Jump to content
Shiloh Discussion Group
Mike

Pope or Grant

Recommended Posts

I was pondering this topic last night, and thought I would open this discussion.

Suppose Grant had been transferred to the Eastern Theater in 1862 instead of Pope? How do you think the course of the war would have been altered? Given the machinations of Halleck against Grant after the Fort Donelson and Shiloh battles I realize that Lincoln would have been strongly advised to leave him in the West, but it raises an intriguing alternative if he had placed Grant st the head of the Army of Virginia in July 1862. 

What are your thoughts?

Just the rambling thoughts of a man with too much time on his hands.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thought provoking... due to the fact that Ulysses S. Grant benefited from the disappearance of Halleck and Pope from the West. As "senior man left standing," based on 16 FEB 1862 date of rank as Major General, Grant was left to his own devices and execution of initiative to take control and conduct operations in the West as he saw fit (under direction from a commander 1200 miles away) and allow time and experience to culminate in Capture of Vicksburg in July 1863.

As for Grant going East in June 1862:

  • He lacked significant reputation. Because Grant's last celebrated Victory was Fort Donelson in February,  his "star" was eclipsed by John Pope (with successes at New Madrid, Island No.10 and Corinth)
  • Too soon. The Grant & Sherman Team did not fully mature until the Vicksburg Campaign.
  • Stifled development. Grant going east, under continued, too-close supervision of Henry Halleck would not have provided time and opportunity for General Grant to develop his own style of war-fighting (which he brought East after Vicksburg and Chattanooga)
  • The issue of Trust. While Henry Halleck trusted John Pope, Halleck did not trust Grant; and the first setback (such as occurred at Cedar Mountain) may have given Major General Halleck the opportunity to cashier Grant... and bring Pope east;
  • Grant succeeded in spite of Halleck, not because of Halleck. Close supervision stifled Grant.

But most important: Time... to fully develop the relationship with Sherman; to realize the importance of Intelligence (ably provided by Grenville Dodge); and to allow the many "significant competitors" to dash their reputations against the Rock of Public Opinion, resulting in U.S. Grant emerging in the East as the "right man, at the right time."

My take on the proposed "What if..."

Ozzy

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By the same token, then...imagine if Pope had not gone East and was appointed to command the Army of the Tennessee rather than Grant.

(I warned y'all I had too much time on my hands.)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pope in the West

“I am not responsible for the truth of the statements thus communicated… in regard to the number of prisoners and arms taken I telegraphed the exact language of General Pope.” [Telegram of Henry Halleck to SecWar Stanton, sent from Corinth 3 July 1862 – OR 10 p.671]

The above communication begins this post because as commander, Left Wing, during Apr/ May 1862 Siege of Corinth, Major General Pope became the Commander in the Field, responsible for pursuit of the retreating Rebels under General Beauregard. With Rosecrans (commanding Right Wing, now the lead element of the pursuit), Pope to his rear (as coordinator of the pursuit) and Buell (to rear of Pope, providing support, if needed), Pope pressed the pursuit south and kept Halleck, at Corinth, informed of his every movement via the telegraph. (And Halleck sends his own reports, within minutes of Pope’s reports, via telegraph direct to SecWar Stanton… one of which reports, “10000 prisoners and 15000 stand of arms captured” – OR 10 page 669.)

OR 11 pages 236 – 255 makes for remarkable reading, as over the course of four days (and exchange of more than twenty-five telegrams), June 1-4 1862, Major General Pope provides Halleck with his assessment that “the Rebel Army is coming apart” (due to the thousands of wounded Rebels and deserting Rebels encountered during the movement south.) Meanwhile, Henry Halleck, believing the encouraging report, begins to arrange for “movement of cars and locomotives south from Paducah” on June 1st [OR 11 page 236]. Pope orders Rosecrans south through Rienzi, through Booneville and onward towards Baldwyn, where Pope believes the remaining Rebels (perhaps 30,000 men) will make a stand. But as the Union force approaches Baldwyn, Pope begins to get “cold feet,” and advises Halleck that “he does not believe it advisable to push beyond Baldwyn due the difficulty of supplying the command.”

