These points I supported with the most particular proof. Not a single one of them has been controverted. The truth of a single fact, or the correctness of a single opinion laid down in that article, has not been disproved. Very few of them have been questioned—none of them overthrown. I have been subjected to a loud and incoherent assault, led by certain gentlemen whose steady purpose of misrepresenting my record has become notorious, and seconded by a few others who follow through ignorance or innocence. Without proceeding directly against the essential parts of my narrative, they raise a clamor of objection and denial. One of the chief elements of this tom-tom warfare is found in the fact that, owing to wounds received in the honorable service of my country, which have virtually paralyzed my right arm and made it impossible for me to write, save under pain and constraint, I have been compelled in the preparation of my articles to accept the service of a professional writer, generously tendered me by the editor of the Times. Upon such trifling casuals as this do my enemies purpose to build their histories and amend mine. The attempt is at once pitiful and disgraceful.
The first point that demands attention is the number of forces on each side engaged in the Gettysburg campaign. In my first article I claimed that we had 52,000 infantry and the Federals 95,000 men; stating, further, that those were the highest figures of our forces and the lowest of theirs. General R. R. Dawes, in commenting on this estimate, disagrees with it quite widely. The main point that he makes is to quote from Swinton's "Army of the Potomac" the following paragraph (page 310): "The number of infantry present for duty in Lee's army on the 31st of May, 1863, was precisely 68,352. I learn from General Longstreet that when the three corps were concentrated at Chambersburg, the morning report showed 67,000 bayonets, or above 70,000 of all arms." This statement is certainly explicit, but there are discrepancies on the face of it that should have warned a cautious and capable writer not to accept it: First, any one at all familiar with the history of the campaign, or even the leading points of it, must have known that the three corps of the army were never "concentrated at Chambersburg" at all; second, it is well known that any organization upon 67,000 bayonets would have involved an infantry force alone of "over 70,000;" and thus have left no margin in the estimate that Mr. Swinton ascribes to me for the other arms of the service.
If General Dawes had followed Swinton's narrative closely he must have discovered that (page 365) he says: "General Lee's aggregate force present for duty on the 31st of May, 1863, was 68,352." These are the precise figures that he gives on page 310 as the aggregate of the infantry alone. My information upon this subject was taken from General Lee's own lips. He estimated his force to be, including the detachments that would join him on the march, a trifle over 70,000. On the 30th of June, or the 1st of July, he estimated his infantry at 52,000 bayonets. If Mr. Swinton received any information from me upon the subject he received this, for it was all that I had. Since I have read the report of the Adjutant-General of the Army of Northern Virginia, lately published, I am inclined to believe that General Lee
