Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1878-07-25
Gen. Grant on the Late War.

HIS OPINION OF SOUTHERN AND NOR svpx
GENERALS, ETC.
The New York Herald of y",..ardav nrints
another long talk of Gen. ,;rant,s with a cor.
respondent, this time. ON the men and events
OF the late war: The gist of the seven columns
intsrvieT Is thus summarized by that paper in
an editorial:
correspondent General Grant touches many of
the most interesting parts of the war. IL is
curious to read, for instance, that il he had
known the soldiers and generals of the Poto-
mac Army better he would have preferred to
invest Lee in Richmond from the Lynchburg
or land side, as he invested Pemberton in
says here that he was never bitten with the
notion. SO prevalent at one time in the NORTH
that Richmond in itself was of Importance.
he ne always saw WITH his clear military eye,
we remember a remark he made to an init
mate personal friend, when first he game east
friend, Il don't want to ask you anything. but
you mean to capture Richmond, 1 hope?"
Grant replied briefly, Il mean to beat Lee,
the 1a6 NE
he says about the losses in the Wilderness
campaign win surprise many persons; but he
knowledge when he says that his total losses
in that campaign amounted to only thirty nine
thousand men. Every military man will agree
with him when he says that that campaign wa S
necessary to destroy the southern confeder
acy. 1t was necessary in order to give the
army OF the Potomac cOnideace in its new
commander, and the conviction that under
Grant they would no longer fight and fall back /.
as they had so often and, in fact, invariably
done, but fight and advance.
Grants narrative of the circumstances at
tending the surrender of Lee, with the picture
OF his muddy and worn uniform, and Lees
magnificent array, and the apology each made
to the other for his dress, will be welcome to
the historians who shall attempt to describe
This famous event. 1t will be seen that the
Judgments he passes upon the generals and
public men OF both sides are always impartial,
Ter, wishes he had had ADLER Subordinates, and
expresses regret that an unlucky phrase in his
official report should have annoyed Butler. He
thinks Jefferson Davis did all he could for the
confederacy, and did not deserve the harsh
criticism he got. He thinks Stonewall Jack
son might not have proved SO effective gen
eral later on Ill the war, and opposed to men
like sherman and Sheridan when his peculiar
tactics would have failed. In this he is proba-
bly, right: jackson Outmarched and outman-
uuvIed his slower antagonists, but when our
troops gained commanders who also acted
with celebrity, it is doubtful if Jackson's IA
nous phrase to his soldiers, when you get
into cornted eat enough to last you week, -
would have saved him from disaster. Grant
seems to think Lee not 50 great as his reputa-
tion-speaking of him, of course, as soldier,
and not as man. He was never SO uneasy
commanders and he describes him as man
of SLOW. mind, without Imagination, and of
grave dignity OF demean0r. Gen. Joe John
Ston. in his opinion, was the ableSt command
er on the southern side. OF Bragg he apnears
to have but poor opinion.
de tells singular story of President John
son desire at one time TO arrest Gen. Lee and
other southern commanders for treason, by
way of making rebellion OdiOuS. Grant and
Seward had, it seems, the manlineSS and good
sense to oppose and defeat this folly; and Gen.
Grant says he would have resigned his com
mission rather than consent to the arrest the
southern men being sacred under their parole
to him.
ROsecrans Buckner, Mcclellan, Buell., Stone
and Mcdowell were, he says, in the opinion of
the old army, the most promising officers i'm
1851 He still thinks that Buell. had genius for
the highest commands, and that Mcdowell
was man of great ability; and he cannot &C
count for the ill-luck of poor Stone, which has
puzzled many other men who knew him as one
of the most highly cultivated officers in the old
army, and one of its best soldiers. Sherman
and Sheridan he praises without stint. and re-
lateS an odd story of his first meeting with the
latter, when Sheridan, then colonel of a regi-
ment, was rude to him. Sherman, he saws, is
not only one of the best men living, but one of
the greatest we have had in our history and
he gives curious account of how ShermauS
narrative OF the war was miSrepreSented to
him, so that he determined to read it, pencil
in hand, and publish reply, but found it "a
true book an honorable book, just to ALL" and
he approves every word of it, Hancock he
thinks, was one of the ableSt of our generals