Daily State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis, Ind.) 1861-1865, 1864-06-02
gen. Grants Campaign.

the relative strength Of the opposing armies will
be a. nearly balanced a. in the fret bloody en-
gagements OF the campaign. Ia the terrible con
hict In which 80 much Is az stake. our heroic army
and is indomItatle commander are entitled 70 the
fullest confidence and sympathy of every class of
loyal citizens. IL there ever an hour when
party passions should be hushed. aud splenetic
cavils fade away ia warm blaze Of generous
encouragement, il Is now, when bruve men are
peFiling their lives IN the service OF the country
We regret that the leading journals OF the Re
publican party are fOrgetfgl OF this obligation
aud seem willing TO make the success of our
Virginia subservient To the results they
wish 70 attain IN the Cleveland and Baltimore
conventions
The Lincoln men and the radicals are alike
unwilling that General Grant, with his military
laures fresh upon him. should loom up as a for
mdable candidate for the presidency. He j.
unacceptable to the Lincoln men simply as stand
ing in the way of their candidate. 10 the radicals.
as never having been in any way identified with
their principles Chase and Fremont by their
consistent antecedents. and Butler by the ex-
travagant zeal Of new convert. are deemed
satisfactory representatives of radical ultraism
But Grant is strong only IN qualities that make
s soldier aud patriot. Rather than take him,
the radicals. choice OF what they consider
evils, would prefer Lincoln. who though con-
more plastic than they could expect 20 find a
man Of Grants stubborn force of will. We
accordingly find the Tribune. "a well the
Times, engaged in ar;iul attempt to belittle
the strategy OF General Grant IN bis brilliant ad
vance. General Grants nomination by the
Cleveland Convention would disorganize and
destroy the Republican party, and the Republi.
can politicians have made up their minds to sac
rlhce his reputation rather than incur the hazard
OF such result.
The Tribune, day before yesterday, opened on
Gen. Grant in a long article full OF dispaFaging
criticism, which the Times promptly followed I'D
yesterday in still more disDaraging editorial.
resembling the insidious assaults on General
Mcclellan when he. too, had approached so near
Richmond as To create a fear that the brilliant
achievement OF its capture would make him too
strong with the people
The Tribune maintains that so far from Gen.
Grant having executed brilliant flank move
ment. compelling Lee TO retreat beyond the
North Anna, there was not only no flank move
ment at all, but that GIANT had been outwtted by
Lee. who dexterously slipped away from his front
without his knowledge, and kept him hoodwinked
for two or three days.
1T il not necessary to Gen. Grants fame
this is the language of the Tribune-"to conceal
the fact that Lee got away from his front rather
Unexpectedly. and that he succeeded in covering
his retreat so adroitly that. though il may have
been suspected on Thursday it was not surely
known till two three days iater-not till his
escape beyond the North Anna had been accom-
plished."
To appreciate the effect of this criticism on the
readers of the Tribune it is necessary to bear in
mind that there is nothing which that journal has
so frequently held up to derision as a proof oil
military incapacity, as general letting an enemy
make clandestine escape from his immediate
front. As one of many instances of the kind
all readers of the Tribune must recollect the run
ming fire of contemptuOus criticism of which
Gen. Halleck was the object when Beauregard
got away from Cofinth without his knowledge
Gen. Grant Is too strongly entrenched in the
hearts of the people for the Tribune to treat him
with the same open Cant OF consideration; but
the substance of the criticism is Identical
Lees retreat being voluntary, and not coerced
by any strategy of Gen. Grant, the tribune at
tempts To explain il by conjecturug its motives
Lee has shortened his distance from his base. and
heightened Grants He comes INFO nearer prox
unity to Beauregard, and renders il safer to make
a temporary junction OF part of their forces &c
deliver sudden blow by abandoning the
open field it may become possible for him to de
tach a force to the aid of Beauregard strong
enough 10 make Gen Buffers present position
extremely perilous" Lee nav find ample time
is closing about Richmond
The Tribune finds an offset to Gen Grants
want of vigilance or strategy, in the fact that a
retreat by Lee Is an evidence of his weakness;
but how often has that journal insisted on the
gross culpability OF letting an enemy escape when
he is so weakened as to make il easy to beat him
Lees last cause for exultati0n," saws the Tri-
Dune. is that he ran away 50 secretly that hi.
enemy, for few days, did not know that he
was gone.
The Times. in an article still more derogatory
to General Grant, broadly insinuates that hi:
strategy is failure III must be remembered,
tsays. THAT the cheekm of General Buter
on the James has entirely changed the aspect oil
the campaign. since the first week in Nav" OF
the two operative movements against Rich
mOnd-the direct one OF General Grant, and the
ore for nterceptng supplies and reinforcement.
by Gen. Butler-the latter is a complete failure
We quote:
Now. however. Richmond and its links with
the South are safe from the rear; Butler himself
Is beSIeged, and the city presents as good cent.I
for Lees operations as any that could be found
There he will be for the present, between Butler
and Grant, and can strike either as he finds op
portuniy His communications with the South
will be open, that he any time retreat,
il he Is forced 10, and he has the advantage OF
considerable Though not perhaps very formida-
ble) intreuchments.
Ii thlS be correct representation, il follows
tlrat General Grants strategy has miscarred. i,
It's purpose was not the mere capture OF Rich
mOnd but the destruction OF Lees army Ii
Lee i not strong enough To hold Richmond he
can maks safe retreat out of il: and we shall
have made enormous sacrifices merely to capture
town which Is of little importance TO the rebels
in comparison TO the safety of the main army
We deprecate all criticism of the sort we have
here exposed, while the campaign is in progress
Ii il should finally fail, no tenderness for Gen
Grant. nor for anybody. should prevent a manly,
truthful acknowledgment of the fact
But these articles in the leading Republican
journals atrocious in intention and mis-
chieyous in their tendency As was the forgery OF
their former emplove for which he Is incarceratei
in Fort Lafayette The only difference is that
one was prompted bv the desire of gain the other
by equally Soriid party spirit Both tend, 20 far
believed TO undermine confidence in the sue
cess of the campaign.
The sufficient reply to such disparaging criti
rance Of Gen. Grants real intentions He Is too
good general to wear his secrets on his sleeve.
We know as little of his plans as the rest: but
when conjecture Is used to defame him, il may
be permissible TO resort 10 conjecture in his de-
Tense.
For ought these critics know 10 the contrary
Gen. Grant may now be engaged in the execu-
ton of iank movement of much wider sweep
than has entered into their conceptions. and
L 4. L II. =. L =