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

Re: Hooker's orders at Chattanooga

Expand Messages
  • bobaldrich2001
    Will, Another facet of this whole Hooker issue is that, according to the OR, the signal corps officer serving Hooker was censured by his commander for not
    Message 1 of 267 , Jul 31, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      Will,

      Another facet of this whole Hooker issue is that, according to the
      OR, the signal corps officer serving Hooker was censured by his
      commander for not having equipment that could transmit signals at
      night. There is a transmission (undated) from November 25 (Vol. 31,
      Pt. 2, p. 113) that reads:

      [Captain WILLARD,

      Aide-de-Camp:]

      CAPTAIN: We have no communication with General Hooker. The two
      officers were ordered to join General Hooker on the mountain, and are
      on their way there now. Will have communication very soon, I think. I
      will send message as soon as open.

      Respectfully,

      JESSE MERRILLINOIS

      As a result, apparently, it seems that Hooker never got a message
      dated 7:00 a.m. of the 25th, which reads:

      NOVEMBER 25, [1863]-7 a.m.

      Major-General HOOKER:

      The general commanding desires that you immediately move forward, in
      accordance with instructions of last evening.

      J. J. REYNOLDS,

      Major-General, and Chief of Staff.


      Then later:

      [Indorsement.]

      Communication has just been opened with Lookout, and message to
      General Hooker sent.

      MERRILLINOIS

      And at 9:20 Hooker reports:

      WHITE HOUSE, LOOKOUT MOUNTAIN, November 25, 1863-9.20 a.m.

      Major-General REYNOLDS:

      Have regiment on Summertown road; one on summit of Lookout. Enemy
      reported picketing Chattanooga Creek. They appear to be burning camps
      in valley. I await orders.

      JOSEPH HOOKER,

      Major-General, Commanding.

      It looks as though even at 9:20 a.m. Hooker hadn't yet advanced, or
      even learned it was time for him to advance, the main body of his
      troops to Summertown Road, as he was instructed to do by the 7 a.m.
      message read in conjunction with the 9:30 pm message from the night
      before. The point being that Hooker has already gotten a late start
      on "advanc[ing] as early as possible in the morning into Chattanooga
      Valley and seiz[ing] and hold[ing] the Summertown road and co-operat
      [ing] with the Fourteenth Corps by supporting its right." So when he
      got the 10:10 a.m. order to "Leave Carlin's brigade at Summertown
      road, to rejoin Palmer. Move with the remainder of your force, except
      two regiments to hold Lookout Mountain, on the Rossville road toward
      Missionary Ridge, looking well to you right flank." Hooker's main
      force was starting from somewhere on Lookout Mountain, instead of
      from the valley, at Summertown Road. By the way, I'm having trouble
      locating Summertown Road on Shotgun's map. Does anyone know of an
      online map that shows this road?

      I don't know exactly what follows from all this, but it seems
      interesting in itself, and possibly relevant to other issues.

      Bob Aldrich

      --- In civilwarwest@y..., "wh_keene" <wh_keene@y...> wrote:
      > --- In civilwarwest@y..., "josepharose" <josepharose@y...> wrote:
      > > It is not my supposition; Grant's memoirs state: "At twelve
      o'clock
      > > at night, when all was quiet, I began to give orders for the next
      > > day, and sent a dispatch to Willcox to encourage Burnside."
      >
      >
      > But it is your supposition that Grant is referring to the set of
      > orders which we have been talking about.
      >
      >
      > > The wording of the 9:30 message to Hooker, "General Grant has
      just
      > > directed that General Sherman move along Missionary Ridge to-
      morrow
      > > with his force, while our force advances to the front, co-
      operating
      > > with Sherman and compelling the enemy to show whether he occupies
      > > his rifle-pits in our front," also doesn't mention an attack up
      the
      > > ridge (which is a bigger job than just seeing if the enemy is
      still
      > > in the pits).
      >
      > But it does mention that Thomas will be cooperating with Sherman.
      > Besides I thought it was your position that Grant never intended to
      > attack the ridge.
    • Aurelie1999@aol.com
      In a message dated 8/8/02 4:25:02 PM, josepharose@yahoo.com writes:
      Message 267 of 267 , Aug 8, 2002
      • 0 Attachment
        In a message dated 8/8/02 4:25:02 PM, josepharose@... writes:

        << Now, which of the two men, Wood or Grant, had been bending the truth
        (if not breaking it)? I think that the evidence heavily points to
        Grant. Because I think that he did so, I question his integrity,
        here and elsewhere. >>

        Mr. Rose,

        It appears to me that you cherry pick data to support your presumption that
        Grant was a worthless fool. Grant's contemporaries - even enemies - praised
        his integrity to the max. So how come that by standing in the dim hindsight
        of 150 years you are able to see what they did not see?

        Finally please explain why Thomas is incapable of standing on his own merit
        and can only be praised by faulting Grant?

        Connie Boone
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.