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

Re: [TalkAntietam] Re: Lee and McClellan

Expand Messages
  • G E Mayers
    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
    Message 1 of 53 , Sep 18, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      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@...>
      To: <TalkAntietam@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@yahoogroups.com
      > [mailto:TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com] On
      > Behalf Of Harry Smeltzer
      > Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2008 8:58 AM
      > To: TalkAntietam@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.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?_r=1>
      > nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?_r=1
      > <http://query.
      > <http://query.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.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.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.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.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.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]
      >
      >
    • eighth_conn_inf
      Looking at Brown pp. 241 and 325 LT Miner occupied SL on 9/3 and sent his last message on 9/5. See also OR s vol. 19/1 p. 117 et seq, and 19/2 p. 184/186. If
      Message 53 of 53 , Sep 19, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        Looking at Brown pp. 241 and 325 LT Miner occupied SL on 9/3 and sent
        his last message on 9/5. See also OR's vol. 19/1 p. 117 et seq, and
        19/2 p. 184/186. If anyone finds anything more re messages to/from
        Miner, pls let me know.

        Larry F.


        --- In TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com, "G E Mayers" <gerry1952@...>
        wrote:
        >
        > They might have either successfully gotten a message off about
        > shutting down or, since IIRC according to Willard Brown's book,
        > they were told to keep reporting as long as possible, were caught
        > before they could shut down?
        >
        > 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: "eighth_conn_inf" <eighth_conn_inf@...>
        > To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
        > Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2008 5:27 PM
        > Subject: [TalkAntietam] Re: Lee and McClellan -- The Baltimore
        > Sun
        >
        >
        > Now there is a twist. What if just after the Rebs took Sugarloaf,
        > a
        > Union station closer to DC signaled to Sugarloaf station re
        > McClellan. But I think that the SL Station told everyone that
        > they
        > were shutting down since the Rebs were close.
        >
        > Larry F.
        >
        > --- In TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com, "G E Mayers" <gerry1952@>
        > wrote:
        > >
        > > This begs another question... how "leaky" was the Federal
        > > communications system? IIRC, the Confederates captured Sugar
        > > Loaf
        > > Mountain, where there was a Federal signal station, not too
        > > long
        > > upon their entrance into Maryland. If there were any messages
        > > to
        > > the Signal Station implying Mac was "back in the saddle", would
        > > not those messages have made their way to Lee?
        > >
        > > 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 2:10 PM
        > > Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] Re: Lee and McClellan -- The
        > > Baltimore Sun
        > >
        > >
        > > >I don't know, Teej. It seems to me any of these stories would
        > > >be originating in DC. So, we would have telegraphs from DC to
        > > >Baltimore, or DC to New York. I don't think Stuart had any of
        > > >his cavalrymen along the lines between those places.
        > > >
        > > > Ahh, coeds.
        > > >
        > > > Harry
        > > > ----- Original Message -----
        > > > From: Teej
        > > > To: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
        > > > Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2008 11:38 AM
        > > > Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] Re: Lee and McClellan -- The
        > > > Baltimore Sun
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > Harry wrote:
        > > >
        > > > Also, how exactly do we think Lee got his hands on these
        > > > papers?
        > > > They were IIRC all printed in the cities of their origin -
        > > > how
        > > > did they get
        > > > to and through the Confederate pickets and vedettes?
        > > >
        > > > One thought to consider. How did the newspapers get their
        > > > stories from their journalists? Telegraph. While I know it's
        > > > a
        > > > stretch, isn't it possible that if Lee had access to any of
        > > > these news items he got them from the wires via his
        > > > fun-loving
        > > > cavalry chieftan?
        > > >
        > > > BTW, Harry, the next time I take you to UNC it will be in
        > > > the
        > > > dead of winter and all those pretty coeds you admired so much
        > > > last time will be wearing OVERCOATS! There, I feel sooooooo
        > > > much better.
        > > >
        > > > Teej
        > > >
        > > > Harry
        > > >
        > > > -----Original Message-----
        > > > From: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
        > > > [mailto:TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com] On
        > > > Behalf Of William H Keene
        > > > Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2008 10:08 AM
        > > > To: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
        > > > Subject: [TalkAntietam] Re: Lee and McClellan -- The
        > > > Baltimore
        > > > Sun
        > > >
        > > > I've been looking at the Baltimore Sun articles from the
        > > > time
        > > > in
        > > > question. Through the Boston Public Library online I can
        > > > access a
        > > > database called 'America's Historical Newspapers.' One has
        > > > to
        > > > have a a
        > > > BPL card tp get in the way I did, but I wonder if others can
        > > > access the
        > > > same thing through their own libraries.
        > > >
        > > > On the 4th the Sun reported that McCellan had "assumed
        > > > command
        > > > of the
        > > > entire federal forces in and around Washington."
        > > >
        > > > On the 8th the Sun reported that "McClellan will take the
        > > > field
        > > > immediately."
        > > >
        > > > [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]
        > > >
        > > >
        > >
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.