Gordo-even before one word of commendation from government had reached this army, on account of its gallant conduct in the capture of those prisoners." Accident alone, not any oversight or neglect on my part, has given you the apparent advantage of the aggravation, which you have artfully thrown into this charge. My letter, commending yourself and the gallant army under your command, for the glorious achievement at Cerro Gordo, was written and sent to you on the 19th of May-eleven days before that which you are pleased to consider as containing a rebuke.

But I meet the main charge with a positive denial. You never were rebuked for discharging the prisoners taken at Cerro Gordo. This issue can be tried by the record. All that was ever said on the subject is contained in the following extract from my letter of the 31st of May.

"Your course hitherto, in relation to prisoners of war, both men and officers, in discharging them on parole, has been liberal and kind; but whether it ought to be still longer continued, or in some respects changed, has been under the consideration of the President, and he has directed me to communicate to you his views on the subject. He is not unaware of the great embarrassment their detention, or the sending of them to the United States, would occasion; but, so far as relates to the officers, he thinks they should be detained until duly exchanged. In that case, it will probably be found expedient to send them, or most of them, to the United States. You will not, therefore, except for special reasons in particular cases, discharge the officers, who may be taken prisoners, but detain them with you, or send them to the United States, as you shall deem most expedient."

If I understand the force of terms, there is nothing in this language which, by fair interpretation, can be made to express or imply a rebuke. I cannot conceive that any mind, other than one of a diseased sensitiveness, over anxious to discover causes for complaint and accusation, could imagine that anything like a rebuke was contained in this extract; yet on this unsubstantial basis alone rests the charge, over and over again presented, that you were rebuked by the War Department, for discharging the prisoners captured at Cerro Gordo. If, in a case where it was so easy to be right and so difficult to get wrong, you could fall into such an obvious. mistake, what may not be expected from you in other matters, where your perverted feelings have a freer and a wider range?

Before considering your complaints, for not having been supplied with sufficient means for transportation for the expedition against. Vera Cruz, I will notice your "four memorials" to the War Department, in which you demonstrated, as you state, that Vera Cruz was the true base of operations, and that the enemy's capital could not, probably, be reached from the Rio Grande.

I cannot discover the pertinency of your allusion to these four memorials, except it be to put forth a claim to the merit of originating the expedition against Vera Cruz, and of being the first to discover that the most practicable route to the city of Mexico was from that point on the Gulf; but your known abhorence for a "pruri

ency of fame not earned," ought to shield you from the suspicion of such an infirmity.

I am sure you are not ignorant of the fact-but, if you are, it is nevertheless true-that the expedition against Vera Cruz had been for some time under consideration; that great pains had been taken to get information as to the defences of that city, the strength of the castle, and the difficulties which would attend the debarkation of troops; that maps had been procured and carefully examined; that persons who had resided there, and officers of the army and navy, had been consulted on the subject, and the enterprise actually resolved on before the date of your first memoir, and before you were thought of to conduct it.

As early as the 9th of July, 1846, within two months after the declaration of war, and before the main body of troops raised for its prosecution had reached the scene of operations, considerate attention had been given to that subject. On that day a letter, from this department to General Taylor, thus alludes to a movement from Vera Cruz into the interior of the enemy's country.

"If, from all the information you may communicate to the department, as well as that derived from other sources, it should appear that the difficulties and obstacles to the conducting of a campaign, from the Rio Grande, the present base of your operations, for any considerable distance into the interior of Mexico, will be very great, the department will consider whether the main invasion should not ultimately take place from some point on the coast, say Tampico, or some other point in the vicinity of Vera Cruz. This suggestion is made with a view to call your attention to it, and to obtain from you such information as you may be able to impart. Should it be determined that the main army should invade Mexico at some other point than the Rio Grande-say the vicinity of Vera Cruz-a large and sufficient number of transport vessels could be placed at the mouth of the Rio Grande by the time the healthy season sets in-say early in November. The main army, with all its munitions, could be transported, leaving a sufficient force behind to hold and occupy the Rio Grande, and all the towns and provinces which you may have conquered before that time. In the event of such being the plan of operations, your opinion is desired, what increased force, if any, will be required to carry it out with success. We learn that the army could be disembarked a few miles distant from Vera Cruz, and readily invest the town in its rear, without coming within the range of the guns of the fortress of San Juan d'Ulloa. The town could be readily taken by land, while the fortress, being invested by land and sea, and all communication cut off, must soon fall. From Vera Cruz to the city of Mexico there is a fine road, upon which the diligences or stage coaches run daily. The distance from Vera Cruz to the city of Mexico is not more than one-third of that from the Rio Grande to the city of Mexico."

