"First a soldier then a citizen was Brown's plan" for the uplift of the "emancipated blacks." "There is no doubt," says this author,[409] "that he still expected the negroes to rise and swell his force to irresistible proportions." Numbers are not irresistible unless they be armed and organized. Why should "the leader of a new revolution," with the sword of Frederick the Great in his hand, plan "to take to the hills" in a trifling retreat, and abandon the military stores at Harper's Ferry--the stores that were necessary to equip the irresistible numbers for irresistible operations? The assumption that he intended to do so is not only illogical; it is absurd. The declaration that Brown was the sole member of the "attacking" force to believe in the assault upon the property of the United States at Harper's Ferry is contradicted by competent testimony, and by the significance of the general order that provided for the occupation of the town, and that designated the officers and men who were to take charge of this same property. As to the unanimity of sentiment that prevailed in relation to the matter, Mr. Redpath says:[410] "On Saturday a meeting of the Liberators was held and the plan of operations discussed. On Sunday evening a council was again convened and the programme of the Captain unanimously approved." Other documents disclose the facts that the "Captain" and his men not only intended to seize this United States property--the arms in the arsenal and in the rifle works--but that they intended to keep them and to use them. A general order issued from the headquarters of their war department provided for the organization of an army. Jeremiah G. Anderson was one of Brown's veterans, who, with full confidence in the final success of their venture, approved of this movement. Late in September, writing from "near Harper's Ferry" he said:[411] Everything seems to work to our hand and victory will surely perch upon our banner.... This is not a large place but a very precious one to Uncle Sam, he has a great many tools here. A victor is one who conquers--who defeats an enemy. In its relation to war, victory means the defeat of the enemy in battle. Anderson had an army in his mind, and battles and conquest, and the establishment of the Provisional Government, when he referred to victory, and used the word advisedly. A "raid" upon a place may be successfully executed but it cannot be, properly, called a victory over anything. John E. Cook believed the arms would be used and approved of the use of them. "But ere that day arrives," he said, "I fear that we shall hear the crash of the battle shock and see the red gleaming of the cannon's lightning."[412]