fixed on, Brigadier-General Stevens being in favor of deferring it until the afternoon. Although, however, no direct objections were made, I judged from a series of questions which were put to General Sevens by General Wright, in regard to the effect produced or likely to be produced on the enemy's works by the battery of the latter (former), that he was not in favor of a forward movement at the present time. The impression was made on me by the general tone of the conversation that, while expressing every desire to further your views to the utmost of their power, the three scarcely in favor of the movement; none of them, however, said as much as this, and General Wright did observe that we could take the battery, he thought.

The affidavit of William O'Connor proves that on the night previous to the attack, in reply to a question of General Benham, General Stevens expressed the opinion that they could succeed.

Whatever opposition, however, may have been felt or manifested by these officers, General Benham was not bound to yield to it. Military men may, and often should, hear the opinions of their subordinates, but it is their privilege, and at times it becomes their duty, to disregard them. I think I am justifice in holding that the attack, on the earthwork was not in fact, and certainly was not intended to be, a violation of orders; nor was it an ill-digested or criminally rash movement, but one which was made from no fault of General Benham, but from caused which he could not control. There is a total absence of that clear proof of culpability which alone would justify the summary proceeding which has been resorted to against him.

General Benham is a soldier by profession. He graduated at West Point in 1837, first of his class, and as an engineer has since adorned five year of his like to his country, and it does seem to be dealing harshly and unjustly to thus strike him down and dishonor him without a trial, even though the criticisms of men, it may be, more cautious than himself should pronounce his conduct in moving upon the enemy ill-considered and rash. Over-aggressiveness has certainly not been so prevailing a vice in the military service during the presents. Rashness and over-eagerness to strike the enemy may certainly become culpable and be fraught with disaster, but the inaction of military men if often yet more to be deplored. General Benham's record as a soldier is one of which he may well be proud; it belongs to the country, and should not be hastily darkened by such a condemnation as that which now rests upon him. Had he done nothing more than offer his life upon the field of Buena Vista, where he fought bravely and was wounded, he would have done much to entitle him to the kind consideration of his Government. General Wool, speaking of his conduct on that occasion, says:

He was very gallant, zealous, and efficient at all times, night and day, in the performance of the important duties with which he was charged.

Lieutenant-General Scott, referring to the same events, uses this emphatic language to the Secretary of War:

There is much merit in the services mentioned within, deserving, in my opinion, of an additional brevet. Brevet Captain Benham deserved that rank for his great services on the 22nd of February, first day of the battle of Buena Vist, and the brevet of major for the next day.

His zeal, ability, and efficiency are yet further attested and commended in earnest terms by some of the most accomplished officers connected with the civil and military administration, all of whom speak of