hide Sorting

You can sort these results in two ways:

By entity
Chronological order for dates, alphabetical order for places and people.
By position (current method)
As the entities appear in the document.

You are currently sorting in descending order. Sort in ascending order.

hide Most Frequent Entities

The entities that appear most frequently in this document are shown below.

Entity Max. Freq Min. Freq
George H. Thomas 1,422 6 Browse Search
William T. Sherman 1,342 2 Browse Search
John B. Hood 1,058 0 Browse Search
U. S. Grant 610 4 Browse Search
Missouri (Missouri, United States) 480 0 Browse Search
United States (United States) 412 0 Browse Search
Edgefield (Tennessee, United States) 390 4 Browse Search
Tennessee (Tennessee, United States) 242 0 Browse Search
Columbia, Tenn. (Tennessee, United States) 234 4 Browse Search
Frederick Dent Grant 229 1 Browse Search
View all entities in this document...

Browsing named entities in a specific section of John M. Schofield, Forty-six years in the Army. Search the whole document.

Found 329 total hits in 65 results.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7
September 12th, 1864 AD (search for this): chapter 18
Grant and Sherman there are so few points of resemblance in military character or methods, that they must be judged by contrasts rather than by comparison. Hence it may always be difficult to determine their exact relative merits as military leaders. Upon this point I forbear, for the present, to express any opinion. In some other respects Grant and Sherman were hardly less in contrast than in their military characteristics. At the close of the Atlanta campaign, in his letter of September 12, 1864, Grant paid to Sherman the following generous and glowing tribute: In conclusion, it is hardly necessary for me to say that I feel you have accomplished the most gigantic undertaking given to any general in this war, and with a skill and ability that will be acknowledged in history as unsurpassed, if not unequaled. It gives me as much pleasure to record this in your favor as it would in favor of any living man, myself included. To this Sherman replied, September 20: In the meantim
March 21st (search for this): chapter 18
ashington, and sailed with the advance of the Twenty-third Corps, arriving at the mouth of Cape Fear River on February 9, 1865, where we joined General Terry, who with two divisions had already captured Fort Fisher. I was then assigned to command the new department of North Carolina. We turned the defenses of Cape Fear River by marching round the swamps, and occupied Wilmington with little loss; then we captured Kinston, after a pretty sharp fight of three days, and occupied Goldsboroa on March 21, within one day of the time indicated by Sherman, from Laurel Hill, N. C., March 8, for our junction at Goldsboroa. General Sherman, who had been delayed by his battle at Bentonville, did not reach Goldsboroa until the 23d, but the sound of his guns on the 20th and 21st informed me that he was near, and I put a bridge across the Neuse River, so as to go to his assistance if necessary. After the junction at Goldsboroa, I commanded the center, one of the three grand divisions of Sherman's a
1877 AD (search for this): chapter 18
he document. This was to be expected from a hasty effort to solve a great political problem by a man without political education or experience. Sherman's failure was not unlike that of great politicians who undertake to command armies. Their general ideas may be very good, but they have no knowledge of details, and hence make mistakes resulting in failure. As now seen, projected upon the dark background of the political history of the Southern States during the twelve years from 1865 to 1877, and compared with the plans of political doctrinaires in 1865, under the light of experience and reason, the Sherman-Johnston memorandum and Sherman's letters of that period seem self-luminous with political wisdom. Sherman needed only the aid of competent military advisers in whom he had confidence to have made him one of the greatest generals of any age, and he would have needed only the aid of competent political advisers to have made him a great statesman. But he looked almost with con
April 26th (search for this): chapter 18
ed, and that if modified at all, they would meet with a second disapproval. I listened to their statements of the difficulties they had encountered, and then stated how I thought they could all be arranged. General Johnston replied, in substance, I think General Schofield can fix it; and General Sherman intimated to me to write, pen and paper being on the table where I was sitting, while the two great antagonists were nervously pacing the floor. I at once wrote the military convention of April 26, handed it to General Sherman, and he, after reading it, to General Johnston. Having explained that I, as department commander, after General Sherman was gone, could do all that might be necessary to remove the difficulties which seemed to them so serious, the terms as written by me were agreed to, as General Sherman says, without hesitation, and General Johnston, without difficulty, and after being copied without alteration were signed by the two commanders. Johnston's words, on handing
September 20th (search for this): chapter 18
