General Bosquet having made a few remarks as to the troops to be detailed for the assault of the Mamelon, in which the Zouaves were to occupy a conspicuous place, Pélissier objected to the arrangement, contending that the Zouaves were not the best troops--'Pourquoi toujours les Zouaves?' he added. He went on to say that these, however, were small questions of detail to be settled afterwards. He was evidently determined to assert his position as Commander-in-Chief, and told us that there were persons in France of the highest position (evidently alluding to the Emperor) who read history and studied campaigns, and then sent him out their ideas as to what should be done. He told us that he had written respectfully to the Minister for War that, so long as he commanded the French army in the field, he declined to carry out any plans except such as were arranged and concerted between Lord Raglan and himself. A few other officers offered some observations, and then Pélissier turned to General Harry Jones. Apparently he had some difficulty in pronouncing his name, and approximately addressed him as General Hairy-Joze.[32] The General--who, I found afterwards, was considerably ruffled by Pélissier's arbitrary language--speaking in somewhat moderate French, said that when the French were ready to take the Mamelon the British troops were prepared to storm and capture the quarries in front of the Redan, and then sat down. Pélissier at once expressed his pleasure at hearing the statement of General Hairy-Joze. The English, he added, were evidently waiting for their allies, and with that 'solidité' which so distinguished them would no doubt succeed in what they undertook. The day and hour of the attack were known only to Lord Raglan and himself, but they should not have long to wait. Pélissier ended by stating that the discussion had been very interesting (no one having practically spoken except himself), and then he wished us all good morning. Lord Raglan was much interested and amused when he heard of the interview, saying that had he known General Pélissier would be present he would have gone himself to listen to his lecture. It was known at the time that considerable differences existed between Pélissier and Niel. Years afterwards, in Kinglake's 'History of the Crimea,'[33] he quotes extracts of letters written at this time by General Niel to the Emperor Napoleon, and which evidently refer to the conference I have just described. In one General Niel says: 'At a meeting which took place yesterday he, General Pélissier, ordered me to be silent with a harshness not to be characterised.... We were in the presence of English officers.' Again, he writes to the Minister for War: 'Knowing nothing of what is going on, I abstain from all reflections. I asked leave to offer some observations on the state of the siege, and was told that it was not the time....'