The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1875-05-18
Grant, sherman and The March TO
tho Sea,

The controversy arising out u tile publica-
ton Of General Sherman's Memoirs bids
fair to become one of the sensations OF the sea-
SON. An administration paper, abiding to the
reviews which have been published in the
HERALD, intimates that there is an attempt to
make ~needless mischief by suggesting ''that
it strikes al the fame Of General Grant as .
military commander and deprives him of some
laurels which he has unfairly taken from an
other" This Journal further informs us that
General Grant has never been guilty OF an act
Of this kind No one, We believe, has ever
charged the President with having ondeavored
to take laurel from the brow Of any OF his
subordinates We are quite willing to concede
to President Grant the merit Of mag
nanimity and kindness toward his asso-
ciates in the war. III there is any
s'needless mischief in General Sherman's
book il is the work Of the General himself, Of
the eulogists and biographies Of Grant, and
not Of the critics. General sherman himself
oxpr essly admits the existence Of doubt,
for on page 1G6, vol. ?, he says: This was
the first time that General Grant asscnted 70
the march 10 the sea. and although many Of
his warm friends and admirers insist that he
vas the author and protector OF that march,
and that simply executed his plans, General
Grant has never, in my opinion. thought 20
or said So" General sherman wrote bis
book under The impression thus clearly ex-
pressed, aud elsewhere seen IN the book, that
the friends Of General Grant steadily iostcred
the idea that H. the President belongs the
credit OF the march to the sea and not to tile
brilliant subordinate. But General Sherman
takes the utmost pains, by quotations from
letters and documents, by narrative and illus-
traiion, to destroy this opinion and 70 estab-
hsh his own credit as the author or this
achievement General Badeau, who has
written standard and official military
history Of the President, in speak
ing Of the march to the sea ard the
campaign which ended in the capture Of
Atlanta, ssys, in vol. !, page ST., that Grant
sent ord r. with view to the movement
against Atlanta aud Mobile which, notwith-
standing his promotion, GIant still intended
10 lead IN person. This operation had nov
been frequently explained by HIM q his staE.
II Vas his plan at this time to fight his wy
to Atlanta aud then. holding that place aud
tie line between il and Chattanooga. to cut
loose with bis army either for Mobile or Sa-
vannah. whichever events should designate a.
the most practical objective point lie meant
10 concentrate Sherman 5. Thomas and Scho-
fields armies for this purpose, and enter
tanned no doubt whatever OF entire success.
When hs started for Washington II vas his
firm intention TO return to Chattanooga, and,
while he retained control Of all the armies, 10
lead In person this which moved toward
the sea- General Badcau further says
that he carried these instructions T. Sher-
man, and with them also private letter
addressed to Sherman and Mcpherson, which
afterward became so celebrated. The real
meaning Of this statement Of General Badeau
is a. we understand IL, that the march 10 the
sea was General Grants own conception; that
he had often explained it to his staff and that
General Grant himself meant to have taken
command Of the army that went through
Georgla to the sea- The inference is irresisti-
ole, therefore, that in the authorized history
OF General Grants military exploits the credit
Of the most brilliant achievement Of the war
Is given to Grant and not to Sherman. There
IL still other evidence showing that General
sherman hss anDsa reason ~ feel that there Il