This text is part of:
[549]
of Knoxville, if not insecure, at least less certain; and the season, which is extremely inclement among these mountains, was now too far advanced for further military operations.
It was useless to send other troops to Knoxville, as the advantage that had been lost could not be regained, before spring; and the rebels were left with this fulcrum for movements whenever the campaign of next year should begin.
The retention of Sherman's column a week or two longer in East Tennessee would, undoubtedly, have obviated this disarrangement of Grant's plans.1
On the 7th of December, Grant announced: ‘It may now safely be assumed that the enemy are driven from the front, or, at least, that they no longer threaten it in formidable numbers.’
He, therefore, that day, renewed his suggestion of a campaign against Mobile.
‘The country south of this is extremely mountainous, affording but little for the support of an army; the roads are bad, at all times, and the season is so far advanced that an effective campaign from here, this winter, may be looked upon as impossible.
Our supplies and means of transportation would not admit of a very early campaign, if the season did. . . . I propose, ’
1 On the 20th of January, Grant said to Halleck: ‘It was a great oversight, in the first place, to have ever permitted Longstreet to come to a stop within the state of Tennessee, after the siege was raised. My instructions were full and complete on this subject. Sherman was sent with forces sufficient alone, to defeat Longstreet; and, notwithstanding the long distance the troops had marched, proposed to go on and carry out my instructions in full. General Burnside was sanguine that no stop would be made by the enemy in the valley. Sherman then proposed to leave any amount of force Burnside thought might be necessary to make his position perfectly secure. He deemed two divisions ample. . . . I write this now particularly to show that the latter named officer’ (Sherman) ‘is in no wise to blame for the existing state of affairs in East Tennessee.’
New York Appleton 1885.
Tufts University provided support for entering this text.
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.