Re: Jefferson Davis and Joe Johnston
- --- In email@example.com, "carlw4514" <carlw4514@y...>
> Can't find my source on this, Dave, but doubts about PembertonI'm aware of all that, Carl, but it wouldn't have had an effect on
> apparently started after Beauregard took over Charleston SC
> defenses; Pemberton was in charge of them prior to B. and he, B.,
> was pretty critical of what P. had done to that point. I'm sure
> this criticism circulated in the CSA and got to Davis.
> -I hate it when I can't find a source. I'm thinking it was not
> circulated in anything official like the OR's, though.
Davis's thinking; he thought enough of Pemberton to promote him to MG
during that Charleston stint.
Davis put Pemberton there for his administrative (bureaucratic)
abilities, not military ones.
Besides, Davis was going to throw away anything Beauregard said,
period, due to the animosity between the two.
By all local civilian accounts, October 1862 to April 1863 was a good
time for Mississippi in Pemberton's department.
As long as it remained a non-combat situation, Pemberton was OK.
- In a message dated 7/10/2003 8:51:31 AM Eastern Standard Time, slippymississippi@... writes:
> Is there any evidence that Sherman had beef with Logan? PoliticalFollowing Atlanta, Logan took leave to do some politicing in order for supporting Lincoln's election coming up in November. He had finished that and was on his way back when Grant sent him the wire to proceed to Nashville and take over command from Thomas. After that order was rescinded, Logan went back and joined Sherman. If Sherman had a beef with Logan so much and did not respect his ability, why did he have Logan appointed the final commander of the Army of the Tennessee. Granted, a year earlier, he had Howard replace McPherson rather than Logan, but not only was Howard a WP graduate, he outranked Logan. I do not think anything personal was involved in Sherman's decision making in this case.
> general or not, he was one of the most effective division commanders
> under Grant during the Vicksburg campaign. It's hard to
> Sherman would relish the loss of a good general.