A good one.
A London letter writer to the New York Herald
says: ‘"The press generally (that is, the London
press,) say that the only General who has shown any marked ability is the man that saved the Federal army on the Chickahominy and at Antietam.
"’--Of course, McClellan
Now, we Confederates have always been under the impression that McClellan
came to the Chickahominy
, not to "save the army," but to take Richmond
; that he went to Antietam
.) not to "save the army," but to capture General Lee
Such was his own opinion of his mission in both instances, as may be learned from sundry thundering proclamations conceived and indicted by him and published to the world with his own signature annexed.--The "army," we take the liberty to suggest, would have required no saving in either instance if he had not carried it into Ganger
This correspondent is very indignant at the outrages offered to McClellan
after all this "saving
" The only reward he got for it, says he, was "being sent to a New Jersey
country." Perhaps the reason of this was that he did not do what he was sent to do. He was sent to take Richmond
, and lasted of taking Richmond
, he "saved the army." He was sent to take Lee
, and, instead of taking Lee
, he "saved the army" We say again, he was not sent to either place to save the army.
Nothing can place the pretensions of McClellan
in a clearer light than the words of this correspondent, and nothing can more plainly demonstrate the entire absence of everything like military talent in Yankeedom, than the attempt to make a hero out of a man who, sent with an overwhelming force on two different expeditions, has an ovation claimed for him, not because be succeeded to his object, but because he saved the army with which he was to operate from absolute destruction.