Savannah morning news. [volume] (Savannah) 1868-1887, 1881-06-03


Gen. Boynton telegTapts The army
and navy edition of the Washington
Herald prints its first paper in review of
Bsdean's alleged history. The editor,
Capt Burritt, was an officer In Han
cocks corps. and has devoted much
study to the operations of the Army of
the Potomac. The following is an ex-
/ tract from the Herald article:
Among the Generals for whom Badeau
Tor Grant, has only abuse are Hancock,
Thomas, Butler, Burnside, Gilmore,
Granger, Steele, Hunter, Smith, Candy,
| Banks, Wright and Warren, and Meade
| is damned with faint praise. Treating
of Grants Richmond campaign, Badeau
claims that but for the mistakes of su-
bordinates the campaign might have
been decided substantially at the Wilder
ness or at Spottsylyania, or at Cold Har-
Dor, or at the first attack on Petersburg,
or at the ''mine" assault on Petersburg.
He says his companions, except Han
cock, were all too slow, while Han
cock had not the moral or intellectual
capacity to command in a crisis, and that
as for Meade, Grants orders lost their
force and direct meaning by filtering
through his mediocrity.
While it has been too frequently the
case with writers about the war to mag
Nifty the Union forces and diminish those
of the enemy, Badeau has studiously and
carefully, and it seems to be disingenu-
ously, taken the opposite direction. The
same may be observed in the opposite
way as to the losses on either side. He
seems to have lessened the Union and
increased the rebel losses. There is
want of logical sequence in all its deduc-
tions which, therefore, would seem to
argue his premises untrue. For example:
First. He asserts inferior generalship
of Lee, and at the same time gives him
another army not quite equal to Grants
Also Grants superiority in strategy and
tactics, yet he never shows any defeat
of Lee until the final winding up of the
game, which evidently was not due to
Grants army alone.
Second. Keeping in mind, as above,
that the numbers are assumed to be
nearly equal, and the additional fact, as
stated by Badeau land which is not true),
that Lee never fought outside of in
trenchments, and Grant always assault
ed, yet he makes Lees Losses in killed
and wounded and missing (prior to the
surrender) greater than Grants. Badeau
speaks OF flank movements by Grant in
the face of an enemy nearly equal, on
ground which he says was so different
that, practically, the armies were equal,
of which movements, he says, if Lee had
taken advantage, the national army
ought to have been defeated; and yet
this bad generalship he excuses. or
rather lauds, by explaining that Grant
knew Lees character so well that he
was justiiable in presuming that Lee
would let these opportunities slip.
We are confident that perusal of
Badeaus life will lower Grants place
in history. 1t is too small and too
querulous. 1t is, as it were, defense.
If true, it destroys the idea of Grant as
pounding the enemy with a view to
| weakening him by attrition, and sets up
in its place the idea of an unsuccessful
strategist. According to Badeau, Grant
starts cut to reach Richmond, or wher-
ever Lees army may go, with the ulti-
mate idea of the necessity of establish
ing base on the James, and all the
time to keep Washington covered. He
does not reach the James until after the
repeated bloody repulses of the Wilder
ness, Spottsylvania and Cold Harbor,
and has to execute dangerous move
ments without compensation to get
there, and yet he leaves Washington so
uncovered that he admits that Early, if
good General, might have captured it,
AS to the Richmond campaign, while
Badeau belittles Grants commanders,
there is not single instance given where
Grant directs any particular movement
in person. His biographer claims for
Grant all the merit that arises from any
success of theirs, and parades it as due
to his foresight, and abuses the com
manders for not making more Of
it. But he is never seen at the
front taking command in person of any
movement, and winning effective
results, a post he should have often
assumed with such incompetent COM
manders. If we grant, or if he thought
that they were fully incompetent, the
Army of the Potomac, according to
Grant Badeau), although he does not say
it in words, was not made of the mate
rial to sustain the elan of prolonged
assault. 1t could made temporary sue.
cesses and nobly stand up and under any
kind of punishment, but for an assault
it was only good for taking the first line,
not always holding that, but never max
| ing success a finality.
Badeau's book is not history. 1t is
a defense.