al Sherman so flippantly discusses and so often avoided, are not satisfied that he shall be the historian or the critic of their brave endeavor.
They will write now, though they could never be brought to do so until the General of the Army assumed to be their historiographer.
They cannot keep silent after reading their record from his reckless pen.
As a military history, nothing can be more unreliable or less valuable than Sherman's book.
It is almost as entertaining as the works of Mark Twain, and reminds us by its vanity of the autobiography of Beneveunto Cellini.
But it is a public contribution to the history of his times.
As an attempt to place his own claims to military conduct on a high ground, nothing could have been more futile and inactive, and the only consolation General Sherman should ever derive from his effort at history is, that which he seems to have attained — viz: that he has written a history which will cause other people to write the truth.
And the self-