John Harrison Wilson, The life of Charles Henry Dana

Feeling that such a despatch might imply dissatisfaction with the course of the Tribune, if not a direct censure of those who were responsible for its management, Dana at once directed his Washington correspondent to ask for an explanation, with the result that the secretary made haste to reply by a personal letter now in my possession, dated February 19, 1862, and written in his well-known backhand. In this letter he pointed out that inasmuch as the Tribune's kind notice of himself might be regarded as a disparagement of the Western soldiers who had won the victory, and thus create antagonism between him and them, he had sent his despatch to prevent that misconstruction and not to repudiate anything the Tribune might say. He expressed the conviction that the despatch should not be published, but wisely, on this and future occasions, left the matter to Dana's judgment, with the declaration that they had “but one mind and heart in the great cause,” that upon many essential points Dana had a wider range of observation and clearer sight than himself, and that he was “therefore willing to be guided” by his wisdom.

The result of this exchange of views was that Stanton's despatch was published without further delay and did much to strengthen the confidence of the public in his good sense and his unselfish patriotism.

Moreover, it had another important result. It served to draw closer the friendly relations existing between the secretary and the editor. The latter had long since lost confidence in the aggressive qualities of General McClellan, who had been in command of all our armies as General-in-Chief for over six months without planning or striking an