Meanwhile, Don Carlos Buell (the senior Major General of the three engaged in pursuit of the fleeing Rebels) informs Halleck of his discomfort at following the orders of the junior Pope; and Halleck advises Buell that if the situation develops, and Buell’s reinforcements are required, then – naturally – Buell, as senior, will take overall command [OR 11 pp. 253 – 4].

Pope eventually reports to Halleck on June 4th at 6:50 p.m. that, “the enemy is developed in considerable force on the direct road to Baldwyn. As soon as I learn that you have ordered Buell forward, I will advance and force the passage of Twenty Mile Creek.”

A subsequent report sent by Pope to Halleck on June 8th advises that, “the enemy has retreated south of Guntown.” Halleck reports to Stanton, next day, that, “the enemy has fallen back to Saltillo, fifty miles away. General Pope estimates Rebel losses from casualties, prisoners and desertion at over 20,000 and General Buell at between 20 – 30,000… General Buell has been ordered east, to form a junction with Mitchel [near Huntsville Alabama.]”  And a follow-up message to Stanton, also sent June 9th: “General Pope has pursued as far south as Guntown… I do not purpose to pursue the enemy any further [unless ordered by your office]” OR 10 p.671.

What is revealed:

·         Pope and Halleck were “too close,” and their judgment was muddled (based on hopes and expectations – of Rebel army disintegration, the imminent end of rebellion (in the West) and potential for rebuilding railroad lines – and not on facts;

·         Too much reliance on the telegraph, and instant communications (even to the point of SecWar Stanton directing aspects of the pursuit from Washington)

·         OR 10 pages 236 – 278 reveal a General Pope willing to tell his commander “what he wanted to hear,” and perfectly willing to adjust and spin his reports to suit Halleck’s ear (as Pope knew that Halleck wanted to focus on rebuilding railroads, and was in agreement with Halleck’s decision to “keep what was left of the Rebel Army” simply pushed well away to the south, too distant to interfere with rebuilt railroads and telegraph lines)

·         Pope was junior to both Don Carlos Buell and U.S. Grant. Major General Pope in command in the West only works if Buell goes away (which did happen) and Grant resigns (which did not happen)

·         Subsequent to the pursuit south of Corinth being terminated about June 9th (and the welcome arrival of news that Memphis had fallen three days earlier to Union forces) Major General Pope was sent to St. Louis to arrange for railroad cars to be sent to run on the Union-controlled railroad lines in the Occupied South.

·         SecWar Edwin Stanton sent the telegram to John Pope at St. Louis on 19 June 1862 calling him to Washington, D.C. (Halleck’s glowing reports concerning John Pope, combined with Pope’s war record of successes at New Madrid, Island No.10 and Corinth, helped convince Stanton that “Pope was the man needed in the East.”)

References:  OR 10 and 11 (pages as indicated)

SDG topic "See you in Memphis" post of 30 April 2016.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mike

The above story of John Pope was provided to illustrate that Major General Pope had been in de facto command of Western troops after Corinth... but the opportunity to crush out Rebellion in the West was allowed to go begging by that officer. (With his close connection to Halleck, Pope could have pressed Halleck to continue the pursuit of Beauregard south of Baldwyn, while Halleck's Army yet numbered 100,000 men, but he did not.)

As concerns the July 3rd telegram from Halleck in regard to "the over-estimation of Rebel prisoners" subsequently accorded to Pope... There was a puzzling situation created after John Pope estimated, "no more than 30,000 Rebels could be mustered for battle near Baldwyn," followed by subsequent reports indicating, "30000 Rebels had been counted as deserters, or wounded, or otherwise leaving Confederate service." (Stanton logically put the two estimates together, subtracted 30,000 from 30,000 and got zero.)

Based on Halleck's own reports, Edwin Stanton (still acting with President Lincoln as co- Commander-in-Chief of the Armies) requested Major General Halleck send four divisions East to assist in defence of Washington... and Halleck demurred, claiming "the Rebels in Tennessee are more numerous than you appreciate." This was followed by, "sending away forces from the West now could lead to disaster" ...which must have confused Stanton. And a July 1st telegram from Halleck further claimed that, "the Rebel force under Bragg is not less than 75- 80000 men," resulted in the July 3rd telegram, by which Halleck threw Pope under the stagecoach.

