In 1861, Several U.S. Newspapers Implied That General William Tecumseh Sherman Was A Lunatic

Although Sherman held the high rank of colonel at the start of the United States Civil War, he was still fairly untested in battle. Like many other famous U. S. Civil War military leaders, he had served in the army during the Mexican-American War (1846-1848), but unlike other future generals, Sherman spent almost all of that war away from the frontlines, doing such tasks as recruiting or hunting down deserters. So, when Sherman first began commanding troops in battle at the start of the Civil War, very few Union generals knew just how good or bad a leader Sherman would be in the field. Unfortunately, Sherman, himself, was one of the doubters of his own ability.

The first year of the Civil War, 1861, did nothing to improve Sherman’s self-confidence. That year, he commanded a brigade in the embarrassing First Battle of Bull Run.  In that battle, Union troops advanced against a strongly-positioned rebel force. The general lack of discipline in the Union and Confederate armies at the beginning of the war gave a clear advantage to the Confederacy in the battle of Bull Run. When Sherman and other leaders pressed their men to attack the rebel lines, the Union forces were thrown into disarray by an onslaught of Confederate gunfire. After the Confederate forces had stopped the Union advance, they launched a counter-attack, which threw the Union soldiers into panic and defeat. Watching the Union army flee from the battlefield did little to encourage Sherman’s self-confidence.

In the aftermath of the battle, President Abraham Lincoln rushed over to the demoralized troops, making appearances and delivering speeches to raise the spirits of the defeated soldiers. Interestingly, in a conversation with Abraham Lincoln, Sherman bluntly asked to be kept in a subordinate military position, as he did not trust himself with a superior command.

After the First Battle of Bull Run, Sherman was transferred to work under General Robert Anderson, who was leading the defense of the area around Louisville, Kentucky. Not long after he arrived, however, Sherman was placed in the position that he feared—General Anderson resigned his command because of mental stress and Sherman (now a Brigadier General) took over the defense of Kentucky.

While in this position, Sherman had an unfortunate meeting with the Secretary of War, Simon Cameron. The secretary had brought along a party of various people to accompany him on the tour of Louisville, and several of them were non-military personnel. When Sherman wanted to discuss private war matters, Secretary Cameron bluntly refused to dismiss any of the men who had accompanied him to Louisville. Therefore, Sherman locked the door and told Cameron about the situation in Kentucky while the other men were still present.

In particular, Sherman wanted the Secretary of War to have reinforcements diverted to Kentucky. Sherman argued that he had only about 18,000 soldiers to defend over 300 miles, while other Union generals, such as McClellan and Fremont, had much more manpower to defend smaller amounts of land. He concluded that he needed at least 60,000 men (about the same amount as Fremont) to mount a feasible defense against a possible Confederate attack. While Sherman’s staff and comrades in the room agreed with him up to this point, his next comment would catch them, and the Secretary of War, all off guard. For whatever reason—possibly due to his lack of self-confidence or an overestimation of Confederate strength—Sherman threw out a huge estimate of soldiers that he thought he would need during the climax and final stages of the war. He told the crowd in the locked room that he would need 200,000 men to carry the war from the defensive stage to that of the offensive. In Sherman’s defense, he was one of the first generals on either side of the Civil War to realize how bloody and destructive the conflict would become. Even so, Sherman would later complete his famously devastating “march to the sea” with an army of only around 62,000 soldiers.

Unfortunately for Sherman, one of Secretary Cameron’s companions in the confidential meeting was a reporter for the New York Tribune, so, naturally, newspapers quickly published out-of-context reports about Sherman requesting 200,000 soldiers for the defense of Kentucky. Several news outlets began releasing regular articles that consistently labeled Sherman with all sorts of unflattering names, such as crazy, mad and insane. Not long after the news stories began, Sherman was relieved from his command in Kentucky and transferred to work under Major-General Halleck in the Department of the Missouri. It was what Sherman wanted—to be back in a subordinate role—but his sudden removal from Kentucky optically reinforced the claims of the newsmen.

