92

ULYSSES S. GRANT

[1862

set at rest all doubts, if any still existed, of the permanent position of Kentucky in the civil conflict and it deprived the Confederates of a large part of Tennessee, a fruitful ground for recruits and supplies. "The people were terrified and some of the troops were disheartened," wrote Albert Sidney Johnston to Davis. "The blow was most disastrous and al

most without remedy.'

When the Governor of Tennessee

proclaimed that the troops must evacuate Nashville and adjourned the legislature to Memphis, panic seized upon the people, and disorder, turbulence and rapine ensued.2

The magnitude of the victory was fully appreciated at the North. "The underpinning of the rebellion seems to be knocked out from under it," wrote Chase. "The almost universal feeling is that the rebellion is knocked on the head," said Oliver Wendell Holmes. The capture of Fort Donelson was regarded in England as a victory of high importance, and greatly helped the cause of the North.3

The victory was due to Grant. The more clearly one studies this campaign, the more firmly is one convinced that the great general longed for by the North had appeared. His quickness to guess the enemy's design and the predicament in which they stood; his rapidity in forming a plan and putting its several elements in operation; his ability to conceal his disappointment and alarm at the disaster to his right wing and his grim determination to snatch some advantage from it here surely we must recognize the stamp of military genius. It is true that when he gave the order to charge the enemy he could not be certain of a complete success and that he would have liked the aid of the gunboats. It may be, as

1 March 18, O. R., VII, 259.

2 Reports and statements of Forrest, Floyd, and one other in O. R., VII, 427-432; Wyeth, Forrest, 73; John Wooldridge, Nashville, 193. 3 III, 598.

4 The gunboats took no part in the battle of Feb. 15.

CH. III]

ULYSSES S. GRANT

93

1

Ropes has suggested, that he only did the obvious thing; but how many generals in the Northern Army at that time. would have acted as he did and turned a defeat into so complete a victory? After Smith had carried the trench and the position on the right had been recovered, Grant must have expected demoralization to follow in the enemy's ranks; finally Buckner's note left no room for doubt. In his reply, which by an allusion to the initials of his name made him known henceforward as Unconditional Surrender Grant, he showed that in the hour of success he would exact the whole loaf: this attitude amid the amenities of our civil war was the mark of a masterful character. Five days after the surrender he wrote to his close friend, E. B. Washburne: "Our volunteers fought a battle that would figure well with many of those fought in Europe where large standing armies are maintained. I feel very grateful to you for having placed me in the position to have had the honor of commanding such an army and at such a time. I only trust that I have not nor will not disappoint. you." 2

Halleck and McClellan 3 were too good theoretical soldiers not to understand that Donelson was a signal victory and they treated Grant in a manner that savors of professional jealousy. "General Grant left his command without any authority and went to Nashville," telegraphed Halleck to McClellan. "I can get no returns, no reports, no information of any kind from him. Satisfied with his victory, he sits down and enjoys it without any regard to the future. I am worn-out and tired with this neglect and inefficiency." "Do not hesitate to arrest Grant at once if the good of the service requires it," was McClellan's reply, "and place C. F. Smith in command." Next day Halleck telegrapheď: "A

1 Ropes, II, 36.

2 Grant's private letters, 4.

'McClellan was still in command of all of the armies of the United States.

94

VICTORY OF DONELSON

[1862

rumor has just reached me that since the taking of Fort Donelson General Grant has resumed his former bad habits [habits of drink]. . . . I do not deem it advisable to arrest him at present but have placed General Smith in command of the expedition up the Tennessee." 1 These despatches were a cruel injustice to Grant. Since his victory his conduct had been proper, discreet and orderly.

Important as was the taking of Donelson, the full fruits of the victory were not garnered forthwith. Celerity was needed and Grant was the one general of the North who had shown that he could move quickly and fight an army effectively. If, instead of being unjustly criticised by Halleck, he had received the consideration that was his due and had been recommended for the active command, he could undoubtedly, if keeping himself at his best level of personal efficiency, have maintained the permanent occupation of Kentucky and Tennessee and taken Vicksburg and Chattanooga, thereby cutting off from the Confederacy a region that was considerably productive of troops and supplies.

