[17.] Shields, Irish by birth, practised law in Illinois, became a judge of the state supreme court and was then appointed commissioner of the General Land Office, Washington. He became discontented under Wool’s command, and sent Davis, his aide, to Washington in the hope of obtaining command of the Illinois regiments or possibly of displacing Wool.
[18.] Frequently not all of the troops arrived at a place on the same date.
[19.] Possibly news of the restoration of the constitution had reached Monclova but not Santa Rosa.
[20.] The authorities of Monclova stated that Wool kept every pledge, and they complained only that the Americans ate up provisions needed for the people. The officers who criticised Wool most appear to have been Shields, who—besides being notably egotistical (Ill. State Hist. Soc. Trans., ix, pp. 36–8)—had been appointed by Polk on a confidential basis (Davis, Autobiog., 96) and therefore felt entitled to be ambitious; Harney, whose characteristics have been explained; Bonneville, who proved himself later incompetent or worse; and Yell, whose men were soon to disgrace themselves at Buena Vista in consequence of lacking discipline. Nov. 10 Taylor issued orders detaching Shields and Harney from Wool’s command (Ho. 60; 30, 1, p. 542). This change doubtless tended to promote harmony. In December Harney brought charges against Wool, asserting that his “extreme imbecility and manifest incapacity” ruined the expedition. The judge advocate general advised that the charges should be ignored ([61]Horton, Dec. 3).
[21.] Just after leaving Parras Wool learned that 2700 Mexicans with four guns had moved from Zacatecas against him. One fault of the expedition was that it could neither support nor be supported by Taylor’s army (see Halleck, Mil. Art, 410 and chap. xi, [note 5], of this history). One asks why Ampudia was not ordered to attack Wool. With Blanco’s irregulars he would have been formidable. The explanation probably is that Santa Anna wished to build up at S. L. Potosí as large an army as possible under his own command. Besides, he expected Wool to turn west.
[22.] Wool received on Nov. 14 Taylor’s instructions to give up the expedition, and on Nov. 26 his instructions to go to Parras and await orders ([61]Wool, Jan. 17, 1847). He moved, however, in anticipation of the latter instructions ([61]Wool, Dec. 7). Nov. 16 he reported that he expected three mounted and two infantry companies as escorts to the last wagons, and after their arrival would have about 2750 in all. [60]Marcy to Taylor, May 6, 1847: It is not important to hold Chihuahua, for you are in advance of it. Ripley (War with Mexico, i, 337), probably to have a fling at Wool, says Wool “only” wished to give up the expedition in order to go toward Durango and Zacatecas in pursuit of glory; but the document he cites does not so state, and Taylor wrote that Wool proposed to join him (Bixby coll., 71).
[24.] July 2 Taylor had expressed the opinion that the expedition might prove very important (Ho. 60; 30, 1, p. 329), but suggested that only mounted men should be employed.
[25.] Marcy said that the expedition prevented a considerable part of Mexico from sharing in the campaign against Scott, and to some extent this was doubtless true.
[26.] Wool’s expedition. Polk, Diary, May 14, 16; Oct. 20. [164]Conner to Bancroft, May 31. N. Orl. Commerc. Bulletin, Aug. 17. Meade, Letters, i, 152. Ho. 60; 30, 1, pp. 323, 363 (Marcy); 325 (Scott); 458 (Freeman); 328, 454, 466 (Jones); 424, 426 (Wool); 428 (Thomas); 305, 329, 351, 361, 374, 377, 400, 409, 418, 424, 433 (Taylor); 410 (Bliss); 567 (Jesup). [254]Mansfield, report, Apr. 19. [61]Wool, July 28; Aug. 5, 15; Sept. 2, 15, 28; Oct. 15, 19; Nov. 4; Dec. 16. [256]Wool, July 29. Sen. 1; 30, 1, pp. 45, 545. Sen. 32; 31, 1 (Hughes and others). [65]Adj. gen., gen. orders 19. Wash. Union, Oct. 19; Nov. 20, 21, 28, 1846 Feb. 8; Mar. 23, 1847. [61]Maynadier, Aug. 25. [61]Horton, June 23; Aug. 8; Oct. 20; Dec. 3. [69]Harney, Aug. 12. Reavis, Harney, 155. Sen. 178; 29, 2. Diario, Sept. 11. [68]P. F. Smith, Oct. 2. [245]Duvall to Lamar, June 27. Buhoup, Narrative. Davis, Autobiog., 105–19. [61]Shields, Aug. 28. Niles, Oct. 24, p. 118; Dec. 26, p. 263; May 8, 1847, p. 156. [61]Kingsbury to Wool, Oct. 13. Sen. 64; 31, 1. National Intelligencer, Nov. 3, 21. Carleton, Buena Vista, 161–76. Balbontín, Invasión, 76. [65]Wool, orders 89, 117, 121, 126, 143, 144, 148, 155. [61]Wool to Taylor, Jan. 17, 1847. N. Y. Eve. Post, Jan. 4, 1849. [180]McDowell to Newton, Sept. 16, 1846. [132]Butler, Dec. 10. Wool in Ceremonies. Bishop, Journal. [69]Duncan to Worth, Aug. 8. Taylor, Letters (Bixby), 71. [63]Marcy to Kearny, Dec. 10. Picayune, Mar. 4, 6, 17, 1847. [69]Wood to Taylor, Dec. 7. [66]Lee to Totten, Dec. 5. Donnavan, Adventures, 41. Wallace, Wallace, 21–9. [69]Wool to Taylor, Dec. 24, 1846; Jan. 20, 1847 Baylies, Wool’s Camp. Journ. Milit. Serv. Instit., xiv, 443. Wilhelm, 8th Inf., ii, 301. [82]S. Anna to comte. gen. Zacatecas, Dec. 6. Neville, diary. The following are from [76]: Gov. Coahuila, Sept. 7, Oct. 8. Gefe Partido del Rio Grande, Aug. 28; Oct. 2. Comte. gen. Zacatecas to comte. gen. Durango, Oct. 14; to S. Anna, Oct. 21. Gefe político, Monclova, to Wool, Oct. 24; reply, Oct. 26. Comte. gen. Durango, Dec. 11. Heredia to comte. gen. Durango, Dec. 10. Gov. Coahuila to Id., Nov. 30. R. Vázquez to S. Anna, Oct. 1. Castañeda to Vázquez, Sept. 24. S. Anna, Sept. 29; Nov. 4; Dec. 19, 24. Wool to Arziniega et al., Oct. 9. Aldrete to Mejía, Aug. 30. Ugarte, Sept. 26. Comte. gen. Zacatecas, Dec. 31. Lobo to R. Vázquez, Nov. 2. Comte. gen. Zacatecas to S. Anna, Dec. 17. Gov. Coahuila to Id., Nov. 30. Comte. gen. Coahuila, Sept. 7. Gefe político, Parras, to S. Anna, Dec. 17. Ampudia, Aug. 25. Rives (U. S. and Mexico, ii, 208) places Polk in a rather absurd position with reference to the expedition. He misunderstands a statement in Polk’s Diary, May 28, 1846. The orders to Wool there mentioned had prime reference to getting volunteers in motion to Taylor (Military Historian and Economist, ii, 32 and note on p. 33).