Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

5042Re: [TalkAntietam] Re: Lee -- laissez faire

Expand Messages
  • G E Mayers
    Sep 18 7:16 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      I meant it to show Lee's contempt for his Federal opponents and
      his almost matter of fact beginning of the campaign...at least
      until September 13th.

      Yr. Obt. Svt.
      G E "Gerry" Mayers

      To Be A Virginian, either by birth, marriage, adoption, or even
      on one's mother's side, is an introduction to any state in the
      Union, a passport to any foreign country, and a benediction from
      the Almighty God. --Anonymous
      ----- Original Message -----
      From: "William H Keene" <wh_keene@...>
      To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2008 10:12 AM
      Subject: [TalkAntietam] Re: Lee -- laissez faire


      What is meant by laissez faire attitude?

      --- In TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com, "G E Mayers" <gerry1952@...>
      wrote:
      >
      > Dear Harry,
      >
      > I wonder if he started the campaign thinking Pope was in
      > command
      > of the AoP? That might explain his almost laissez faire
      > attitude.....
      >
      > When did he know for sure Mac was his opponent?
      >
      > Yr. Obt. Svt.
      > G E "Gerry" Mayers
      >
      > To Be A Virginian, either by birth, marriage, adoption, or even
      > on one's mother's side, is an introduction to any state in the
      > Union, a passport to any foreign country, and a benediction
      > from
      > the Almighty God. --Anonymous
      > ----- Original Message -----
      > From: "Harry Smeltzer" <hjs21@...>
      > To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
      > Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2008 9:17 AM
      > Subject: RE: [TalkAntietam] Re: Lee and McClellan
      >
      >
      > > Gerry,
      > >
      > > Trying to focus here on one thing - when did Lee know Mac was
      > > in command of
      > > the Army in the field in Maryland.
      > >
      > > Harry
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > -----Original Message-----
      > > From: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
      > > [mailto:TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com] On
      > > Behalf Of G E Mayers
      > > Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2008 9:12 AM
      > > To: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
      > > Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] Re: Lee and McClellan
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > Harry;
      > >
      > > Mac himself seems to acknowledge this in his comments about
      > > fears
      > > of being shot or whatever for exceeding his orders. However,
      > > was
      > > he not given more or less carte blanche to go after Lee's
      > > ANVa
      > > and get it out of Washington? He did leave sufficient
      > > resources
      > > to man the defenses before taking the army out to the west in
      > > pursuit.
      > >
      > > Or could his actions be broadly construed as being within his
      > > authority as being in charge of the defenses of Washington,
      > > i.e.
      > > best defense is the offense?
      > >
      > > Yr. Obt. Svt.
      > > G E "Gerry" Mayers
      > >
      > > To Be A Virginian, either by birth, marriage, adoption, or
      > > even
      > > on one's mother's side, is an introduction to any state in
      > > the
      > > Union, a passport to any foreign country, and a benediction
      > > from
      > > the Almighty God. --Anonymous
      > > ----- Original Message -----
      > > From: "Harry Smeltzer" <hjs21@comcast.
      > > <mailto:hjs21%40comcast.net> net>
      > > To: <TalkAntietam@ <mailto:TalkAntietam%40yahoogroups.com>
      > > yahoogroups.com>
      > > Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2008 9:05 AM
      > > Subject: RE: [TalkAntietam] Re: Lee and McClellan
      > >
      > > <snip> There's a big difference, as the Times points out,
      > > between
      > > Mac being in
      > >> charge of the defenses and his taking an army into the
      > >> field.
      > >>
      > >> Harry
      > >>
      > >>
      > >>
      > >> -----Original Message-----
      > >> From: TalkAntietam@ <mailto:TalkAntietam%40yahoogroups.com>
      > > yahoogroups.com
      > >> [mailto:TalkAntietam@
      > >> <mailto:TalkAntietam%40yahoogroups.com>
      > > yahoogroups.com] On
      > >> Behalf Of Harry Smeltzer
      > >> Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2008 8:58 AM
      > >> To: TalkAntietam@ <mailto:TalkAntietam%40yahoogroups.com>
      > >> yahoogroups.com
      > >> Subject: RE: [TalkAntietam] Re: Lee and McClellan
      > >>
      > >>
      > >>
      > >> I know this is only one paper, but it was a pretty widely
      > >> read
      > >> one:
      > >>
      > >> On August 30, the NY Times reported the McClellan had been
      > >> appointed to
      > >> command of the Army of Virginia, but that Burniside was in
      > >> command of the
      > >> Army of the Potomac and Pope in command of the Army of the
      > >> Rappahannock.
