# Talk:P. G. T. Beauregard

Your 'External links' section features these two items: 

Works by or about Gustave Toutant Beauregard at Internet Archive
Works by or about P. G. T. Beauregard at Internet Archive
Hi I don't know how Wikipedia works but the first paragraph under Civil Rights Legacy makes no sense.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 32.208.96.62 (talk) 21:09, 17 October 2023 (UTC) 
Why are there two of these? Valetude (talk) 05:08, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
"Beauregard became a vocal proponent for Republicans, endorsing President Ulysses S. Grant in 1868's election saying that he would "become the tool of designing politicians."[82]"   This is an _endorsement_?  Please clarify. 24.170.225.138 (talk) 21:30, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

Hello 24.170.225.138, I don't think you understand the term "endorsement";
PGT Beauregard spoke on why people should vote for the Republican candidate President Ulysses S. Grant in the 1868 election. This is Beauregard's public approval for the Candidate Ulysses. S. Grant. In other words, PGT Beauregard endorsed Ulysses S. Grant in the 1868 election. That's what an endorsement is. Aearthrise (talk) 19:22, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
The reality is that that sentence was based on a misreading of the source, and I have removed it. I checked the book cited ("P. G. T. Beauregard: Napoleon in Gray," by T. Harry Williams) out from the library in order to cross-check it, and found that the sentence that was in the article confusedly misrepresents Williams's text. It says nothing about Beauregard becoming a "vocal proponent for Republicans"- it makes clear that Beauregard favored postwar reconciliation, but did not support the Republicans per se, certainly not in 1868. Williams says that Beauregard was "happy to strike a blow against the Republicans" in the elections of 1868, detailing the meeting with Rosecrans, Lee, et al that purposed to undercut postwar Republican claims that Democrats were incapable of accepting the outcome of the war. The text also says absolutely nothing about Beauregard's endorsing Grant, and in fact says that Beauregard considered leaving the country after the Republicans won the elections of 1868. The "designing politicians" text is, as the IP editor suggested, critical of Grant, and not at all an endorsement. Later text in the same chapter further remarks on Beauregard's apparent scorn for Grant ("on occasion the old resentments and hatreds could flare forth"), and notes that he supported Grant's opponent, Greeley, in 1872. The "become the tool of designing politicians" quotation is also a quotation from Williams's text, not a quote from Beauregard himself, and should not have been in quotes.
I noticed that much of the article overall is heavily reliant on Williams's book- it's by far the most-cited source, and whole subsections are cited to nothing else. This is maybe unavoidable (it's a respectable work, and Beauregard bios aren't exactly thick on the ground), but it's potentially a little shaky. The section I looked at ("Political views during the Reconstruction Era"), at least, has a lot of text that's an uncomfortably-close paraphrase of Williams's book. I suspect the erroneous sentence I removed is the result of an editor trying to quickly-and-dirtily work Williams's info into the article at some point in the past, without reading it very closely. Yspaddadenpenkawr (talk) 12:54, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for explaining what "endorsement" means.  Some other useful words are "tool," which in this context means "stooge," "pawn," "unwitting accomplice," "useful idiot"; "designing," which means "conniving," "plotting," "conspiring," with strong connotations of dishonesty and corruption; and "politicians," which strengthens those connotations of dishonesty and corruption. Do you see why "endorsement" is an inappropriate word here?
24.170.225.138 (talk) 14:46, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

You're irrationally imagining and inserting your own context considering he voted for Grant; the phrase "become the tool of designing politicians" is just Beauregard's way of saying that he will help bring change. Is English your first language? Aearthrise (talk) 19:44, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

The Waukesha resident who commented we "did not feel very kindly toward him; but the past was dead and now they admired him" might have been my great grandfather Henry Snyder (who had gone into the 43rd Wisconsin as Heinrich Schneider). He became a well-known boot maker (and foreman of the fire department) into whose shop Beauregard came. Beauregard noticed his "Grand Army of the Republic" regalia and remarked "I was also in the late unpleasantness - but on the other side." Even shortly after the end of the "unpleasantness" there remained little animosity between the opposing soldiers. Beauregard returned to Waukesha every summer, and always stopped to get a new pair of boots. My grandfather bought the then-famous Volney L. Moore house -- https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Waukesha_June_2023_033_(Dr._Volney_L._Moore_House).jpg -- where he died in 1909. Van.snyder (talk) 21:00, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

It has been a while since this article has been reviewed, so I took a look and noticed lots of uncited statements, including the first two paragraphs in "Political views after the end of the Civil War" and a block quote in "Louisiana Unification Movement". Should this article go to WP:GAR? Z1720 (talk) 19:24, 15 June 2025 (UTC)


### P. G. T. Beauregard
I removed the image of New Orleans streetcars with the caption "Beauregard revolutionized New Orleans with his cable cars".  Well intended, but not so.  New Orleans streetcars (general term) went from the old horse or mule drawn cars to electric trams powered from overhead wires - "trolleys" (in the original sense of the term).  Cable cars are pulled by an in-ground cable.  Beauregard's ingenious cable car system was never developed in New Orleans.  -- Infrogmation (talk) 12:28, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

For future readers/source checkers - there have been at least three distinct rounds of editing of this article over a number of years by different editors, including myself. From what I can tell, there have been at least 3 editions of the Williams biography used, each of which has different pagination. Where moving text that I can verify is in Williams, I have retained existing page numbers, but where rewriting stuff I am using the pagination from the 1955 edition I am consulting. So this should be kept in mind when checking against Williams in the future, as there are at least 3 sets of pagination in here. Hog Farm  Talk 22:47, 26 September 2025 (UTC)