The gloom at Richmond reflected the real dimensions of the disaster. On February 22, six days after the fall of Donelson, the provisional gave way to the permanent government of the Confederate States and Davis was inaugurated President for a term of six years. Amid the profound depression, "at the darkest hour of our struggle," as he phrased it, Davis, pale and emaciated from illness and grief, delivered his inaugural address, in the course of which he admitted that we have recently met with serious disasters." Adversity drove the Confederates to extreme acts. Six days after his inauguration, Davis, by authority of an Act of Congress passed in secret session, proclaimed martial law in the city of 1 March 3, 4, O. R., VII, 679–682.

2 There had been Union victories besides Henry and Donelson, III, 581.

Сн. ІІІ]

MCCLELLAN DALLIES

95

Richmond and the adjoining country for ten miles around and declared the suspension therein of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus. Seven weeks later, in response to his recommendation, a rigorous Conscription act was passed.1

Oh, for a Grant in command of the Army of the Potomac to take quick advantage of this demoralization in the capital of the Confederacy! And indeed it seemed for the moment as if McClellan would be spurred to action, as is evident from two of his despatches to Halleck of February 20: "If the force in West can take Nashville or even hold its own for the present, I hope to have Richmond and Norfolk in from three to four weeks." "The rebels hold firm at Manassas. In less than two weeks I shall move the Army of the Potomac, and hope to be in Richmond soon after you are in Nashville.” 2 On February 24, Nashville was occupied by the Union troops. McClellan had a wonderful opportunity. In command of 150,000 men superior so far as the average raw material of the rank and file is concerned to the armies of most European countries, with roads to traverse no worse than many of those in the south of Italy over which the Sardinian army had marched in 1860, — roads no more difficult of passage than were the roads in Tennessee, on which the Union troops had marched and were still marching to good purpose-he should unquestionably have struck at Joseph E. Johnston at Manassas. He had three men to the enemy's one and, though the outcome of a great battle may never be predicted with certainty, especially one with a McClellan pitted against a Joseph E. Johnston, nevertheless the chances were decidedly with the Union Army. Moreover Johnston was about

1 April 16.

2 O. R., VII, 640. He recovered from his illness about the middle of January, 1862. Edward Dicey, III, 604.

96

GRANT AND HALLECK

[1862 to retire from Manassas. He began his preparations on February 22, started the movement itself on March 7 and four days later had his army safely on the south bank of the Rappahannock river. Here had been an excellent opportunity "for inflicting damage," to use McClellan's own words, on a large army that was withdrawing "in the face of a powerful adversary." 1

Let us now return to Grant during the days following the capture of Fort Donelson. In a private letter to Washburne of March 22, he gave an account of his misunderstanding with Halleck. 'After getting into Donelson," he wrote, "General Halleck did not hear from me for near two weeks. It was about the same time before I heard from him. I was writing every day and sometimes as often as three times a day. Reported every move and change, the condition of my troops, etc. Not getting these, General Halleck very justly became dissatisfied, and was, as I have since learned, sending me daily reprimands. Not receiving them, they lost their sting. When one did reach me, not seeing the justice of it, I retorted and asked to be relieved. Three telegrams passed in this way, each time ending by my requesting to be relieved. All is now understood however and I feel assured that General Halleck is fully satisfied. In fact he wrote me a letter saying that I could not be relieved, and otherwise quite complimentary." 2 But in his article in the Century Magazine (February, 1885) and in his Personal Memoirs,

10. R., V, 51. Authorities: O. R., V, VII, X, Pt. II; B. & L., I; Grant, I; III; Ropes, II; Grant's private letters; Life of General Rawlins, J. H. Wilson MS., kindly lent to me by General Wilson. Since the use that I made of the MS. this book has been published. Neal Pub. Co., 1916; N. & H., V; Bruce Milt. Hist. Soc., VII; Swinton; T. L. Livermore; Hosmer's Appeal; Johnston; McClellan; Webb. For a characterization of Grant, III, 594.

2 Grant's private letters, 8.