For intriguing reading, see OR 16 part 2 page 9 orders from Halleck to Buell of 11 June 1862; and OR 16 part 2 page 81, 1 July 1862 telegram from Corinth of Halleck to Stanton (and the pages between  9 and 105, to appreciate how fully the Federals deceived themselves after Siege of Corinth.) The following Naval War College report by Louis G. Burgess (1991) is also valuable for understanding what took place after Siege of Corinth: http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a236370.pdf  Bragg's Invasion of Kentucky.

Cheers

Ozzy

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the meantime, this is what the newspaper reader "back East" was learning about the War in the West:

image.png

Pope's Victory at Island No.10 (with Navy assistance.)

image.png

The Capture of the South's largest city occurred in the West (and no one really knew who was responsible, besides Farragut.)

image.png

After a campaign many believed would never end, Corinth is in Union hands (an almost bloodless capture, after the Bloody Horror of Shiloh.)

image.png

And now Memphis... And all these achievements took place in the West, greasing the wheels for Halleck and Pope to roll East to Washington...

The point: from the successes at Fort Henry and Fort Donelson, through to Island No.10 and Corinth and Memphis, it was becoming known that Henry Halleck had some role in achieving those Victories, and John Pope was accorded success at New Madrid, Island No.10 and Corinth. (Because of the Bloody, hard-won Victory at Shiloh, U.S. Grant had lost favor with much of the public, half of whom held him responsible for the carnage, with many -- including those with family members at Shiloh -- believing he should be Court-Martialed.) Therefore, Pope and Halleck outshone everyone else in the West, and they were rewarded by being called East.

Timing (and perception) sometimes work to one's favor...

[All newspapers found at Library of Congress site, Chronicling America.]

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course, all of the blame for the lost opportunity south of Corinth cannot be unloaded on Major General John Pope... because there was another Union General who was supposed to have come up from the south with his troops (most likely to act as anvil to Henry Halleck's hammer, with Beauregard dutifully playing the piece to be worked.) But, this other General did not make an appearance. [Identity of this other General is to be found in OR 6.]

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who was the Union General?

 

No guesses on the identity of the Union General anticipated to assist Halleck from the south during the Siege of Corinth?

Here are a few clues:

  • How did Union soldiers from Connecticut and Massachusetts arrive in Louisiana in 1862?

  • Where is Ship Island, Mississippi?

  • Of Navy officers Farragut, Porter and this Army General, who was senior?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Must be Ben Butler who would have out-ranked those two naval officers.  As I recall (but don't my reference have readily available), Butler was one of the early war commissioned major generals, causing great headaches for the Federals later in the war when their seniority entitled them to commands despite their evident incapacity.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well Done, Transylvania!

It was indeed Major General Benjamin Butler, one of the early ”essential Union leaders,” who was responsible for finding a way around Rebel-controlled Baltimore; forcing a beachhead at Annapolis; and arguably responsible for keeping Maryland in the Union. And Butler helped save the Capital at Washington, D.C. during the dark days following surrender of Fort Sumter (with the subsequent Secession of Virginia, and the threatened secession of Maryland.)

Most are unaware of General Butler's role in the clandestine movement of Union troops from Maine and Massachusetts and Connecticut to Ship Island, off the coast of Mississippi, where a force of eighteen powerful U.S. Navy warships (under Farragut) and 21 “mortar sloops” (David D. Porter) were assembled preparatory to the April 1862 assault on Forts Jackson and St. Philip in the Mississippi River below New Orleans. Unfortunately, Farragut (the senior Naval officer) and Butler (the senior Army officer) were given different sets of orders, both of which stressed the vital goal of capturing New Orleans; but afterwards, the secondary and tertiary goals diverged.

Farragut misread his orders and bypassed Vicksburg (instead of taking control of Vicksburg) and focused on joining Davis's Western Flotilla south of Memphis, instead. Butler was left behind at New Orleans when forcing the surrender of the Crescent City proved too difficult a nut to crack for Farragut – and Butler's Army of the Gulf (over 15000 men) remained on Ship Island, or served as occupation troops in New Orleans and Algiers instead of pressing inland to Jackson, Mississippi... where he should have been, as Halleck advanced his Army of the Mississippi south from Pittsburg Landing.

