previous next
[75] be seen, too, that all which has been said of the enemy outflanking the Federalists' left is rubbish, and that the main contest was, as I stated, on the right of the line.

Mr. Davis returned by train to Richmond on the 23d a conqueror. His conduct is thus described:

[Here he gives the account of Jeff. Davis's reception, with the report of his remarks,--given in Doc. 7.--ed.]

The medical appliances and surgeons of the army.

The “luxury of ambulances” is a new and curious ground of complaint, and I suspect that there were not many articles of the kind in the rear of the Confederate army.

Apropos of this subject, I must remark that one class of officers in the Federal army did their duty nobly — the surgeons remained on the field when all others were retiring or had left. One is reported killed; six are prisoners in the hands of the enemy, engaged in attending the wounded of both sides — an invaluable aid to the scanty medical staff of the Confederates.

There is no reason to believe the treatment of wounded or prisoners was what it was reported to have been. There may have been some isolated acts of atrocity in the heat of battle or pursuit, and it is only too likely that a building in which wounded men were placed was set fire to by a shell, but it is only justice to the Confederate authorities to say that they seem to have done all they could for those who fell into their hands. Much irritation has been created by the false statements circulated on this subject, and the soldiers on guard over Confederate prisoners here would not permit them to receive some little luxuries which had been ordered by sympathizing inhabitants, on the ground that they did not deserve them after the treatment given by their friends to the Federalists.

Treason exists in every department of the Federal Government — what Mr. Russell saw in the United States Post office.

And as I have used the word “sympathizers,” let me add the expression of my belief that there is scarcely a department, high or low, of the public service of the United States in which there is not “treason”--I mean the aiding and abetting the enemy by information and advice. It is openly talked in society — its work is evident on all sides.

I went into the private department of the Post Office the other day, and found there a gentleman busily engaged in sorting letters at a desk. The last time I saw him was at dinner with the Commissioners of the Confederate States at Washington, and I was rather surprised to see him now in the sanctum of the Post Office, within a few feet of Mr. Blair, of the sangre azul of abolitionism.

Said he, “I am just lookiny over the letters here to pick out some for our Southern friends, and I forward them to their owners as I find them;” and if the excellent and acute gentle man did not also forward any little scraps of news he could collect I am in error.

Again, a series of maps prepared with great care, for the use of General McDowell's staff, are given out to be photographed, and are so scarce that superior officers cannot get them. Nevertheless one is found in a tent of a Confederate officer, in the advance of Fairfax Court House, which must have been sent to him as soon as it was ready.

It is also asserted that General Beauregard knew beforehand of McDowell's advance: but the Confederates left in such haste that much credence cannot be given to the statement that the enemy were fully informed of the fact any considerable length of time before-hand.

The “on to Richmond” cry.

The battle having been duly fought and lost, the Federalists are employing their minds to find out why it was fought at all.

The convulsions into which the New York press have been thrown by the inquiry, resemble those produced on a dead frog by the wire of Galvani. “Who cried ‘ on to Richmond?’ ” “Not I, ‘pon my honor. It was shouted out by some one in my house, but I don't know who. I never gave him authority. I won't shout any thing any more.”

“ Who urged General Scott to fight the battle, and never gave anybody any peace till he was ordered to do it?” “Nobody!” “It was that other fellow.” “Please, sir, it wasn't me.”

“I never approved it.”

“I'll never say a word to a soldier again.”

Mr. President knows I didn't.”

It is really a most curious study. I begin to thing that the best possible instructors may sometimes be in the wrong at this side of the Atlantic.

The Tribune declares that General Scott, being absolute master of the situation, is responsible for the battle.

But the New York Times gives a statement of what took place before the battle at the General's table, which, therefore, is probably published with his sanction, as it is impossible to suppose a gentleman would print it without express permission, from which it would certainly appear that the veteran commander was not, as I hinted, a free agent in the matter. Here is the statement:

[Mr. Russell here furnishes Raymond's Washington letter to the New York Times, commencing with:--“General Scott, it is said, discussed the whole subject of this war, in all its parts, and with the utmost clearness and accuracy. He had a distinct and well-defined opinion on every point connected with it, and stated what his plan would be for bringing it to a close if the management of it had been left in his hands,” &c.--ed.]

Can the Government meet a reaction?--General McClellan at work.

It remains to be seen if the plans of General

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.

An XML version of this text is available for download, with the additional restriction that you offer Perseus any modifications you make. Perseus provides credit for all accepted changes, storing new additions in a versioning system.

hide Places (automatically extracted)

View a map of the most frequently mentioned places in this document.

Download Pleiades ancient places geospacial dataset for this text.

hide Display Preferences
Greek Display:
Arabic Display:
View by Default:
Browse Bar: