The National tribune., 1895-06-06
GRANT VS.. McCLERNAND.

Revival of the Old Controversy Discussed.
EDITOR NATIONAL TRIBUNE: The fol-
lowing, from the pen of William E. Curtis,
appeared in the Chicago Record some time
ago:
The old controversy between Gen. Grant and
Gen. McCiernsnd, which has been revived by the
latters attempts to get pension. attracts no inter
est among military people here. II has been
thoroughly discussed in tho histories and reports
Of the war and the opinions of those who are
ing could alter them. Gen. Grant treats the affair
fully and frankly in his auobiog raphy, and Gen.
Sherman discusses it at ieng,h in hi, Mepoirs. A
prominent officer of the Army of the Tennessee
said to-day that President Lincoln sent Gen. Nc
Clernand 10 The West with q sort Of independent
com mission, which resulted In a great deal OF an
tagonsm, irritation and misunderstanding. Gen.
Grant protested against having military officer
in his Department who was not entirely subordi-
nate to him, and after consider able correspondence
his position was sustained and Gen. MoClernand
was ordered away.
There are many old soldiers who have not
had access to the Autobiography of Gen.
Grant or Memoirs of Gen. Sherman, and
even if they had it would not be wise to ac-
cept them as proof conclusive as to histori-
cal correctness.
The officers and volunteer soldiers know
now, if they did not at the battle of Shiloh,
why Gen. Grant Remained on the field
each night until an hour when felt there
would be no danger before morning" and
left no General in command. Gen. Nc
Clernapd wao there, and he ranked Gen.
Sherman. The Vicksburg affair is but
continuation of the same. See Autobiog-
raphy Gen. Grant, Vol. / my action in
sending, Sherman back from Oxford to
Memphis) was expedited by desire to get
him in command of the forces separated
from my direct supervision. 1 found that
delay might bring McCernand, who was his
(Shermans) senior, and who had authority
from the President and Secretary of War
to exercise that particular command-and
independently.
"Van Dorm captured Holly Springs and
destroyed all our munitions of war, food
and forage, my secondary base Of supplies.
"This demonstrated the impossibility of
maintaining so long line Of road over
which to draw supplies for an army moving
in an enemy's country. l therefore deter
mined to abandon my campaign.
I" l felt great embarrassment about Nc
Clernand. He was the senior MajorGeneral
after myself in the department.. 1t would
not do, with his rank and ambition, to assign
a Junior over him. Nothing was left, there
fore, but to assume command myself. l
Woulu uaVo Decn gidu lO put oucIInaH III
command. to give him an opportunity to
accomplish what he had failed in December
before, but there seemed no other way out
of the difficulty, for he was junior to Nc
Clernaud. Shermans failure needs no
apology"
Perhaps we do not know, but the inquir-
ing mind will wonder why one General
should abandon my campaign" because he
had to draw his supplies about 173 miles, if
from Columbus, KY, or 80 miles, if from
Memphis, and in few months wildly call
on the powers at Washington to compel
Gen. Rosecrans 10 make diversion in his
favor, regardless of the fact that Gen. Rose
Grams had used up most of his supplies in
hard-fought battle; that his line over which
to draw supplies was over 30 miles long,
and no adequate amount of cavalry to pro-
tect it. But when he was fully equipped,
he moved forward and captured Chattanooga,
and it would have been "held until they
starved" as glorious old Pap Thomas said.
The Army of the Cumberland saved
Shiloh, and they can point with pride TO
Chickamauga and Mission Ridge inscribed :
on their banners.-WILLIAM HARVEY, Co.
f, 57th ILL.,, Bradford, III.