Ozzy

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I found my reference regarding date of rank.  The ranking officers, with dates of rank, are

Winfield Scott                Major General    Regulars                                       25 June 1861
George B McClellan      Major General    Regulars                                       14 May 1861
John C Fremont            Major General    Regulars                                       14 May 1861
Nathaniel P Banks         Major General    Volunteers                                   16 May 1861
John A Dix                       Major General    Volunteers                                   16 May 1861
Benjamin F Butler         Major General    Volunteers                                     16 May 1861

That's an impressive list of officers and shows great perspicacity  on the part of the Administration in their selection.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Transylvania

Thanks for continuing this discussion, because it is my belief that when it comes to “political generals,” it is easy to say, “He didn't do diddly” or “He was never any good” ...and miss the whole story. What follows is my interpretation of the above six listed generals (and I am more than happy to debate the performance of any of them, provided references are included.)

Beginning with Winfield Scott, the brevet Lieutenant General born in 1786, veteran of the War of 1812 and Commander of the Victorious Army which won the War with Mexico. Made Commander of the Army in 1841, General Scott continued in that role through the Buchanan Administration (and likely made decisions that resulted in Major Anderson being posted to Charleston Harbor in November 1860; sending Captain Don Carlos Buell to Charleston with verbal orders for Major Anderson in 1861; and sending orders to Lieutenant Adam Slemmer at Pensacola Harbor to “Hold the best fort.” There was no doubt that General Scott was past his prime, but “How does one remove an icon and War Hero?” Ask him: “Who should replace you?” Once Robert E. Lee disappeared as candidate for the role, General Scott advocated for Henry Halleck.

George B. McClellan. USMA Class of 1846 and Mexican War hero. Because of victories in minor skirmishes in Western Virginia (and elevation to militia Major General by the State of Ohio) George McClellan came to President Lincoln's notice at a time when he could use all the help he could get. Having survived ten days of terrible uncertainty at Washington D.C. following the Fall of Fort Sumter, and then suffering humiliation at Bull Run, President Lincoln was unwilling to wait for Henry Halleck to arrive from California; George McClellan arrived at Washington July 1861 and was installed as General of the Army (and Winfield Scott retired.) Upon request of President Lincoln, General McClellan provided Lincoln with a detailed “Plan of Offensive Operations” for the conduct of the war. (Meanwhile, Henry Halleck arrived from California and was installed at St. Louis in November, replacing Fremont and Hunter.)

John C. Fremont. A regular Army officer (but not a West Point graduate) Fremont was known as “the Pathfinder” to an adoring public (and as a Traitor by West Point graduates, due to political “interference” in California and the short-lived Bear Republic.) [Note: when California was admitted as a State in 1850, Henry Halleck wrote the State Constitution.] Fremont was married into a powerful Democrat family of Missouri politics; yet John Fremont became one of the original members of the Republican Party (and ran for President in 1856.) Fast forward to November 1860, after Lincoln's election as President, with war clouds gathering to the South. John Fremont met privately with Abraham Lincoln in Springfield Illinois; Fremont met with Lincoln during March 1861 and departed Washington D.C. in April, bound for Europe and a whirlwind series of visits to major arsenals and arms suppliers in Britain, France, Germany and Austria. After buying every serviceable rifle-musket available (and a number of artillery pieces) General Fremont returned to America late June, met with President Lincoln in Washington, and took command of the Department of the West, based at St. Louis in July 1861. The German and Hungarian communities of St. Louis rallied to Fremont; and his ties to the Benton Faction of the Democrat Party helped convince Unionist Missourians to forego the Rebel MVM (which became the State Guard), and join Fremont's Home Guard, instead. Making use of West Point graduate Nathaniel Lyon, offensive operations were conducted that drove Rebel forces away from St. Louis. St. Louis was fortified, protected by a ring of forts. And Fremont made use of Generals Hurlbut, Grant, Pope and Prentiss to commence driving Rebel forces out of Missouri. The loss of Lexington, the near loss of St. Joseph, and the death of Nathaniel Lyon highlighted shortcomings in Fremont's ability as military commander. These shortcomings were overblown by West Point graduates (who took delight in white-anting Fremont.) The “Pathfinder” signed his own Death Warrant when he issued an Emancipation Proclamation... and refused President Lincoln's demand to withdraw it. Fremont was removed from command at St. Louis. And Henry Halleck was installed as Commander, Department of Missouri on 9 NOV 1861.

