The reason of it is clear. Abercrombie lived to return to England: the living always find means to justify themselves. But Braddock was killed: the dead are always in the wrong, and never find disinterested advocates to plead their cause. Braddock's order of march--criticised by your French Generals--may, at first sight, appear singular; and may pretend that he must of necessity have been beat, in consequence of the bad disposition of it. But analize it, and you will find nothing else than the common rule practised through all Europe in passing through a wood: an army formed in three columns--the artillery, baggage, waggons and cavalry being the column of the centre, between the other two columns of infantry; half of the Grenadiers at their head to support the Pioneers employed in opening a road through the wood for the passage of the carts and artillery, and the rest in the rear, to close of march. Braddock was invested on all sides by the Canadians, and dispersed in the wood, each of them behind a tree, marking out his victim; so that every musket-shot brought down a soldier, and at every discharge they flew from tree to tree. What can regular troops do in such a case? Close their ranks and files each moment, as did Braddock, direct a continual fire at the woods, without perceiving a man, and be cut to pieces without seeing an enemy. There is no other method for troops to defend themselves against the Indians than what I practised, with success, when I was surprised by them at the ford of the River Montmorency: the soldiers, with fixed bayonets, dispersed themselves, rushed on in disorder towards the places where they perceived the smoke of the Indians' discharge; and by these means my detachment in the woods chased away your nine hundred Indians, who in a moment disappeared entirely, and suffered me to retire at my leisure to my camp.