GDG- war councils

Wed Dec 6 14:05:06 CST 2006

J.D.,

	<<In reviewing Hancock and Sedgwick's testimony to the Joint
Committee on the
Battle of Gettysburg, when asked about the July 2 council, Hancock makes
no
mention of Meade wanting to retreat.  When one of the congressional
panel
members asked Sedgwick whether Meade had plans to retreat from
Gettysburg,
his answer was "I do not think he ever contemplated a retreat."

	It may be that, since Hancock's comments and Sedgwick's staff
chief
McMahon's comments to Kelly came long after the war (around 1880) about
Meade, too much water had gone over the dam by then, and not much
credibility is being given to what was being said at that late date
about
Meade's preferences at the time of the July 2 meeting.

	Sedgwick did tell the committee that Meade was apprehensive
about his
flanks, and that essentially is what Hancock said to Kelly with a little
extra embellishment about "Gettysburg is no place to fight a battle in."

	Since the statements both men made to the JCCCW were
contemporaneous while
those made to Kelly came much later, it may well be that the former
would be
seen as trumping the latter.>>

Regards, Tom

Hi,
Tom, I think we need to keep it in mind that when the JCCW testimonies
took place most of the generals interviewed were still under Meade's
command and would continue to serve under his command.  It is not a good
idea to get on the wrong side of your commander.  They may well have
determined that it was wiser to leave embarrassing moments out of their
testimony for the sake of their careers, as well as the successful
prosecution of the war.
The officers, I assume, were familiar with Sickles' charges against
Meade, and, I think there is no doubt that most of their testimonies
would be strongly in defense of their commander, and not in support of
Sickles.

I do not think Hancock had any reason to embellish on the details of the
2 July council.  He wanted Kelly, at least, to know the truth.
With Kelly working on the council picture and the subject of Gettysburg
coming into the public focus, he may have been somewhat frustrated at
the perception of Meade as the resolute commander determined to stay and
fight it out.  Hancock, being human, could have decided to at least tell
Kelly that Meade's role was not quite as it appeared to be.  That
Hancock felt his comments did much to stiffen backbones at the council
to stay and fight.  There is really no reason, in my mind, for Hancock
to have simply made up Meade's comment about Gettysburg being no place
to fight a battle in.  There are too many others who confirm Meade's
statement.
Hancock can easily be credited with a more important role than Meade in
the Union success at Gettysburg, yet, at that time, Meade was getting
all the credit.  Today, and in recent years, Hancock's role has been
dominant in producing the victory.  Look at the title of Dave Schultz's
latest work, "The Battle between the Farm Lanes, Hancock saves the Union
Center: Gettysburg, July 2, 1863".

Slocum's memory of Meade's statement at the 2 July council is very
similar to Hancock's to Kelly.
>From a 19 Feb, 1883 letter to Doubleday, "The opinion of each corps
commander was asked, commencing with the junior in rank.  A majority
were of the opinion that we should remain in the position then held by
us.  When each officer had expressed his views, Gen. Meade said: "Well,
gentlemen, the question is settled.  We will remain here, but I wish to
say that I consider this no place to fight a battle."  I do not believe
any officer who was present at this important meeting has forgotten Gen.
Meade's words." (Meade, "Life and Letters of MG G.G.M.", Vol II, pp
398).
I do not believe that Slocum was aware of Hancock's statement to Kelly,
as Kelly's last meeting with Slocum occurred prior to Hancock's
revelation to Kelly.

Doubleday related that there were several other witnesses who heard that
statement, but were adverse to making any comments.  But, he did mention
MAJ J. B. Fassitt of Birney's staff who commented on Meade's statement.

Butterfield, in his JCCW testimony, testified that, "After the council
finished, General Meade arose from the table, and remarked that in his
opinion, Gettysburg was no place to fight a battle; but it was settled
to remain there, and the council dispersed." (Hyde, "The Union Generals
Speak", pp 257).
Butterfield's recollection of Meade's statement is very similar to
Slocum's and Hancock's.

Meade's statement did not specifically include the word "retreat", so
the officers could honestly testify that Meade did not mention retreat,
although withdrawal was clearly an option they were asked, by Meade, via
Butterfield, to consider.  If withdrawal was not an option to Meade, it
would not have been included as an option, only the present line or and
adjusted line would have been considered.
The first question was, "1. Under existing circumstances, is it
advisable for this army to remain in its present position, or to retire
to another nearer its base of supply?" (OR 27, Vol I, pp 73).
Meade, in his first JCCW testimony, made no mention of the retirement
option, or that a vote was taken.  He presented it more as a discussion
of the condition of the army, and whether to adjust the current line or
remain on the current line.

Pleasonton stated that he was not at the council because he had been
ordered by Meade around 1700 "to collect what cavalry and artillery he
could proceed with it to the rear, and take up a position to cover the
retreat of the army." (L&L, pp 396).  Pleasonton was not at the council,
he was a corps commander, and if not for his stated reason, why was he
absent?

Lincoln's Navy secretary, Gideon Welles, provides us with an interesting
opinion of Meade, via his take on Sickles, which, I think is relevant to
this discussion.
>From Welles' diary, "Allowance must always be made for Sickles when he
is interested, but his representations confirm my impression of Meade,
who means well, and, in his true position, that of a secondary
commander, is more of a man than Sickles represents him,--can obey
orders and carry out orders better than he can originate and give them,
hesitates, defers to others, has not strength, will and self reliance."

VR, Rick Schaus

----------------------------------------------------------------
You may unsubscribe by going to
http://mailman.arthes.com/mailman/listinfo/gettysburg

You can add yourself to the GDG map at:
http://www.frappr.com/gettysburgdiscussiongroup

View archived posts from May 2004 -  present at
http://mailman.arthes.com/pipermail/gettysburg/