      > >> See here:
      > >>
      > >> http://query.
      > >> <http://query.
      > >> <http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?_r=1>
      > > nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?_r=1>
      > >> nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?_r=1
      > >> <http://query.
      > >> <http://query.
      > > <http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?
      _r=1&res=9D07E0DA1330EF34BC48
      > >> nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?_r=1&res=9D07E0DA1330EF34BC48
      > >>> nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?_r=1&res=9D07E0DA1330EF34BC48
      > >> 50DFBE668389679FDE&oref=slogin>
      > >> &res=9D07E0DA1330EF34BC4850DFBE668389679FDE&oref=slogin
      > >>
      > >> On the 2nd, the Times reported that McClellan had no command
      > >> of
      > >> any
      > >> importance:
      > >>
      > >> http://query.
      > >> <http://query.
      > > <http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?
      res=9C0DE5D71F3AE43BBC4A53DFB
      > >> nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=9C0DE5D71F3AE43BBC4A53DFB
      > >> F>
      > >> nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=9C0DE5D71F3AE43BBC4A53DFBF
      > >> 668389679FDE
      > >>
      > >> On the 4th of Sept., it was reported that McClellan had been
      > >> placed in
      > >> command of the defenses of Washington:
      > >>
      > >> http://query.
      > >> <http://query.
      > > <http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?
      res=9B07E3D81F3FEE34BC4C53DFB
      > >> nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=9B07E3D81F3FEE34BC4C53DFB
      > >> F>
      > >> nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=9B07E3D81F3FEE34BC4C53DFBF
      > >> 668389679FDE
      > >>
      > >> On the 6th, McClellan's GO No. 1 state again that he is in
      > >> command of the
      > >> fortifications:
      > >>
      > >> http://query.
      > >> <http://query.
      > > <http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?
      res=9C0DE5D71F3AE43BBC4A53DFB
      > >> nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=9C0DE5D71F3AE43BBC4A53DFB
      > >> F>
      > >> nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=9C0DE5D71F3AE43BBC4A53DFBF
      > >> 668389679FDE
      > >>
      > >> Also on the 6th, this article explains that Mac is ONLY in
      > >> charge of the
      > >> defenses, and definitely WILL NOT be taking an army into the
      > >> field:
      > >>
      > >> http://query.
      > >> <http://query.
      > > <http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?
      res=9F0DE1D81F3FEE34BC4E53DFB
      > >> nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=9F0DE1D81F3FEE34BC4E53DFB
      > >> F>
      > >> nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=9F0DE1D81F3FEE34BC4E53DFBF
      > >> 668389679FDE
      > >>
      > >> On the 12th is the first report from "General McClellan's
      > >> Army", reporting
      > >> it to be no further from Washington than Poolesville.
      > >> Interestingly, this
      > >> article also points out that Miles should evacuate Harper's
      > >> Ferry, as it is
      > >> untenable:
      > >>
      > >> http://query.
      > >> <http://query.
      > > <http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?
      res=9C01E4D71F3AE43BBC4A52DFB
      > >> nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=9C01E4D71F3AE43BBC4A52DFB
      > >> F>
      > >> nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=9C01E4D71F3AE43BBC4A52DFBF
      > >> 668389679FDE
      > >>
      > >> Harry
      > >>
      > >> -----Original Message-----
      > >> From: TalkAntietam@ <mailto:TalkAntietam%40yahoogroups.com>
      > >> yahoogroups.com
      > >> [mailto:TalkAntietam@
      > >> <mailto:TalkAntietam%40yahoogroups.com>
      > >> yahoogroups.com] On
      > >> Behalf Of William H Keene
      > >> Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2008 8:33 AM
      > >> To: TalkAntietam@ <mailto:TalkAntietam%40yahoogroups.com>
      > >> yahoogroups.com
      > >> Subject: [TalkAntietam] Re: Lee and McClellan
      > >>
      > >> --- In TalkAntietam@ <mailto:TalkAntietam%40yahoogroups.com>
      > >> yahoogroups.com, "Harry Smeltzer" <hjs21@> wrote:
      > >>> ...
      > >>> Can anyone show that Lee did know, even by the 9th of
      > >>> September, that
      > >>> McClellan was in command of the Union army then in the
      > >>> field
      > >>> in
      > >> Maryland?
      > >>
      > >> It was very well reported in newspapers from August 30 on
      > >> that
      > >> McCellan
      > >> was in command of the US forces in and around Washington. I
      > >> cant show
      > >> that Lee read those newspapers, but it doesnt seem far
      > >> fetched
      > >> to think
      > >> he did.
      > >>
      > >> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      > >>
      > >>
      > >>
      > >>
      > >>
      > >> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      > >>
      > >>
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      > >
      > >
      >
    • Show all 53 messages in this topic