This text is part of:
Table of Contents:
[648]
them.
I also stated to them that the advices received from the Army of the Potomac convinced me that our movement should be toward Richmond, and gave orders for the disposition of their troops, having in view an early demonstration up James River from the right of our position.
And with this letter I sent the proper orders to my corps commanders to carry out the movement indicated in it.1
General Gillmore having stated in reply to my letter that he did not know what I intended to do, I directed that he should meet with me for consultation.
He did so, and after the fullest explanation of my plan of operations made no objection.
After he retired, I sent a despatch to General Hincks informing him that the news received from the Army of the Potomac would involve a change of plan, and gave him orders not to move on Petersburg as was intended, but to devote his energies to perfecting the defences at City Point and Fort Powhatan.2
It will be observed that one movement to take Petersburg was thus frustrated by information from headquarters through Washington which was in every substantial particular misleading and untrue.
There was severe fighting on the night of the 9th, the enemy making an attack in force upon Generals Brooks and Heckman, but were handsomely repulsed.
On the 10th the plan of withdrawal of the troops from Swift Creek was carried out without loss, and the railroad wholly destroyed for seven miles, under my personal supervision, there being no such agreement between my corps commanders as would lead them to do any other thing in unison save to protest against the plans of the commanding general.3
Generals Smith and Gillmore made separate replies to my letter.
These replies did not agree with each other, and, what was of more consequence, they had no effect upon my plans under the instructions and recent information I had received from Lieutenant-General Grant.
Another letter of General Smith4 shows the state of co-perative feeling between my two corps commanders upon other subjects of joint action.
They would not now be published save that justice requires that their answers to my implied censure should be made public.
This is but fair-play.
A. M. Thayer and Co. 1892.
Tufts University provided support for entering this text.
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.