indignation so common in parliamentary debate, "that they had got to
learn," etc. etc. etc. It seemed to me that the lesson which they
had yet to learn was then in the process of being taught to them.
They were anxious to be told all about the mischance at Ball's
Bluff, but nobody would tell them anything about it. They wanted to
know something of that blockade on the Potomac; but such knowledge
was not good for them. "Pack them up in boxes, and send them home,"
one military gentleman said to me. And I began to think that
something of the kind would be done, if they made themselves
troublesome. I quote here the manner in which their questions,
respecting the affair at Ball's Bluff, were answered by the
Secretary of war. "The Speaker laid before the House a letter from
the Secretary of War, in which he says that he has the honor to
acknowledge the receipt of the resolution adopted on the 6th
instant, to the effect that the answer of the Department to the
resolution, passed on the second day of the session, is not
responsive and satisfactory to the House, and requesting a farther
answer. The Secretary has now to state that measures have been
taken to ascertain who is responsible for the disastrous movement at
Ball's Bluff, but that it is not compatible with the public interest
to make known those measures at the present time."

In truth the days are evil for any Congress of debaters, when a
great army is in camp on every side of them. The people had called
for the army, and there it was. It was of younger birth than
Congress, and had thrown its elder brother considerably out of favor
as has been done before by many a new-born baby. If Congress could
amuse itself with a few set speeches, and a field day or two, such
as those afforded by Mr. Sumner, it might all be very well--provided
that such speeches did not attack the army. Over and beyond this,