chose the direct attack in
in command, except, perhaps, for a moment,
| of all your troops engaged in resisting that
| attack, while | assumed immediate COM
| mand. during the battle, of Woods division
| of your corps, which had been stationed
| on the north bank of the river in readiness
| the reach of your orders while you were en-
| gagged in the battle on the south side of the
| river.
Il observe that Cox says the command
| ants of the two corps (you and he) met on
| the turnpike just as Opdyke and his men
| were rushing to the front Assuming this
| to be exact, there must have been mo-
ment of time before that meeting when Cox
| had the authority and ii was his duty to
! order your reserve brigade (Opdyke's) into
| action, not by a reason of any order | had
| given, but under the authority duly imposed
upon him by the l22d article of war.
| In respect to your being with me on the
| north side Of the river before the hattie I