This text is part of:
Table of Contents:
1 This is a curious sentence, and deserves a little examination. The date of the document on which it appears is December 2, 1862, and the general-in-chief says that on that day he was ignorant of General McClellan's plans because the latter, from a date about a month previous, had ceased to communicate with him personally and had sent his reports directly to the President. Are we to understand that the relations between the President and the general-in-chief were such during the whole month of November, 1862, that the latter never saw, never was informed of, the communications addressed to the former by the general commanding the largest army in the field? But, if the statement does not mean this, it is a mere gratuitous effusion of spite against General McClellan. If it means this, will any body believe it?Again, “about this time” General McClellan ceased to communicate with the general-in-chief. About what time? Two dates Lad just before been mentioned,--October 26 and November 3; and there is nothing to indicate which of the two was meant. If it were the latter, General McClellan could not have had time to send many communications to anybody after that day, as he was deprived of his command on the 7th: if it were the former, then the statement is not true; for in the appendix to General Halleck's testimony, as published by the Congressional Committee on the Conduct of the War, there appear no less than six despatches addressed to him by General McClellan after October 26. General McClellan's communications to the President were generally in reply to inquiries or suggestions from the latter, whose restless and meddlesome spirit was constantly moving him to ask questions, obtrude advice, and make comments upon military matters, which were as much out of his sphere as they were beyond his comprehension. It is true that General McClellan did not communicate his plans of the campaign either to the President or the general-in-chief; but surely he is to be commended for this. The success of a military movement often depends upon its being kept an entire secret from the enemy. General McClellan had learned by experience the danger of revealing, even in official conversation, his future operations; and it would have been an increased risk if he had made the telegraph-wire a confidant. The whole passage is characteristic of the inventive ingenuity which has been shown, from first to last, in devising pretexts to find fault with General McClellan.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.
An XML version of this text is available for download, with the additional restriction that you offer Perseus any modifications you make. Perseus provides credit for all accepted changes, storing new additions in a versioning system.