And it is with equal pleasure that I record the just and generous
treatment shown by General Sherman toward me from the beginning of
that campaign. Although much my senior in years, experience, and
reputation, he never showed that he was aware of it, but always
treated me as his peer. In his official reports and his memoirs
he has never been unkind or unjust, though it has never been his
habit to bestow much praise on individuals, or to think much of
the rewards due his subordinates, generally giving credit as justly
due to troops rather than to commanders. It would be impossible
for me not to cherish feelings of strong affection for my old
commander, as well as the profound respect due his character as a
man and solider, and his brilliant genius.

If anything I may say in criticism of General Sherman's acts or
words shall seem unkind or be considered unjust, I can only disclaim
any such feeling, and freely admit that it would be wholly unworthy
of the relations that always existed between us. I write not for
the present, but for the future, and my only wish is to represent
the truth as it appears to me. If I fail to see it clearly, I do
but condemn myself. History will do impartial justice. Having
been in a subordinate position in the campaigns of 1864 in Georgia
and Tennessee, I shall not attempt to write a full account of those
campaigns, but shall limit myself to such comments as seem to me
to be called upon the already published histories of those
campaigns.

In estimating the merits of Sherman's "Memoirs,"( 1) it should be
remembered that he does not, and does not claim to, occupy the
position of a disinterested, impartial historian. He writes, not
for the purpose of doing equal and exact justice to all actors in
a great historical drama, but for the purpose of elucidating his
own acts and motives, and vindicating himself against the harsh
criticism and censure which have followed some of his most important
transactions. However unconscious General Sherman himself may have
been of the influence of such motives, their existence was natural,
even inevitable, and they have manifestly given their coloring to
all of the memoirs. This should not occasion surprise, nor even
regret, much less be held to justify unkind criticism. It is
desirable for the future historian to have the view of the chief
actor in any portion of history taken from his own standpoint. It
is only by a critical, laborious and honest