The weekly Union times. [volume] (Union C.H., South Carolina) 1871-1894, 1886-07-09

Ian, in their testimony before the committee O,
the conduct Of the war, in this following Ian
guagc:
Gen. Sumner said that Gen. lockers corn
was dispersed /; there is no suggestion abou
'hat. sent ono OF my staff officers to find
where they were and Gen. Rickcts, the
only oihccr he could find, said he could not
raise three hundred men of the corps Their,
were troops lying down the left, which
took took to belong to Mansfclls command
In the meantime Gen. Mansfield had beer
killed, nnd portion of his corps had also beer
| thrown into confusion
| Gen. Mcclellan said: The next morning
the 18th, found that our loss had been SC
great and there was so much DISCRIMINATION in
| some of the commands that did not consider
| 1t proper to renew the attack that day
Thus it is plain that in the scattered disor-
ganizcd, and dcmoraized condition of his army.
Mcclellan was too badly worstcl to attack Lee
on tho 18th. On the other hand Lee was in n
much better condition for fight than he was
on the l7th All of Jacksoas IInrpcr's Ferry
army had arrived, and thousands of our strac
glers had returned to their commands. | am
quite sure that the Macbeth could have carried
more men into n fight on the 18th than VIC did
on the 18th. The two dctachmcnts, belonging
to our disabled guns were intact and MANY
who aided the wounded iu getting from the
held never returned. Experience taught us
before night put an end to the conflict thnt il
would not do to send men out of the battle
with the wounded. The experience of that
day would have been of immense value to us
had the fight been renewed Gu the 18th. Then
it is true that while Mcclellan was in no con-
dition to renew the fight, Lee was in a better
one When, in addition to this, we take into
account the inequality of the forces that
fought the battle, the advantages were over
whelmingly i'll Lees favor. Mcclellan assault
ted Lee with his splendid army of ninety
thousand men. Lee beat him back with thirty
three thousand-fghting, as it will be seem
nearly three to one. And this was about the
usual odds in most Of tho pitched battles fought
between Lee and the Federal commanders.
But Federal officers say that we fought them
with overwhelming numbers. For instance,
Gen. Grant says he fought against great odds
at Chattanooga. Pope says we masscd heavy
forces against his right and were able to meet
him with equal numbers oil along the line.
Mcclellan magnifed D. II. Hills little division
of five thousand into g r,sh ,,o,on,,. o
made for a purpose: Either to bclttle our
victories and magnify theirs, or TO hide their
own inefficicncy and the cowardicc of their
troops. But these eXtravagant statements
crumbe before facts and figures and reason
and common sense.
From first to last the Federal Government
enlisted two million six hundred aud seventy
eight thousand, nine hundred and sixy.scvcn
men. or this number the Southern States
furnished nearly three hundred thousand
white aud q very large number of cclorcd SOL
diers. Missouri furnished 10S, l62 kentucky,
1925; Maryland, 46,053 West Virginia,
zoos ; Tennessee, 3l,092; Arkansas, $3.50
Louisiana, 1924; North Carolina, S,l5G;
Alabama 1876 Texas, 1910; Mississippi, 545.
If to these you add the colored troops, you
you will have as large an army made up of
Southern material as the Confederacy ever had
in the field at any one time. Suppose these,
with the confederate soldiers killed by them,
could have been in our armies, how different
somo of the chapters in the history of the war
could have read. Going back to the millions
of troops put into the armies Of the Federal
Government, l say with emphasis that none
but vitiated mind could imagine it possible
for the Confc lcrato States to have met such
o host with overwhelming numbers
But other writer's from the Federal stand
All, ,l,ot thn 10, hat h
ern people were not worth man for man, as q
soldier, was dispellcd long before the war
ended This was proven, they say, as soon as
incompetcn officers were removed and efficient
officers put in command of their troops. Ref
erence is evidently had here to Gen. Grant and
his final success at Appomattox Court House.
Let us sec how Gen. Grant dispelled that
| dclusion. When he moved against Lee, accord
ing to tho report of the Secretary of war, he
had III 100 men, Lee had only 10000 to meet
this grand army, under this capable officer.
And according to Gen. Grants own statement,
we had robbed the cradle and the grave to fill
| up our armies Yes, the seven days around
| Richmond, Cedar Run, Second Manassas,
Sharpsburg, Fredericksburg, Chanccllo: lille
and Gettysburg had made gaps in Lees army
that coull not be closed up with material equal
| to that which he had lost. Yet Lees army,
composed Of these boys from the cradle and
old men from the verge of the grave, beat
Grant at the Wilderness, Spcttsylvania Cour
House, and at Cold lIarbor. Lee blcl him
from the time he crossed the Rapidan till hC
reached the James Ills own historian, Swim
ton, says Grant lost sixty thousand men-th'
number Lee had in his army. Grant did not
in that Campaign prove his superior general