War of the Rebellion: Serial 124 Page 0809 UNION AUTHORITIES.

Search Civil War Official Records

Could not the same apportionment be made by towns, as subdistricts?

Indeed, the apportionment by Congressional districts could only be made by ascertaining the aggregate credit of the towns composing the several districts. But the important thing to be noted in the consideration of this dispatch is that the "apportionment of credit" is reorganized as a principle sanctioned by act of Congress.

But Governor Gilmore there upon sends the following dispatch:

(Numbers 9.) CONCORD, July 18, 1863.

Honorable E. M. STANTON,

Secretary of War, Washington, D. C.:

SIR: I am in receipt of your dispatch of yesterday. if he draft is to be made as you have decided, you must send a regiment to enforce it. Will you not send the New Hampshire Fifth?

Please answer by telegraph.

J. A. GILMORE,

Governor of New Hampshire.

But even before this communication reached the Secretary of War he seems to have reconsidered the apparently hasty conclusion expressed in his telegram of the 17th (Numbers 8.) as appears by the following of the same date:

(Numbers 10.) WASHINGTON, July 17, 1863.

(Received 18th.)

His Excellency Governor GILMORE:

For mature consideration of the question presented by your communication and the resolution of the Legislature of the State have submitted them to the Solicitor of the War Department and Judge-Advocate-General. In the meantime proceedings will be stayed until their conclusion is arrived at, of which you will be notified. Any further views you may offer will be carefully considered.

EDWIN M. STANTON,

Secretary of War.

And the Provost-Marshal-General at the same time sends the following:

(Numbers 11.) PROVOST-MARSHAL-GENERAL'S OFFICE, Washington, D. C., July 17, 1863.

Governor J. A. GILMORE,

Concord, N. H.:

The questions presented by the Legislature and Governor of New Hampshire have been submitted to Solicitor of War Department. The draft must not proceed in New Hampshire till his answer received.

JAMES B. FRY,

Provost-Marshal-General.

It would seem them that the conclusion expressed in the telegram of the Secretary of War of the date of July 17 (Numbers 8) was reached without "nature consideration."

But the last two preceding dispatches furnish evidence of a sincere and honest purpose to consider the matter carefully. The attention not only of the Secretary of War and of the Provost- Marshal-General, but also that of their special Solicitor, Mr. Whiting, is engaged; and the result was just what was anticipated a plain, explicit, unequivocal declaration that the rights of the State and the people and the