The subject was again brought into view on the 13th of October, in the same year, and more particularly on the 22d of October, in letters addressed to General Taylor. At the last date, the plan had been so far matured that several officers of the staff and line were

indicated for that service. This was nearly a month before it was determined to employ you with the army in any part of Mexico.

It was never contemplated here to strike at the city of Mexico from the line occupied by General Taylor, or through any other, except that from Vera Cruz. If the war was to be pushed to that extent, it required no elaborate demonstration, no profound mili tary talent, nothing more than common sagacity and very slight reflection on the subject, to see the propriety and the necessity of making Vera Cruz the base of military operations.

An alleged deficiency of means to transport the troops in the expedition to Vera Cruz seems to be most prominently presented, and most confidently relied on, to sustain your charge against the War Department for neglecting this branch of its duties. I issued, it seems to be admitted, the proper order, so far as the means of transportation were to be drawn from the north; but the allegation is that it was issued too late, and was never executed. It was issued at least four days before you arrived at New Orleans, on your way to the army. If promptly executed, it was a reasonable calculation that the "ten vessels," alluded to in your letter, would have arrived in season to receive the troops, as soon as you could collect them from their remote and scattered positions in the interior of Mexico, bring them to the sea coast, and prepare for their embarkation. Whether an order for ships to be sent out in ballast, issued the 15th of December, was or was not in season for the service they were designed for, depends upon the time when the expedition could be got ready to sail. To determine this, a regard must be paid to what you required to be done preparatory to the expedition, rather than what you may have said on that subject.

A reference to two or three of your requisitions will show that no rational hope could be entertained that the expedition would set forth before the middle or the last of February. You required, as one item of the outfit, one hundred and forty surf boats-all to be constructed after you left Washington. Though the department urged a less number, you insisted on all. You estimated the expense of each at $200, and thought, by putting the principal shipyards on the Atlantic coast in requisition, they might be constructed by the first of January. To show what reliance was to be placed on your calculation, I refer to the fact, that though due regard to economy was had in procuring these boats, each cost on an average $950-nearly fivefold your estimate. Conceding that you erred much less as to the time within which they could be constructed-nay, more, admitting they could have been ready by the first of January, and sooner you did not expect they could be madeby no reasonable calculation could they have reached the coast of Mexico before the first of February. The expedition could not go forth without them. In your letter to me, dated the 28th of February, off Lobos, you state that but a small part of the transports engaged at New Orleans, under your orders of the 28th December, had arrived, and "not one of the ten ordered by your memorandum of the 15th of that month, and the whole were due at the Brazos on the 15th of January." Having thus shown, by your own opinion,

that, under my order, "the ten vessels" ought to have been at the Brazos at least fifteen days before the expedition could have been ready to sail, I have vindicated myself from the charge of having neglected my duty, by not isuing that order at an earlier date. If issued earlier, it would have involved a largely increased expenditure for demurrage, and resulted in no public benefit.