is letter of September 12, 1864, Grant paid to Sherman the following generous and glowing tribute: In conclusion, it is hardly necessary for me to say that I feel you have accomplished the most gigantic undertaking given to any general in this war, and with a skill and ability that will be acknowledged in history as unsurpassed, if not unequaled. It gives me as much pleasure to record this in your favor as it would in favor of any living man, myself included. To this Sherman replied, September 20: In the meantime, know that I admire your dogged perseverance and pluck more than ever. There has been much learned discussion of the relative merits of McClellan's, Grant's, and other plans for the capture of Richmond, as if that was the object of the campaign. In fact, though the capture of Richmond at any time during the war would have produced some moral effect injurious to the rebellion and beneficial to the Union in public opinion, it would have been a real injury to the Union c
May 10th, 1865 AD (search for this): chapter 18
limits of his own capacity. He probably knew that even his great ability and education did not suffice to qualify him for the command of an army in the field. If so, his action afforded a patriotic example which some others would have done well to imitate. As I have before stated, General Halleck was always kind and just to me, so far as I ever knew, and I was much indebted to him for support when it was needed. Now I find in the records the following letter: Richmond, Va., May 10, 1865, 10:30 A. M. Hon. Edwin M. Stanton, Secretary of War: I beg leave to withdraw for the present my recommendation of Schofield as military governor of North Carolina. It is represented to me that he and General Blair were the principal advisers of Sherman in his armistice with the rebel General Johnston. If so, he is not a proper person to command in North Carolina. I therefore suspend my recommendation for further developments. H. W. Halleck, Major-General. The fact was that
March 8th (search for this): chapter 18
uth of Cape Fear River on February 9, 1865, where we joined General Terry, who with two divisions had already captured Fort Fisher. I was then assigned to command the new department of North Carolina. We turned the defenses of Cape Fear River by marching round the swamps, and occupied Wilmington with little loss; then we captured Kinston, after a pretty sharp fight of three days, and occupied Goldsboroa on March 21, within one day of the time indicated by Sherman, from Laurel Hill, N. C., March 8, for our junction at Goldsboroa. General Sherman, who had been delayed by his battle at Bentonville, did not reach Goldsboroa until the 23d, but the sound of his guns on the 20th and 21st informed me that he was near, and I put a bridge across the Neuse River, so as to go to his assistance if necessary. After the junction at Goldsboroa, I commanded the center, one of the three grand divisions of Sherman's army. For the elucidation of some things in this campaign which have seemed obscu
1861 AD (search for this): chapter 18
en by the enemy's cavalry. The worst form of operations in such a war is territorial strategy, or that which aims at the capture and occupation of territory as a primary object. The best is that which aims at the destruction or capture of the opposing armies as the first and only important object. Grant at Donelson, Vicksburg, and in Virginia best illustrated this kind of strategy. Halleck was probably the chief of the territorial strategists of our Civil War period. In the winter of 1861– 1862 the counties of north Missouri bordering on the Missouri River were infested with guerrillas. Halleck sent Pope, with a force of all arms amounting to a considerable army, to clear them out. Pope marched in triumph from one end of that tier of counties to the other, and Halleck then informed me with evident satisfaction that north Missouri was cleared of rebels, and that the war was ended in that part of the State! In fact, the guerrillas, flushed like a flock of quail by Pope's adva
1862 AD (search for this): chapter 18
the enemy's cavalry. The worst form of operations in such a war is territorial strategy, or that which aims at the capture and occupation of territory as a primary object. The best is that which aims at the destruction or capture of the opposing armies as the first and only important object. Grant at Donelson, Vicksburg, and in Virginia best illustrated this kind of strategy. Halleck was probably the chief of the territorial strategists of our Civil War period. In the winter of 1861– 1862 the counties of north Missouri bordering on the Missouri River were infested with guerrillas. Halleck sent Pope, with a force of all arms amounting to a considerable army, to clear them out. Pope marched in triumph from one end of that tier of counties to the other, and Halleck then informed me with evident satisfaction that north Missouri was cleared of rebels, and that the war was ended in that part of the State! In fact, the guerrillas, flushed like a flock of quail by Pope's advance-gu
1863 AD (search for this): chapter 18
actics of a former generation, with its rule of 10,000 men to the mile in line and regular approaches. I was many years younger than Halleck, Thomas, Sherman, Grant, and the other chief commanders, and hence had much more to learn than they. Perhaps I was also, on account of comparative youth, more teachable. At any rate, the two lessons from Halleck above referred to, and later experience, caused me to do a world of thinking; so that I was amazed beyond expression when, in the winter of 1863-64, just before Grant was made lieutenant-general, Halleck told me that his plan for the next campaign was to send west of the Mississippi River force enough to finish the war in all that region of country, and then return and clear up the States east of that river! I said nothing, but could not help thinking that it was, sure enough, time to have another general-in-chief of the army. But accepting his strategic theory of operations in the American Civil War,—territorial conquest,—his plans
1 2 3 4 5 6 7