GDG- doubleday

Wed Feb 7 10:12:53 CST 2007

Tom,

Read his testimony to the JCCCW from Mar(?) '64.  Doubleday seemed very 
conscious of being a Republican and abolitionist surrounded by McClellan 
Democrats.  Add to that Meade's lingering resentment over the lack of 
support from Doubleday's division at Fredricksburg: while the reserves were 
struggling in the breach of Jackson's line, Doubleday's division was in a 
defensive posture against Pelham and his gun.

At 05:38 AM 2/7/2007 -0800, you wrote:
>Esteemed GDG Member Contributes:
>
>
>Chet,
>   This is wonderful material. I will be sure to include thanks to you and 
> Jim Cameron in my book.
>   I intend to have an entire chapter in my book about Doubleday's strong 
> abolitionist and anti-secessionist feelings and actions and how those 
> clashed with many of his fellow officers.
>   Can you suggest a source for the political aspects of the Union army?
>
>Chet Diestel <chetd1 at comcast.net> wrote:
>   Esteemed GDG Member Contributes:
>
>
>
>Esteemed GDG Member James Cameron Contributes:
>
>1. There are a couple of often repeated anecdotes of his ordering his
>arriving troops into battle, but the early part of the action is dominated
>byReynolds and his death. After that, most of the attention given the Union
>command seems to shift to Howard. This isn't, of course, surprising, given
>that Howard was in command of the field after Reynolds was killed, but
>it does tend to take the spotlight off Doubleday.
>
>I am fairly sure that Howard gave no orders to Doubleday for six hours.
>What do you know?
>It took Howard a long time to actually ride over to the 1st Corps line
>and see Doubleday in person, but the two were in communication before that,
>and Doubleday does indicate receiving orders from Howard.
>
>2. Early reports from the field, from both Buford and Hancock, tended
>to confirm his already low opinion of Doubleday, and he lost no time acting
>to replace him.
>
>Can you help me find these two reports "from both Buford and Hancock"?
>Thanks very much for your interest.
>Buford's message that I was referring to was actually to Pleasonton, not
>Meade, although I think it's reasonable to assume that Meade would have been
>informed of its contents. This was the 3:20 pm message in which he wrote
>"In my opinion, there seems to be no directing person." He appended a P.S.,
>"We need help now."
>This message is commonly taken as more a criticism of Howard's command
>of the field than of Doubleday, and perhaps that's how Buford intended it.
>But with Doubleday the other Corps commander on the scene, I could easily
>see Meade viewing this as critical of him as well. Just my opinion, though.
>(And the thought just occurred to me - which I hesitate to push too far,
>because there's really nothing concrete to base it on - that I suppose this
>could even be construed as critical of Slocum for not coming up in person to
>assume command.)
>
>The Hancock report I'm referring to is his 5:25 pm message to Meade from
>the field, which included the comment that "Howard says that Doubleday's
>command gave way." And Howard himself sent Meade a 5:00 PM message which
>while not overtly critical of Doubleday, gave the impression that the 1st
>Corps was forced to retire, as opposed to the 11th Corps being ordered back.
>
>None of these messages were the sort of thing that was going to boost
>Meade's confidence in Doubleday. Taken as a whole, they were all he needed
>to pull the trigger on replacing him.
>
>Jim Cameron
>
>The decision to remove Doubleday had roots that ran far deeper and with a
>history extending far past his actions (or inaction), real or imagined, on
>one hot July day on a Pennsylvania battlefield. Part of it certainly
>involves the pro-McClellan and anti-McClellan fractions that still held sway
>over certain members of the AOP high command and would not actively settle
>down until the arrival of Grant the following year.
>Indeed, the very scene that greeted Hancock and then Meade should have
>worked against the removal of Doubleday, messages (with pointed negative
>remarks, intended or not, aimed at Doubleday) aside. Once upon the field, it
>should have been obvious to Hancock and later Meade that the I Corps units,
>although battered, were still combat worthy with virtually all its artillery
>intact, repositioned and ready on Cemetery Hill etc. --- all signs of a more
>or less orderly retreat as opposed to the XI Corps in which both Barlow's
>and Schurz's divisions had been obviously routed from their portion of the
>battlefield and whose commanders were desperately trying to rally the men,
>sort out what was left of the commands and make them combat worthy once
>again.
>One other thing on the removal of Doubleday --- it would have been one
>thing if he had been replaced by a dynamic and aggressive young division
>commander --- or even if Meade had placed Warren in command --- but John
>Newton? On his worse day, Doubleday could have equaled if not outperformed
>his replacement and Abner was coming off one of the best days of tactical
>fighting that any general on either side had during the war.
>With regard,
>Chet
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------
>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/
>
>
>
>tombart0 at yahoo.com, Author, WalkieTalkie Fanning Bees; The Fierce Fun of 
>Ducky Medwick,(Scarecrow, May 2003), and Pepper Martin, A Baseball 
>Biography(McFarland, September, 2003). Forthcoming: on March 1, 2007: 
>Barnstorming 1901-1962 from McFarland and Those Peerless Semipros: The 
>Brooklyn Bushwicks of Dexter Park from St. Johann Press.
>   Now at work on a biography of civil war general Abner Doubleday.
>   Still in the works are a book on the 1941 Dodgers and a book on Babe 
> Ruth's ten years of barnstorming.
>
>
>---------------------------------
>Be a PS3 game guru.
>Get your game face on with the latest PS3 news and previews at Yahoo! Games.
> 
>----------------------------------------------------------------
>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/

Fred Johanson
ITSM Administrator
University of Chicago
773-702-8464 