Edward Alfred Pollard, The lost cause; a new Southern history of the War of the Confederates ... Drawn from official sources and approved by the most distinguished Confederate leaders.

1 Mr. Headley, a Northern authour, in his interesting work, “The campaigns of Sherman and Grant,” makes the following very just commentary on the Northern mania for a “change of commanders.” Referring to the achievements of these two popular heroes of the war, he says:

It is not to be supposed that they were the only two great generals the war had produced, or the only ones who were able to bring it to a successful issue. It is an errour to imagine, as many do, that the Government kept casting about for men fit to do the work these men did, and, after long searching, at length found them. Several were displaced, who would have, doubtless, succeeded in bringing us ultimate victory, had they been allowed a fair trial. The errour was in supposing that men, capable of controlling such vast armies, and carrying on a war of such magnitude and covering almost a continent in its scope, were to be found ready-made. They were not to leap forth, like Minerva from the head of Jupiter, completely panoplied and ready for the service to which they were determined. A war of such magnitude, and covering the territories that ours did, would have staggered the genius of Napoleon, or the skill of Wellington, even at the close of their long experience and training. To expect, therefore, that officers, who had never led ten thousand men to battle, were suddenly to become capable of wielding half a million, was absurd. Both the army and the leaders, as well as the nation, had to grow by experience to the vastness of the undertaking. A mighty military genius, capable at once of comprehending and controlling the condition of things, would have upset the government in six months. Trammelled, confined, and baffled by “ ignorance and unbelief,” it would have taken matters into its own hand. Besides, such prodigies do not appear every century. We were children in such a complicated and wide-sweeping struggle; and, like children, were compelled to learn to walk by many a stumble. Greene, next to Washington, was the greatest general our revolutionary war produced; yet, in almost his first essay, he lost Fort Washington, with its four thousand men, and seriously crippled his great leader. But Washington had the sagacity to discern his military ability beneath his failure, and still gave him his confidence. To a thinking man, that was evidently the only way for us to get a competent general-one capable of planning and carrying out a great campaign. Here was our vital errour. The Government kept throwing dice for able commanders. It is true that experience will not make a great man out of a naturally weak one; but it is equally true that without it, a man of great natural military capacity will not be equal to vast responsibilities and combinations. Our experience proved this; for both Grant and Sherman came very near sharing the fate of many that preceded them. Nothing but the President's friendship and tenacity saved the former after the battle of Pittsburgh Landing. His overthrow was determined on; while the latter was removed from the department of Kentucky, as a crazy man. Great by nature, they were fortunately kept where they could grow to the new and strange condition of things, and the magnitude of the struggle into which we had been thrown. If the process of changing commanders the moment they did not keep pace with the extravagant expectations of the country, and equally extravagant predictions of the Government, had been continued, we should have been floundering to this day amid chaos and uncertainty.