The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1879-08-21
out of Varnells. He had endangered the
peace and integrity of many homes.-At-
ldnta Constitution.
Military Men in the Civil war.

Longstrcet is not far wrong in his con-
clusions about Federal Generals. Grant,
unquestionably, while not military
genius, such as Napoleon or Stonewall
Jackson, capable of great and brilliant
strategy, was the most complete master
in the art of war produced by the Union
army. His ability consisted of accurate
calculation of forces and their applica-
ton, just as one would dispose mechani-
cal forces to accomplish a result. Lee,
with equal forces would have destroyed
him by rapid and brilliant strategy, as he
did with an inferior force keep him at
bay. No other Federal General could
have used the Federel army like Grant
did, persistent, always holding them
down to a chosen line of operations,
and wearing out his opponent with
continued pressure. The operations of
Hooker, Burnside and others, were a Sc
rics of battles in which they were defeat
ed by far inferior force; Grants opera
tions were q continual pressure, every
day, never relaxed, and finally success
full, as mathematical result of given
powers.
But Longstreet does Mcclellan injus.
tice. His wonderful work of orgainza-
ton contributed very largely to the ulti-
mate result, and it was work done
which lasted, and of which subsequent
commanders had the benefit.
There is no evidence, however, that
Mcclellan was a great strategist. On
the contrary, his only great battles, the
seven days conflict, showed him to be in
ferior to his opponent. While, taking
into consideration the superiority of his
force, its organization, commissariat and
discipline, Grants operations equally de-
monstrated his inferiority to Lee as q
strategist and leader of armies. Lee
baff1ed and held him in check with a
much inferior force of starving, worn out,
ragged men, and finally forced to aban-
don his chosen line Of advance. A
greater General would have worked out
the result in one or two battles by mas.
terly strategy. Grant worked it out by
an accurate calculation of the powers in
hand and keeping them always pressed
upon his enemy, who was able to do
nothing more than defend and await
certain result. AS to Sherman, Long
street is unquestionably correct. What
ever genius he may possess, it is certain
that he never displayed it. His march
to the sea was merely spacious nothing,
a big raid on foot. His operations down
to Atlanta were like those of Grant in
Virginia, continual pressure of superb
or force on an inferior, but his forces
were continually increased in numbers,
organization and efficiency, buoyed up by
continual success in dealing severe blows
upon superior enemy. At that point,
Atlanta, Sherman's fortune was bright
ened by the sudden removal of Johnston,
and the movement of Hood gave him an
unopposed march to the sea. Long
streets estimate of Johnston also needs
qualification. His talents as q military
commander were displayed in organiza-
ton, in perfecting his machinery, in bril-
liant defense. His disposition in retreat
on Atlanta have never been excelled, but
they were almost purely defense against
an advancing foe, dispositions in check
of positive movement. This is, how
ever, no evidence that Johnston was the
equal of Lee, or of Jackson in brilliant,
effective strategy-the working out Of
large positive results with small force
by superior skill. The results of a re-
treat on Atlanta showed great military
skill in handling forces, but it was rath-
er tactical than strategic, and if there
was subtle strategic, it was on q mar
row field, where all of his forces were
under his own immediate personal direc-
ton. The difference between such oper-
ations, and those conducted over a wide
territory, is apparent. While Lee dis
played the same power in the retreat be.
fore Grant, or rather in the defense of
Richmond, that Johnston displayed in
his retreat before Sherman, he has also
demonstrated in his campaigns superior
military genius which Johnston may have
possessed, but which he certainly never
displayed. 1t may be believed that he
mander when he was removed, but it can
was Just about to demonstrate this pos
session Of all the genius of a great COM
only be believed and not known