The Campaign of Chancellorsville | Page 2

is made with sincere appreciation of his many
admirable qualities, frankly, and untinged by bitterness. But it must be
remembered, that Gen. Hooker has left himself on record as the author
of many harsh reflections upon his subordinates; and that to mete out
even justice to all requires unvarnished truth.
The most uncalled-for slur upon the conduct of his lieutenants probably
occurs in his testimony before the Committee on the Conduct of the
War. Before withdrawing from the south side of the Rappahannock,
after the decisive events of the battle-field had cooped up the army
between the river and its intrenchments, Hooker called together all his
corps commanders, and requested their several opinions as to the
advisability of attack or retreat. Whatever discussion may have then
been had, it was generally understood, in after-days, that all but one of
these generals had expressed himself freely for an immediate advance.
In referring to this understanding, while denying its correctness,
Hooker used the following language:--
"So far as my experience extends, there are in all armies officers more
valiant after the fight than while it is pending; and, when a truthful
history of the Rebellion shall be written, it will be found that the Army
of the Potomac is not an exception."
Merely to characterize as ungenerous this aspersion upon the courage
of such men as then served under Hooker, savors of error on the side of
leniency. And, inasmuch as these words strike, as it were, the keynote
of all the statements which Hooker has vouchsafed with reference to
these events, they might be assumed fairly to open the door to

unsparing criticism. But it is hoped that this course has been avoided;
and that what censure is dealt out to Gen. Hooker in the succeeding
pages will be accepted, even by his advocates, in the kindly spirit in
which it is meant, and in which every soldier of the beloved old Army
of the Potomac must uniformly refer to every other.
There is, moreover, no work on Chancellorsville which results from
research into all records now accessible.
The work of Allan and Hotchkiss, of 1867, than which nothing can be
more even-handed, or more admirable as far as it goes, adopts generally
the statements made in the reports of the Confederate generals: and
these are necessarily one-sided; reports of general officers concerning
their own operations invariably are. Allan and Hotchkiss wrote with
only the Richmond records before them, in addition to such
information from the Federal standpoint as may be found in general
orders, the evidence given before the Committee on the Conduct of the
War, and newspaper correspondence. At that time many of the Federal
reports were not to be had: such as were at the War Department were
hardly accessible. Reports had been duly made by all superior officers
engaged in and surviving this campaign, excepting only the general in
command; but, strange to say, not only did Gen. Hooker refrain from
making a report, but he retained in his personal possession many of the
records of the Army of the Potomac covering the period of his
command, and it is only since his death that these records have been in
part recovered by the Secretary of War. Some are still missing, but they
probably contain no important matter not fully given elsewhere.
Although Hooker testified before the Committee on the Conduct of the
War: "Without an exception I forwarded to that office"--the War
Department--"all the reports and returns and information concerning
the army, and furnished them promptly, and, as I think, as no other
army commander has done," his memory had at the moment played
him traitor, for a considerable part of these records were not disposed
of as stated. It should be remarked, however, that Hooker is not
singular in this leaning towards the meum in the matter of records.
The sources relied on for the facts herein given are the reports of the
officers engaged, both Federal and Confederate, added to many private
notes, memoranda, and maps, made by them; the testimony before the
Committee on the Conduct of the War, which included Hooker's

examination; and the maps made by the Engineer Department of the
United-States Army, and those of Capt. Hotchkiss.
This latter officer was the topographical engineer of the Second Corps
of the Army of Northern Virginia, and made his surveys by order of
Gen. Lee immediately after the campaign. They are of the greatest
assistance and value.
Eighteen years have elapsed since North and South crossed swords
upon this memorable field; and it would seem that all Americans can
now contemplate with unruffled heart the errors under which "the
Army of the Potomac was here beaten without ever being fought," as
well as boast with equal pride, not only of the abundant courage
displayed