mony 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
thi