it,' said we, 'and of asking for General Preston's house, which is large.' 'That is where General Logan holds his headquarters,' said he, 'and orders have already been given, I know, to burn it on tomorrow morning; but if you say you will take it for a convent, I will speak to the General and the order will be countermanded.' On the following morning, after many inquiries, we learned from the officer in charge (General Perry, I think) that his orders were to fire it unless the Sisters were in actual possession of it, but if even 'a detachment of Sisters' were in it, 'it should be spared on their account. Accordingly we took possession of it, although fires were already kindled near and the servants were carrying off the bedding and furniture, in view of the house being consigned to the flames."
Although actual orders for the burning of the town may not have been given, the soldiers of General Sherman certainly believed that its destruction would not be displeasing to him. That such was their impression we have the authority of a personage not less distinguished than the officer of highest rank in the army of the invaders next after the Commander-in-Chief himself. The proof is beyond impeachment. It comes from the honored pastor of one of our city churches, Rev. P. J. Shand, to whom reference has already been made, and it is thus expressed in his written statement in the possession of the committee: "As well as I recollect, in November, 1865, I went in company with a friend to see General Howard at his headquarters, in Charleston, on matters of business. Before we left, the conversation turned on the destruction of Columbia. General Howard expressed his regret at the occurrence, and added the following words: 'Though General Sherman did not order the burning of the town, yet somehow or other the men had taken up the idea that if they destroyed the capital of South Carolina it would be peculiarly gratifying to General Sherman.' These were his words in the order in which I have set them forth. I noted them down as having great significancy, and they are as fresh in my remembrance as they were immediately after they were spoken. My friend (whose recollection accords fully with my own) and myself on our way home talked the mater over, and could not but be struck by the two following facts: First, that although General Howard said that General Sherman did not order the burning, he did not state that General Sherman gave orders that the city should not be burned. Second, that it was surprising if General Sherman was opposed to the burning that his opposi-