The newspaper harassment continued to plague Sherman even after he arrived in St. Louis, Missouri. Sherman was so stressed by all of the negative attention that it prompted him to eventually request twenty days of leave to spend with his family. Major-General Halleck justified his support for this time off in an unfortunate letter to the then Union commander-in-chief, General McClellan. Halleck wrote, “I am satisfied that General Sherman’s physical and mental system is so completely broken by labor and care as to render him, for the present, unfit for duty; perhaps a few weeks’ rest may restore him.” Yet, other than that one line of unflattering wording, General Halleck was a great help to Sherman, both personally and professionally. Most importantly, General Halleck put Sherman in a position to work with Ulysses S. Grant. Together, Grant and Sherman were able to help each other overcome their individual problems and imperfections, resulting in both leaders becoming military legends.

Written by C. Keith Hansley.

Picture Attribution: (Photograph of General William Tecumseh Sherman, taken between 1865 and 1880, [Public Domain] via Creative Commons).

Sources:

• Memoirs of General W. T. Sherman by W. T. Sherman. Delaware: Renaissance Classics, 2012.
• https://www.britannica.com/biography/William-Tecumseh-Sherman 
• https://www.britannica.com/event/First-Battle-of-Bull-Run-1861 
• https://www.britannica.com/biography/Simon-Cameron 
• https://www.history.com/topics/american-civil-war/william-t-sherman  

The Bizarre Bad Luck Of Wilmer McLean, Who Had Two Separate Homes Ravaged By The American Civil War

In 1853, Wilmer and Virginia McLean established their so-called Yorkshire Plantation on a spot of farmland at Manassas Junction, Virginia, located along the Bull Run tributary, which feeds into the Occoquan River. Little did the McLeans known just how closely their prosperity would be tied to the American Civil War, an event that would erupt in less than a decade.

In 1861, the Union and rebel Confederate forces that made up the two sides of the American Civil War fatefully converged right on top of the McLean family’s Yorkshire Plantation. Wilmer McLean was considered too old to be conscripted by either side in the war, but he was a Confederate affiliate, who worked as a supplier for the quartermasters of the Confederacy. When battle loomed, McLean sent his family away to safety, but he personally stayed to continue his civilian work with the Confederacy.

From July 1861 to August 1862, the Union and Confederacy fought in two major battles at Bull Run. The buildings on McLean’s plantation were well used by the Confederacy during the Battles of Bull Run. P. G. T. Beauregard, the leading general of the Confederacy during the Battles of Bull Run, set up his headquarters in McLean’s farmhouse, and transformed Yorkshire Plantation’s barn into a makeshift hospital and prison. With McLean’s plantation serving such roles as these for the Confederate forces, the Union army deemed the Yorkshire estate to be fair game for their artillery. During one notable incident in 1861, Union artillery thoroughly annihilated McLean’s kitchen. After an experience like this, Wilmer McLean understandably decided to flee his war-torn plantation and relocated his family to the peaceful town of Appomattox Court House, Virginia.

In 1683, the McLeans set up their new home in a former tavern located in Appomattox. From there, Wilmer McLean worked as a sugar merchant and continued his operation as a supplier for the Confederacy. Although the war raged on, he must have hoped that the front lines would remain clear of Appomattox Court House. Nevertheless, in 1865, the Union and Confederate forces clashed in their last significant skirmish in the vicinity of McLean’s new home.

With disastrous luck, the McLean home was chosen as the location where Confederate General Robert E. Lee would surrender to Union General Ulysses S. Grant. Lee formally admitted defeat on April 9, 1865, from within the front parlor of Wilmer McLean’s home in Appomattox Court House—this historic moment would destroy McLean’s life.

Unfortunately for the McLean family, their home was the sight of an important historic event. As such, the victorious Union soldiers inside the McLean home at Appomattox Court House wanted material keepsakes with which they could remember the occasion—regretfully, the only souvenirs that were available all belonged to the McLean family. Despite this obstacle, the soldiers wanted their remembrances and were not in a mood to pay fair prices for the items that they took. The desk and inkstand that Lee used in his surrender was looted, as were McLean’s chairs, candlesticks, and even a cloth doll that belonged to McLean’s daughter. Furthermore, soldiers cut away countless strips of fabric from curtains and upholstered furniture. By the time the soldiers left Appomattox Court House, the McLean House was thoroughly pillaged and vandalized.

