The National tribune., 1908-05-07
MCCLELLAN AND HIS SUCCESSORS
A Comparison of the IA Months of the
Army of the Potomac Under His Com
mand With che Same Time Under
Those Who Followed Him.

Army of the Potomac Under His Com.
mand With che Same Time Under
Those Who Followed Him.
Editor National Tribune: Like thou
sands of old veterans all over our land
have read with interest Comrade Nc,
Elroy's history of the Peninsular Cam.
paign that has been running in the col
umns of The National Tribune. 1t i:
not expected that we can all agree as
to the merits or dement's of the differ
ent commanders, or corps, or divisions
that took part in that tremendous
struggle that shook the Nation from
circumference to center, and the mem
ories of which stir so deeply the hearts
of the survivors OF that great contest
What / wish to say here is, that can
not understand why some of our com
rades, in making comments on the
Peninsular Campaign, persist in saying
that Mcclellan was a splendid organ
izer of an army, but could not fight,
or that Mcclellan could teach his SOL
diers how to drill, but somehow could
not teach them how to kill" The
Army of the Potomac is also accused
of being tediously slow in its move
ments while under the command of
Gen. Mcclellan, and many other
"
opinion, are contrary to the facts
1t was my fortune to be in the old
Third Corps and to serve under Little
Mac on the front lire every hour that
he commanded that grand old fighting
machine that did such heroic service
during the four years of its existence,
and / wish for those comrades who, as
yet, have not learned the facts which
should go into history, to know that
during the IA months Gen. Mcclellan
was in command the Army of the Poto-
mac moved by land and water $50
miles. The next IA months, while
under the Command of Burnside,
Hooker and Meade. it moved $50 miles.
Under Mcclellan it went thru the siege
of Yorktown and fought the general
battles of williamsburg, Fair Oaks,
Seven Days battles in front of Rich
mond, South Mountain and Antietam.
During the next II months it fought
the general battles of Fredericksburg
Charlottesville and Gettysburg. So
far as distance covered and battles
fought Mcclellan is far in advance
Now let US compare the fighting and
killing part of the AFFAIR.
1 have gathered from such histories
as Stokes's and Swinton's and other
sources. which probably are not far
from being correct, the fact that the
army under Mcclellan inflicted a loss
upon the Confederates in killed,
wounded and prisoners, during its gen.
eral engagements, total of 56,437.
losing itself a total os 37,1s0. During
the next II months the army under
Burnside. Hooker and Meade inflicted
LOGS upon the enemy of 1880, itself
losing 52,70S. do not bring into this
account skirmishes and other losses
outside of general battles, which is
as fair on one side as on the other
To recapitulate: The army under
Mcclellan in IA months moved 75oI
miles, fought at least eight general
battles, killed, wounded and took pris-
oners. 56.437 of the enemy. During
the next IA months the army moved
45a miles. fought three general battles,
killed, wcundeds and took prisoners,
1880. So far as fighting is connected
with it, ] wilf~ ask my comrades who
are pre5udiced towards Mcclellan. if
there was anywhere greater fighting. or
courage or stubborn resistance dis
played than during the seven days in
front Of Richmond and at South Moun-
tain and Antietam? Do these COM
rades know that Antietam was the