The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1864-09-24
Is Gen. Mcclellan a Coward?

The Democratic papers constantly assert
that the reports of McClellan's cowardice are
base FLANDERS; that he never has been weak
or cowardy, but always brave and valiant.
On question OF this kind we pretend to no
definite personal knowledge, but there is one
thing worthy OF consideration. 1t is this:
II Gen. Mcclellan has always been brave,
and never shown the white feather, either be-
fore or during battle, how came the reports
of his cowardice TO get into such general cir
culation? Is it usual to find so much smoke
and no fire? Is 1t common for such whole
cloth ISLANDERS to be invented of men, which
are the exact opposite of their true charac-
tiers? Is q man who Is proverbial for bis
truthfulness likely to become a reputed liar
Is the scrupuIousy honest man often branded
as a cheat or a knaves Is the profoundly wise
maa likely to acquire the reputation of a
fool?
Jackson was denounced for his cruelty and
ttubbornness. but was he ever called cow
ard? Taylor was called sRough," uucouth,
ignorant, but was he ever denounced for dis
holessy? Harrison was called weak, "Gran-
ny HARRISON" aud his enemies burlesqued
him with peslieoat flags, but who ever sus-
pected the integrity of his character: Scot,
has been called "old Fuss and Feathers" and
hal his 'hasty plate of SOUP" dashed in his
face. but whoever doubted his bravery or his
chivalrlc bearing?
Tae truth l., tho most malignant eneu.i, 8
are too wise to invent scandal that is oppos, d
to the leading traits or those who are the OF :
j'.ts Of it. The strong, marked character :
tics Of man are admitted by his enemies
and traiucsrs, but sought to bs coupled wi b
qlsities that shall destroy their merit. I'll {
honest man may he called simpleton; lie
brave maa tyrant; the truthful man may b.
called hypocrite, and the pssiiot may b.
denounced as a demagogue, but the leading,
outward exhibition Of character is never de-
MED.
Is it said that the charge of cowardice
against Mcclellan Is the offspring of sheer
spite or envy? How then are we to explain
the fact that Grant. while he has been calico
a"butcher," has never been called coward I;
that Sherman, who has been denounced fol
his barblrity, has never been suspected of lack
of courage; that Rosecrans, though charged
with two much opium eating, was admitted to
be brave as a lion; that Shields, who was ac-
cused offalling into the snares OF the rebel De-
llIahs never was accused OF showing the white
feather; that Hooker, who was charged with
drunkenness has always been called Fighting
JO;" that Kaarney, who was abused for his
dislike OF Mcclellan was admitted to be "a
very 6ev.l" in battle; that Ben. Butler, while
dsnoun I'D asa Beast" and a fend incarnate
In cru lily, has never been denied personal
courages How happens it that Mcclellan, Il
as brave as his admirers claim, should have
hspans associated with cowardice that his
friends feel called upon constantly to defend
him aud to prove his courage? Has Grant or
Sherman ever required to have their courage
viddicatedf Has Hooker ever been required
TO prove that he was not a poltroon? HIS
Howard ever needed newspaper evidence thst
he Is not a coward? Did the gallant Berry
or jameson ever need other proofs of their
courage than they gave upon the field? How
then, we again ask, are we to explain the fact
that McClellan's courage has been called in
question and that his friends are constantly
employed ia defending him? The thing looks
suspicious. His courage has never been 70
well established or vindicated on the field.
that his friends feel willing to leave ifthere.