Nathaniel Banks. A political animal with no military exposure, the Massachusetts native was able to become Governor, and was appointed Major General, strictly due to political connections. His record in the field speaks for itself.

John Dix. Born in 1798 this veteran of the War of 1812 had been Treasury Secretary at the end of the Buchanan Administration. Making himself available to President Lincoln, Major General Dix was installed at Baltimore (replacing General Nathaniel Banks.) In May 1862 General Dix was installed at Fortress Monroe (replacing the ageing General John E. Wool, who was two years older than General Scott). General Dix is most noted (and relevant to Battle of Shiloh captives) due to his collaboration with Confederate General D. H. Hill in Spring 1862, resulting in the Dix – Hill Cartel (formalizing a system of prisoner of war exchange).

Benjamin Butler. Politician who commanded the Massachusetts Militia, Brigadier General Butler answered the call and readied Massachusetts volunteers to be sent south after Fort Sumter erupted. After one regiment of Massachusetts men were impeded passing through Baltimore, and Baltimore subsequently closed to passage by any more Northern volunteers, General Butler commandeered a ferry, sailed his force of men to Annapolis, and against the demands of Governor Hicks of Maryland landed his force, defended the U.S. Naval Academy, and sent the Midshipmen away on USS Constitution (to establish the Naval Academy at Rhode Island for the duration of the war.) Butler rebuilt the rail line connecting Annapolis to Washington D.C. and guaranteed occupation of Annapolis (Capital of Maryland) by Union forces for the remainder of the war. “Following” orders from Lieutenant General Scott, in May 1861 Major General Butler occupied Baltimore... with no opposition. For violating his orders, Butler was recalled, and sent to command Fortress Monroe. (And Nathaniel Banks replaced Butler in command of Baltimore.) While attempting to expand the safe Union zone around Fort Monroe, General Butler's force got caught up in the Battle of Big Bethel. Although a Union defeat, the subsequent events at Bull Run overshadowed newspaper readers, and Big Bethel faded into insignificance.

Major General Butler commanded an expeditionary force in August 1861 that captured Forts Hatteras and Clark in North Carolina. Benjamin Butler then departed on recruiting duty in the Northeast... ostensibly to provide troops for another expedition; but in reality, these troops were sent to Ship Island off the coast of Mississippi. In April 1862 much of the combined Naval and Army force accumulated at Ship Island was sent up the Mississippi River in the operation to capture New Orleans. And Butler's 15000 troops were subsequently used to garrison New Orleans, Algiers, Fort Jackson and Fort St. Philip. (And when General Butler was replaced as commander of Occupied New Orleans in December 1862, it was Nathaniel Banks who replaced him.)

 

References:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winfield_Scott  Winfield Scott.

https://www.historynet.com/mcclellans-war-winning-strategy.htm  George B. McClellan

https://www.battlefields.org/learn/biographies/nathaniel-lyon   Nathaniel Lyon.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nathaniel_P._Banks   Nathaniel Banks.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_E._Wool   John E. Wool.

http://www.mrlincolnswhitehouse.org/residents-visitors/the-generals-and-admirals/generals-admirals-john-dix-1798-1879/   John A. Dix.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dix–Hill_Cartel   Dix - Hill Cartel

https://www.militarymuseum.org/HistoryCW.html   California Military History [Fremont, Halleck, Sherman, Ord, A.S. Johnston, Bear Republic]

https://www.militarymuseum.org/History Early CA.html   California Military History [Sherman, Ord, Halleck]

https://www.battlefields.org/learn/biographies/benjamin-f-butler  Unflattering bio of Benjamin Butler

https://www.nps.gov/people/benjaminfbutler.htm  Benjamin Butler at Fortress Monroe and "Contraband Decision"

http://www.mrlincolnswhitehouse.org/residents-visitors/the-generals-and-admirals/generals-admirals-benjamin-butler-1818-1893/  Butler and Maryland

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...