The Sweetwater forerunner. [volume] (Sweetwater, Tenn.) 1867-1869, 1868-06-11
Grants Military Fame.
From the New York Herald.]

What General Scott called 'the econc-
my of life by means of headwork," will be
sought for in vain in the campaigns of
General Grant. His successes have been
won by prodigal expenditure of his SOL
diers. In his last and greatest campaign
he pitted an enormous army against
small enc, and sacrificed twice as many
men as General Lee had under bis COM
mand. 1t is not justice but adulation, to
praise him as if he had conquered an army
as large as his own. 1t is not justice but
an affront to humanity to give him as
much credit as if he had achieved the
same result without such wholesale sari6-
ces of men. The following is an authentic
statement Of the respective forces and
losses of Generals Grant and Lee between
the Rapidan and the James:
Grant OF assuming command May 4th,
1864, had of effective men besides the re-
serve, when he crossed the Rapidan, 1885,
600.
Lee at the same date had an effective
force of $4,000.
Grants reinforcements up to the battle
of Cold Harbor, June 3, we're $4,000.
Lees reinforcements up to the same
date we're $4,000.
Grants total force, including reinforce
ments was 222,000.
Lees total force, including reinforce
ments, was 10000.
Returns to their respective governments
showed that when both armies had reach
ed the James, June 10, the number Of
Grants army that had been put hors du
combat was 100000.
Up to the same date, the number Of
Lees men who had been put hors du
combat was 10000.
The two armies then met in front of
Petersburg.
We have been at some pains to ascertain
and verify these figures, and we vouch for
their substantial accuracy. We shall take
good care that they do not escape the no
tice, nor slip the recollection of the coun-
try. We cheerfully eoncede to General
Grant the merit of success; but it is right
that the country should know the terrible
cost at which that success was purchased.
The truest test of military genius is the
accomplishment of the great results with
slender means. We recall no instance,
unless Grant be an instance, of General
who established his title to- be called great
otherwise than by succeeding against great
Neutrality-suspicious. superior numbers,
or consummate abilities in the commanders
opposed to him, or formidable physical
obstacles. A man does not prove that he
possesses giants strength by overmaster-
ing an invalid or cripple. A General
does not establish his title to be consider
ed great by subduing an army one third as
large as his own, and losing five of his men
for every one that he disables of the enc
my.
We have had some experience before of
running successful Generals as candidates
for the Presidency, but their achievements
were in this particular, great contrast to
those Of General Grant. General jackson
won his brilliant victory at New Orleans
with 1000 men against British army of
$4,000. General Taylor had but 5000
men at Buena Vista, and the Mexicans
twice that number. General Scott had
5000 men at Cerro Gordo, the Mexicans
$4,000. The splendid victory of Contre-
ras was achieved by Scott with $500,
against $4,000 Mexicans. General Scott,
in his report to the Secretary Of War,
speaking of the battles in front of Next
co, said: "And | assert, upon accumulat-
ed and unquestionable evidence, that in
not one of these conflicts was this army
opposed by less than three and half
times its numbers-in several Of them by
a yet greater excess" a -