-
McClellan and Halleck at War: The Struggle for the Union War Effort in the West, November 1861–March 1862
- The Kent State University Press
- Chapter
- Additional Information
mcclellan and halleck at war 133 McClellan and Halleck at War The struggle for Control of the Union war Effort in the west, November 1861–March 1862 ethan s. rafuse on november 1, 1861, President abraham lincoln appointed thirty-four-yearold George brinton McClellan general in chief of the United states army. The move was not unexpected. McClellan had known for some time that brevet lt. Gen. Winfield scott’s twenty-year tenure as commanding general was coming to an end. He also knew that lincoln was considering no other man for scott’s replacement. Yet near the end of the meeting in which he informed McClellan of his promotion, lincoln felt compelled to wonder out loud if overseeing the organization and operations of thewestern armies and thearmyof the Potomac might be too much for any one man to handle. according to lincoln’s secretary, John Hay, McClellan quietly assured the president, “I can do it all.”1 Much has been written about McClellan’s tenure as commanding general 133 E Civil War History, Vol. XlIX no. 1 © 2003 by The Kent state University Press earlier versions of this essay were presented to the 2000 Mid-america Conference on History in lawrence, Kansas, and the 2002 annual Meeting of the society for Military History in Madison, Wisconsin. The author would like to express his gratitude to session commentators William G. Piston and William b. Feis for their helpful critiques, and to Charles r. bowery Jr., Phillip Cuccia, and the two anonymous readers forCivil warhistorywho read laterdrafts of the essayand provided many useful suggestions for its improvement. 1. McClellan to his wife, october 19, 30, 31, 1861, in stephen W. sears, ed., The Civil war Papers of George B. McClellan: selected Correspondence, 1860–1865 (new York:Ticknor and Fields, 1989), 109, 112, 114; John Hay, letters of John hayand Extracts from Diary, 3vols. (Washington:[n.p.], 1908), 1:50. 134 ethan s. rafuse 2. In the most thorough biography of the general, stephen W. sears devotes only nine pages to McClellan’s dealings with the western theater as general in chief. sears, George B. McClellan: The young Napoleon (new York: Ticknor and Fields, 1988), 129–30, 138–39, 148, 151–54. The most recent book-length study of McClellan, by Thomas J. rowland, devotes less than a paragraph to the subject. rowland, George B. McClellan and Civil war history: in the shadow of Grant and sherman (Kent, ohio: Kent state University Press, 1998), 87. For other examples of the cursory treatment the general’s involvement in thewestern theater has received, see Peters. Michie, General McClellan (new York: d. appleton and Co., 1901), 153–55, 158–63; William starr Myers, a study in Personality :General George Brinton McClellan (newYork:d. appleton-Century Co., 1934), 246–47;Clarence edward McCartney, little Mac: The life of General George B. McClellan (Philadelphia: dorrance and Co., 1940), 118, 121–27; and Warren W. Hassler, Jr., General George B. McClellan: shield of the Union (baton rouge: louisiana state University Press, 1957), 39–40. The subject is completely ignored in Hamilton J. eckenrode and bryan Conrad, George B. McClellan: The Man who saved the Union (Chapel Hill, n.C.:The University of north Carolina Press, 1941), and James Havelock Campbell, McClellan: a vindication of the Military Career of General George B. McClellan: a lawyer’s Brief (new York: The neale Publishing Co., 1916). 3. For two critiques of the tremendous amount of attention historians have devoted to McClellan ’s personality in particular, see Joseph l. Harsh, “on the McClellan-Go-round,” Civil war history 19 (June 1973): 101–18, and rowland, George B. McClellan and Civil war history, 45–75. For a prime example of the tendency of scholars of Civil War command relations to place a heavy emphasis on personalities, which goes so far as to explicitly employ psychoanalysis in its effort to explain McClellan, see Joseph T. Glatthaar, Partners in Command: The relationships Between leaders in the Civil war (new York: Free Press, 1994), esp. 237–42. of the United states army from november 1861 to March 1862. The deterioration of the general’s relationship with lincoln, his clashes with congressional republicans, and the inactivity of the army of the Potomac during this period have all attracted much attention from historians seeking to understand the Union war effort. This essay will examine an aspect of McClellan’s endeavors as commanding general that has yet to receive the same level of scrutiny: his efforts to direct the...