When the notice came that the command was ready to take up its march I was sitting with Terry and Gibbon. General Terry invited General Gibbon to go with him and see it. They walked off a few yards from the bank of the stream and stood together when Custer joined them. The three remained together until the command had filed past and the final good-by was said. Custer mounted his horse and rode off, and Terry and Gibbon came back to where I had remained. The last remark made to Custer was by Gibbon. If any change was made at that time in Custer’s orders it was perforce known to Gibbon, who was alongside of Terry, and the only one who was with him and Custer. Now let us see what Gibbon said in a letter written to General Terry twenty-seven years ago, when he could not foresee for what purpose his words would be quoted: “Except so far as to draw profit from past experience it is, perhaps, useless to speculate as to what would have been the result had _your plan_ been carried out. But I cannot help reflecting that, in that case, my column, supposing the Indian camp to have remained where it was when Custer struck it, would have been the first to reach it; that with our infantry and Gatling guns we should have been able to take care of ourselves, even though numbering only two-thirds of Custer’s force.” The only person actually in the presence of Terry and Custer at that final parting, happened to be the third member of the conference, who knew the “plan,” and on the fifth of the November following he writes as above, of what would have been the result had “your plan” (Terry’s conference plan) been carried out. It so happened that I went over this whole subject with General Gibbon personally only a short time before his death. He certainly knew nothing of any change in the “conference plan” at that time. Any historian who makes use of the affidavit General Miles had some years ago, would do well to look carefully into the facts. Third: Andrews states: “He (Hughes) adduced many interesting considerations, but seemed to the writer not at all to justify his views.” I am, by no means, sure that this dissent would have disturbed me if I had depended on my own judgment alone in submitting the article[119] for publication, but it so happened that I did not do so. The tragedy discussed being of an exceedingly grave character, and both the responsible heads having passed away, rendered it unusually important that every possible precaution should be taken against mistakes. For this reason, after the “many interesting considerations” were prepared for publication, I submitted the article to different _competent military men_ with the simple question, “Is it conclusive?”