New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1883-09-22
NEW PUBLICATIONS.

prrps-EYE VIEW OF OUR CYL s,a ME Army NY
SO m VI 346 James r. Osgooo.
rrnser the modest disguise OF narrative "ri''o"
on1e .s.,no,,on of his son, the author has pro-
5ucod remarkably clear. concise ana reaaaoe n'S-
80 sr;ted to the wants of the admit civlhah
.sor There is nothing in the plan or style
20 the hook 10 indicate that 1t is ihtenueo
oo;al,v for the young. On the contrary,
akes many appeals to the mature crltlcaiJudgihen'
II ia the work of professional soldier whose COM
pants upon strategy. tactics andthe chatac'eiisio'
of prominent generals, although terse' arc always
xveigbty and suggestive; and If we do not call IL
critical military history 1t is only oeca.S0
n is too brief and summary 10 NC
.erye that title Its most conspicuous nieii. 20
.I.arness The author sezes all the essential points
of the story with professional instinct; anu
formed in his own mind perfectly distinct iuea u
:. oa,na,gn he resolutely suppresses unimportahe
details in order that the movement as "nolo'
with ,,s decisive incidents may be Thoroughly ""'
dorstood. Illuminated as these outline pictures
often are by n short military commentary, tnoy s0'
hafore ns the successive chapters OF thc hoo0i.,'
with ylyidness which we have not seen G."
in any book Of similar scope Inc cohueo''o i W
want of connection, between separate camp 80
md the nature of individual engagements arc "'0
made entirely plain. - g
The Introductory chapter on the olisi
the war is Just and positive. buV 4t
the author speaks without ambiguity u
f.uoc;es Of Confederate politics. he expresses
s:.I 81 nonarous apprec,ation OF the Confeder-
ots soldier He admires Robert e. Lee as one q 'no
raatest of modern generals and one OF the ihoS'
iustrous figures of the war; ana he sets Ill " '0iS
strong light the ability with when 'n's e"i'u'"V
commander so long held at bay lorce U"ioo 90
great as his own, and so olteh ou'"'',1N
and outfought the favorte Federal leaders, 10
nokes no direct comparison. puI ho io0N'
upop Lee as much greater so'oie' wa
Grant Sherman, he thinks, IL any oho' sno" -
durjnp our Civil War the divine military sp"'N
An, no ba. an almost equal respect for Thomas who
"perhaps falls as little short Of the model so'oiei do
any man produced by this courtry' WIN tess'u
40 General Grant the fervor of his praise is balanced
nv the severity of his ceusure. He critlclses inc
1t pnsuccessful mo vanents of the NickSbur@ canl'
paen with great sharpness and ne cohuel'HS 'no
battles of the Wilderness, and especi"iy '"o
slanphter of Cold Harbor as fruisess anu
unnecessary sacrifice of lite Hurting HIS
men against intrenchments i'll brutal ana careiesS
manner, without proper tactical dispositions VI "'
toution to preliminary details. Grant Iose Que Kan
Of his entire army Ia number equiv aleht 10 Lo0
whole force), without accomph shins any '""s
which could not have been secured by inah'bu-
s,r "Whenever Grant rcsorted TO iuanDuvring
he succeeded measureably. Whenever ne attacked
all along the line he failed utterly"
The author passes marsh Judgment upon iia'-
eek. WHOM he holds responsible for innimeraoe
plumbers of the carly campaigns. Of Mcclellan ne
meaks with great but by no means Exaggerated
respect. What he says OF Sheridan, Meade, burn
hide Hooker, Hancock, and some others VIII COM
nand general approval. and We presume 'n"'
neither side will quarrel with his comparison De-
,voan tbe Northern aud the Southern soldier.