The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1884-09-07
SOME NEW BoOKA
naell,s Milltarx Career.

4 Il I
our civil war that Gen. JAMES d. Fry has
undertaken to rewrite In The Army t'nier Buell.
ID Van Nostrand). Con. Buell. was not by any
means the only commander who had cause to
complain OF harsh treatment at the hands OF
tho Washington authorities: but In one respect
he has been especially unfortunate. He has
not hitherto boon lucky enough In his advo-
cAtes to secure an effective presentation OF all
the facts in his case before that bur OF public
opinion which has reversed so many hasty and
mistaken judgments. He has at last found.
however. a Jealous and powerful defender. and
no student OF the war who desires yDNrrivc ut
correct decision on some Interesting questions
should fail TO examine this account OF the
military operations conducted by Buell be-
tween June and October. 1862. and the authors
comments on the So called Buell. Commission.
II will be remembered that when Buell. was
assigned. in November. 1861. to tho command
OF the Department OF tho Ohio. tho state OF
things In that region. and especially in Ken
lucky. WAS ominous in tho extreme. Gen.
Albert Sydney Johnston was in command OF the
rebel iorcos. which held military possession Of
one-third OF the State. and were preparing for
aggressive movements ncrthward. During the
seye1 months interve ning between Buelrs
assumption Of command and June 10. the date
Ut which this narrative begins. he had organized
md disciplined an army which defeated the
Contedsrates NJ Middle Creek. driving
Humphrey Marshall from Eastern Kentucky.
And a few days later won the battle OF
Mills Springs. He had also contributed
one brigade and eight additional regi-
ments 70 the capture OF Fort Donelson and.
advancing with the main body OF his troops
Into Middle Tennessee and north Alabama.
reached Pittsburs Lnnllng in season to rescue
Grants army from irrcparabla disaster. Up to
that time not a word OF complaint or OF dis
Engagement had been whispered against Buell..
md he stood second to only one other commsn-
der In the eyes Of his ccuntrynen. No man
who knew what the Ur Oh owed to his services
ut Shiloh could havo imagined hat before lve
months had passed Bu,l would bs relieved Of
his command and A Commission Of inquiry In
stituted under circumstances Implying severe
unimadversion on his military cal acity
After the evacuation Of Corinth the question
before HaliecS was. In his position Ut General
In Chief and principal military adviser to tho
President an! Secretary Of War; What should
be done with the armies OF Grant. Buell.. and
Ponc. which Lad been concentrated against
Deaure.:ards torcesp He decided thar Buell's
army. with which we are especially concerned.
should move east to Chattanooga and east
Tsnnessee. it being taken for granted that the
enemy would not oppose his march. The
move Duell's army. weakened as 1t Ions: was by
the withdrawal Of Thomas's division. into
enst Tennessee proved entirely inpracticabe.
1t was first necessary to drive Bragg and Kirby
Smith out OF Kentucky. which was effectualiy
done In the Perryville campaign. although
Buell. had but $4,000 men. Of whom 22.0J0
were raw troops. whereas. after tho Con!edcr-
ates had concentrated at Harrodsburg in tho
early part OF October they numbered. accord
ing to the official reports of their own officers.
upward OF $1,000. There seems to be no doubt
that In this campaign. at all events the rebos
did actually possess u large preronderance Of
force. Nevertheless Buell.. rs We have seen.
forced BrtGg to evacu,te Kentucky and to fall
back on his base in eastern Tennessee. This
was the position Of affairs. and Buell. had mad,
tho host dispos itions In his power for covering
Nashville and preventing the enemy's return
into Kentucky. when. On Oct 80. he was sud
denly directed to turn over the command OF his
army to Gen. Rosecrans. and to report at In
dianapolis. there to await an investigation OF
his conduct by q military Commission. The
charges against him we're hardness Of move
ment and remissness for permitting Bragg to
escape from Kentucky without a battle.
and there were also imputations. wholly
unsustained by evidence. against Gen.
Buelrs loyalty. Gen. Fry points out that the
which no was subjected did not originate with
Halleck. He was merely the organ used for
expressing them. The true authors OF the
clamor against Buell. are shown to have been
Gov. Morton OF Indiana and Andrew johnson.
the military Governor OF Tennessee. 1t was
some time before Morton. who was VIGOROUSLY
lf-willed and oyerbearing. could DO made to
learn when and whore his authority over In
diana volunteers ended. 1t was Bueil's un-
pleasant duty to teach him that when his State
troops had boon mustered into the service OF
the United States. they fell under tho orders OF
the general Government. and n State executive
could not be suffered to exert any species OF
power over them. Buell. also earned the active
luminosity OF Johnson. because. after the cap
ture Of Nashville. he insisted In general orders
that peaceable citizens should not DO molested
In their persons or property. This conciliatory
policy had hitherto been approved Of. and even
dictated by. the Federal Government. but 1t ran
counter to the purposes OF Johnson. who be-
lieved that no knew best what treatment dis
loyal Tennesseeans should receive. and who
unauestionably had the confidence OF Presl.
dent Lincoln and Secretary Stanton. No doubt
tho personal hostility Of Morton and johnson
found material to work on In the keen disap-
pointment and impatience with which people.
otherwise unprejudiced. beheld the prconga-
ton Of struggle which, in tho West OF all
events. they had hoped to see concluded by the
successes Of the spring campaign. In the West
this popular irritation fell exclusively on Buell..
and In such a state OF public opinion his assal.
ants found II easy to make his failure to bring
on . decided engagement within the Ave
months preceding Oct. 80 q pretext for his sum-
mary removal
Touching the charge OF hardness in moving.
Gen. Fry invites US to compare the marches OF