Re: Orders to occupy Paducah
- "Polk's move was certainly impolitic"...that's a
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "josepharose" <josepharose@y...>
> --- In email@example.com, huddleston.r@c... wrote:
> > >Yet, there's no question that Polk beat the Federals into
> Kentucky, >correct?
> > >> P.S. Grant may also have been wrong about how closely he beat
> >>the Rebels to Paducah, as I don't think that their arrival was
> nearly so
> > >> imminent.
> > Of all the stupid moves made by either side in the Civil War,
> this "preemptive strike" ranks right behind the attack on Fort
> Sumter: all it did make certain that Kentucky not only remained
> loyal but also contributed large numbers to the Union Army.
> > --
> > Take care,
> > Bob
> Polk's move was certainly impolitic.
> Even though Fremont appeared to have been thinking of a unilateral
> move into Kentucky himself, he should be given all due credit for
> quickly ordering Grant to occupy Paducah (and for mandating the
> establishment of Fort Holt). It would be wrong of Grant if he had
> tried to take the credit from Fremont by stating that he twice told
> him of the proposed move and had received no response.
- I found it. OR Vol 7 Pg 571 McCellan to Halleck and Buell " A deserter just
in from the rebels, says that .... he heard officers say that Beauregaed was
under orders to go to
Kentucky with fifteen regiments from the Army of the Potomac.(Jan.29, 1862).
Halleck replied on Jan 30. "Your telegraph regarding Beauregard is received.
General Grant and Commodore Foote will be ordered to immediately advance, and
to reduce and hold Fort Henry, on the Tennessee river.
I remain, Sir, your most humble servant.