The National tribune., 1889-10-10
MCCLELLAN AND POPE.
Criticism Of I,,,la HACKS Methods.

EDITOR NATIONAL TRIBUNE: In your paper
of Sept. appears an article by Warren G.
Hursh, 1st N. ]. Cav, in which he expresses
admiration for Mcclellan, and gives special
credit to Stonewal Jackson for his manuvers
in northern Virginia The exigency has ar
rived when take pleasure in giving my views
in regard to this campaign. l have made it
special study, and have given attention to the
many writer's bearing upon this subject, so
much so that feel qualified in taking the neg
alive from that of Comrade Hursh.
1t has been my opinion that Mcclellan could
have saved Pope at the second battle of Bull
Run. Twentyseven years have lapsed since
the awful scenes of carnage took place on the
old battlefield of Manassas and until late date
it seemed that Glen. John Pope in the eyes of
the public was responsible for this overwhelm
ing defeat by Lee aud Jackson. Mcclellan, by
remaining at Harrison's Landing Il days after
he had orders to pursue Lee and Jackson i'll
their flank movement, made IL an easy matter
for Jackson to interpose his forces between
those commanded by Pope. A movement of
this kind had the effect TO neutralize portion
of Pope's army. So Lee, by rapid marches and
without fear of Mcclellan, was enabled to fall
upon the remaining portion of Popes army and
defeat ii in detail,
Note what might have taken place had Nc
Clellan at the proper time entered upon the
pursuit with the energy that Sherman did
when he went TO the relief of Knoxville in
Dec, 1863. Lee and Jackson in all probability
would have been in the sad predicament of
devisinR ways and means to escape Pope and
Mcclellan, and one decisive battle instead of
the two, viz, second battle of Bull Run and
Antietam, would havasiosed the campaign for
the year 1862, and the great sacrifice Of prop
erty and loss of prisoners at the strongly forti-
fled Harper's Ferry and the terrible battle OF
Antietam would have been avoided. l adj
mired the bravery of jackson, but in espousing
the cause Of the Southern Confederacy his
judgment was marked by great degree of de-
licieucy, and the admiration wrought by his
bravery has been somewhat abated.
In the Federal army we had Generals noted
for their indomitable pluck and energy, whom
Gen. Grant mentioned when he said Stone
wall Jackson's peculiar tactics might have failed
him later in the war when he came to meet
such Generals rs Sherman and Sheridan, and l
would add Mcpherson and Logan.
Tho mighty battles Comrade Hursh men,
toned during the seven days around Richmond
between the forces of Johnston, Lee, and Me-
Clellan were not great battles compared with
Shiloh, Chickamauga, the Wilderness, and many
others fought during the rebellion. Comrade
Hursh adds that Mcclellan had not the show
that Grant had in trying to capture Richmond,
because McClelan's troops were raw and mex
pericnced. Why was McClellan's more so than
Iec's2 Tho two armies wero enrolled about
the same time. In my judgment Little Mac
had n better show to capture Richmond than
any Of his successors. When Mcclellan was
within two miles of Richmond in the Summer
of 1862 he found tho rebel army MS inexperi
encod rs his own, and Richmond was not forth
fed like ii was in 1875. Again. we are
reminded Of McClolaa's weakness when we
remember that the Confederate commander
held him at bay for months at Manassas during
the Spring Of 1862 with wooden guns.-J. Il.
PALMER, Normal, III.