But the graver part of this charge is, that none of these "ten vessels" ever arrived. "Relying," you say, in the letter now under consideration, "upon them [the ten vessels] confidently, the embarkation was delayed, in the whole, or in part, at the Brazos and Tampico, from the 15th of January to the 9th of March, leaving, it was feared, not half the time needed for the reduction of Vera Cruz and its castle, before the return of the yellow fever." To whomsoever the calamitous consequences of the non-arrival of these "ten vessels" and your "cruel disappointment" in relation to them are imputable, be has certainly involved himself in a serious responsibility. I hope to remove the whole of it from "the head of the War Department," and entertain some apprehensions that it will fall, in part, upon the commanding general of the expedition. The execution of the most difficult branch of duties appertaining to a military expedition-providing for transportation-is by the distribution of the business in the War Department allotted to the quartermaster general. As an expedition against Vera Cruz had been resolved on some time before you were assigned to take command of it, General Jesup had gone to New Orleans to be in the best position to make the necessary preparations for such an enterprise. From his great knowledge, and long experience in military affairs, not only in his appropriate department, but as a commander in the field, the government thought it fortunate that you could have the advice and assistance of so able a counsellor.

Your suggestion that it might be necessary to send ships in ballast from the north, for transports, was not neglected or unheeded by me. Whether it would be necessary, or not, depended, according to your statement to me, upon the means of transportation which could be procured at New Orleans, &c. My first step was, to write to the quartermaster general, then at that place, for information on that subject. In my letter to him of 11th of December, I said: "It is expected that most of the vessels in the service of the quartermaster's department can be used as transports for the expedition. It will be necessary that the department here should know what portion of the transportation can be furnished by the ordinary means which the quartermaster's department has now under its control for the purposes of its expedition. I have to request that information on this point should be furnished without delay.

"Another point upon which the department desires information is, what amount of means of transportation, for such an expedition, can be furnished at New Orleans, Mobile, and in that quarter.

"The expense of procuring transports from the Atlantic cities will be exorbitant. Freights are very high, and most of the good vessels are engaged for the ordinary purposes of commerce."

It is important to bear in mind that you saw this letter, on your

first arrival at New Orleans. In writing to me from that place, December 21st, you observe, "I have seen your letter (in the hands of Lieutenant Colonel Hunt) to the quartermaster general, dated the 11th." You could not mistake its object, because it was clearly expressed. I asked distinctly what means of transportation for the expedition can be furnished at New Orleans, &c., and referred to the expense and difficulty of procuring transports from the Atlantic cities. You could not, therefore, but know that my course, as to sending ships in ballast from the north, would be regulated by the quartermaster general's reply. While waiting for this information, and in order to prevent delay, and be sure not to deserve the imputation you now cast upon me, I issued the order of the 15th of December, to which you refer, knowing that it could be modified and conformed to the exigencies of the service, according to the answer which I should receive from General Jesup. His reply is dated the 27th of December, and in it he says:

"Transportation can be provided here for all the troops that may be drawn from the army under the command of General Taylor, and for all the ordnance, ordnance stores, and other supplies, which may be drawn either from this depot, [the Brazos,] or from New Orleans. The public transports, I mean those owned by the United States, that can be spared for the contemplated operations, it is estimated, will carry three thousand men, with all their supplies. Vessels can be chartered here, on favorable terms, for any additional transportation that may be required." This letter was submitted to, and read by, you, as appears from your endorsement thereon After referring to some other matters in the letter, you conclude your endorsement as follows: "I recommend that Brevet Major General Jesup's suggestions be adopted." This fact shows that the letter received your particular attention.

When this letter, which you knew was forwarded to the department, was here received, showing that your apprehended difficulty in obtaining sufficient transportation at the south was unfounded, and that it could be provided in that quarter in great abundance on favorable terms, my order of the 15th of December, so far, and only so far, as it related to sending out vessels in ballast, was countermanded. It is strange, indeed, that, after you were made acquainted with the object of my inquiries and General Jesup's letter in reply to them, you should have looked for transport vessels in ballast from the Atlantic cities; and, still more strange, that their non-arrival should be the proof you rely on to convict me of having neglected my duty in this instance. If, in truth, you delayed the expedition nearly two months for these transports, I am blameless; the responsibilty is in another quarter. It cannot be said that this statement, as to the sufficiency of transports to be obtained at the south, had an implied reference to what I had ordered from the Atlantic cities; for my order was then unknown to yourself and the quartermaster general. You first received a copy of it several days after the date of General Jesup's letter to me, and of your endorsement thereon. [See your letter to me of the 12th of January.] Resisted, as you were, by "head

1