The National tribune., 1907-02-28
GEN. HOOKER.
An Indiana Veteran Who Has Some Yer!
Positive Ideas as to Generals.

Editor National Tribune: Your criti-
cism of Gen. Hooker's character in
your Army of the Cumberland" your
comparison of him with Howard and
the other Generals, looks to the un-
biased reader as If you were writing q
| history of the Army of the Cumberland
expressly for the eye and ear of that
| army. and incidentally for the mem
bers of the Army of the Tennessee, bat
| leaving out entirely the grand old
Army of the Potomac Hooker may
have had his faults and made mis-
| takes. So did Grant, also the i'm
perious" Sherman, likewise the pet Of
] the Army of the Tennessee, the So
called peerless Mcpherson. They all
blundered. l was not a member of the
Army of the Potomac, but cannot see
| you stand on the dead body of Fight
ing Joe" Hooker in order to boost such
| a man as Gen. o. o. Howard without
| protest. Show US where Hooker was
insubordinate TO those placed over him,
either in the East or West, Who of
all those participating in the battle of
Charlottesville, not excepting Stone
wall Jackson himself. contributed 50
much to the failure which you lay at
| Hooker's door. as the man whom you
tell us so readily executed Hooker's
commands, Gen. o. o. Howard? Was
it Hooker's mistake that brought dis
aster to the Right Wing of the Army
of the Potomac, causing almost total
annihilation of the Eleventh Corps at
Charlottesville? No: 1t was the will
full d!sobedience of those placed under
him, Of Gen. Howard. He received the
order from Hooker to protect his
fianks to which Howard paid no atten,
T1n4 L., L.
ter the battle, when Howard expected
a court-martial. this order Of Hookers
was not to be found; but later, when
Hooker had been removed and all dam
ger to Howard over. the order was
brought out of hiding and given to some
one in authority to be properly fled.
Afterwards this order mysteriously dis
appeared from the Adjutant-Generars
Office in Washington. Who took It?
Why was 1t taken? If there had been
man at the head of the army instead
of Granny" Halleck, Howard would
have had q chance to do his praying
where the results would not have been
SO disastrous to the country. Had he
served under Napoleon instead of Hook
er his military and civil career would
have been terminated then and there
If Gen. Hooker's advice and sugges,
tions had been followed, results in vari-
Gus Instances would have been vastly
different. Shermans animosity to
Hooker was so intense that he did not
hesitate to treat his whole command
with the greatest indignity. After
Peach Tree Creek Sherman rode up 20
where Gems. Hooker and Palmer were
standing conversing on the events Of
the day previous. "Well, Hooker. you
had quite fight yesterday" said Sher-
man. YES" replied Hooker: my
losses We're about 1000 men" ooh.
pshaw." said Sherman; "thr- will all
turn up when you come to issue ra-
tons" Hooker's face flushed, his lips
quivered. but he made no reply. The
official report when received showed his
losses to have been upwards of 1900
men. Such a reward from the COM
manding General after Hooker's expert
ence was brutal. A poor recompense
indeed, to those who had so freely Civ
en- their lives. or those who were so
MANNED for life that by continual suf-
fering they were never allowed to for
get that days fight. Why Sherman dis
liked Hooker so intensely I cannot say.
1t may have been an old feud, or n
may have been jealousy Hooker gained
great credit at Lookout Mountain. while
Sherman, from whom great things had
been expected, failed utterly to make
good" He seemed to be utterly re-
eardless of the feelings of others. Hie
slur of Logan. styling him a political
General after the faithful service Lo-
gan had rendered him, his harsh. un-
feeling and unjustifiable treatment of
Williams, both were without excuse.
You made use of the proper word when
you called him the 'imperious Sher-
man."-R. H. Martin. Co /, 46th Ind,
Delphos, o.