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

Re: Jefferson Davis and Joe Johnston

Expand Messages
  • Dave Smith
    ... I m aware of all that, Carl, but it wouldn t have had an effect on Davis s thinking; he thought enough of Pemberton to promote him to MG during that
    Message 1 of 41 , Jul 1 4:27 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, "carlw4514" <carlw4514@y...>
      wrote:
      > Can't find my source on this, Dave, but doubts about Pemberton
      > 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.

      I'm aware of all that, Carl, but it wouldn't have had an effect on
      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.

      Dave
    • GnrlJEJohnston@aol.com
      ... Following 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
      Message 41 of 41 , Jul 11 7:32 AM
      • 0 Attachment
        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? Political
        > general or not, he was one of the most effective division commanders
        > under Grant during the Vicksburg campaign. It's hard to
        > imagine
        > Sherman would relish the loss of a good general.

        Following 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 After that order was rescinded, Logan went back and joined Sherman.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.

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