554
The President of the Confederate States has repeatedly and positivelyasserted that he received from General Johnston a dispatch which gave theplan of battle, exactly as it was fought, and that this dispatch was not thatof April 3d already quoted, but was lost. General Beauregard and his staff-officer, Colonel Jordan, have taken issue with Mr. Davis on this point,vehemently insisting that no such dispatch was, or could have been, sent.Their denial rests merely upon a priori objections to the probability of Mr.Davis’s assertion. On the other hand, Mr. Davis’s clear and positive statementmade many years ago, and often repeated since, is confirmed by contem-porary documentary evidence. On April 5th he sent a telegram to GeneralJohnston , in which he acknowledges his telegram of “ yesterday,” April4th. This telegram of “yesterday” was plainly the “lost dispatch,” for“ yesterday ” was April 4th, not April 3d. If, as I have sought to show, impor-tant changes had occurred in the plan of battle, nothing could be morenatural and proper for the commanding general than instantly to inform hisfriend and commander-in-chief; and even if no change had occurred, still itwould have been right for him to keep his chief fully advised of the progressof the movement. I have always said that General Johnston ’s original planwas probably to attack by columns of corps, as indicated in his telegram ofApril 3d. Special Orders, No. 8 directed an attack in three lines parallel tothe enemy’s front. Jordan tells us General Johnston did not see these ordersas published until the morning of the 4th. What more natural than that heshould then communicate the changes made, and add his purpose to turn theenemy’s left, not mentioned in the telegram of April 3d. A curious corrobora-tion, hitherto unobserved, occurs in Mr. Davis’s telegram of April 5th, that itwas in reply to a lost dispatch. On April 2d General Beauregard wrote toGeneral Johnston, saying that he had telegraphed to the War Depart-ment for generals, and adding, “ Would it not be well for you to telegraphalso for the generals you may require!” We have no record of any suchrequest made upon this suggestion, but Mr. Davis, in his telegram of April5th, says: “Brigadiers have been recently appointed; among them, Bowen.Do you require others t ” This seems to be a response to a request; Bowenwas commanding a brigade in General Johnston ’s army. But as there wasno request in General Johnston ’s telegram of April 3d, it is reasonable tosuppose that it was contained in one of the 4th, which has been lost. But Iam giving an importance to this question which it would not merit exceptfor the prominence given it in the pages of “ The Century Magazine.” Whethersent or not, it is entirely irrelevant to the main issue. Its whole importanceconsists in showing, not who made the plan of battle, but that the planhaving been given to his subordinates, General Johnston , so long as he lived,held them to the steady and successful execution of it. When GeneralBeauregard succeeded to the command he abandoned the vital principle ofthat plan, which was to push the contest to a final decision that day, andtook a course of his own, not embraced or contemplated in General John-ston ’s designs — a policy of withdrawal and delay which led to defeat insteadof victory.