Although the war was over, Wilmer McLean’s financial troubles were just beginning. With his plantation at Manassus Junction destroyed at the start of the war, and his home at Appomattox Court House looted after the end of the war, Wilmer McLean found himself heavily in debt and short on assets. After he defaulted on his debts in 1869, McLean’s Appomattox Court House “Surrender House” was repossessed and sold in a public auction. The house was then sold from person to person until it fell into the hands of a businessman in 1891 who had an ambition of turning the historic place into a mobile tourist attraction—he demolished the home, brick by brick, and planned to make Washington D.C. the new home of the Surrender House. The businessman, however, was bogged down by financial and legal troubles, which kept the dismantled home in Appomattox. Thankfully, the United States Park’s Service purchased these bricks, as well as the property that made up McLean’s estate in the region, and went to work carefully rebuilding the historic home. It was officially opened to the public in 1950 and remains a tourist destination, to this day.

Written by C. Keith Hansley.

Top picture attribution: (Wilmer McLean, c. 1860, in front of The Room Where Lee Surrendered to Grant in the McLean House of Appomattox Court House, published by The Major & Knapp Eng. Mfg. & Lith. Co. 71 Broadway, c. 1867, both images [Public Domain] via Creative Commons).

Sources:

• http://www.history.com/news/how-the-civil-war-stalked-wilmer-mclean 
• https://ehistory.osu.edu/articles/wilmer-mclean-beginning-and-end 
• http://militaryhistorynow.com/2014/01/29/meet-wilmer-mclean-one-of-the-civil-wars-first-and-last-victims/ 
• https://www.nps.gov/parkhistory/online_books/civil_war_series/17/sec4.htm 
• https://www.nps.gov/apco/mclean-house.htm  

Who Was The Last Surviving Veteran Of The American Civil War? It Is A Much More Controversial Debate Than You May Think

(Battle of Spottsylvania by Thure de Thulstrup  (1848–1930), [Public Domain] via Creative Commons)

The United States of America is a very sentimental country. Its citizens, like those of other countries, idolize its great figures, glorify its achievements and even bemoan its own unjust actions from the past. It should be no surprise that one such area of history the citizens of the United States are understandably drawn to is the U. S. Civil War (1861-1865), a topic viewed in America with simultaneous fascination and horror. With the Civil War being such an important piece of U. S. History, intense debates can arise out the most mundane of questions—such as, who was the last surviving veteran of the American Civil War?

In this debate two names are prominent: Walter Washington Williams (c. 1842-1959) and Albert Woolson (c. 1847-1956). Mr. Williams claimed to have been a member of the Confederate Army, and for a long time was the frontrunner in the battle to seize to the spot as the last living veteran of the Civil War. Very close behind Williams, however, was Mr. Woolson, who had a stronger trail of evidence than his competitor. There were other self-proclaimed Civil War veterans who died between Woolson and Williams, nevertheless, Albert Woolson’s Civil War career remained the best documented of all these veterans.

To get a sense of the divide between the supporters of these two men, compare Ken Burns’ 1990 documentary series, The Civil War, against articles on the subject published by the Smithsonian. On the one hand, Burns affirms that Walter Washington Williams was the last surviving Civil War veteran. In another take, Smithsonian writer and author, Richard A. Serrano, championed Albert Woolson and claimed Williams to be a fraud.

Walter Washington Williams claimed to be the forage master for Confederate General Hood’s Texas Brigade during the American Civil War. For the most part, his story was believed and he was even given an honorary rank of general by President Eisenhower (presidential term, 1953-1961). After Williams’ death in 1959, the Texas Historical Survey Committee put up a memorial in his honor, stating he was “Reputed to have been [the] last surviving soldier of the Civil War (1861-1865).” Click HERE for a picture of that monument.

As for Albert Woolson; he claimed to have joined the Union Army after his father died at the Battle of Shiloh. Woolson enlisted in 1864 and became a drummer boy for the 1st Minnesota Heavy Artillery Regiment. He died in 1956, three years before the death of Walter Washington Williams. Until after the 1950s, the decade when both of these men died, Woolson was, for the most part, overshadowed by his rival, Williams. Now, however, the supporters of Albert Woolson seem to be gaining the upper hand in the debate of who was the last surviving veteran of the American Civil War. The seemingly impeccable trail of evidence backing up Albert Woolson’s claims, compared against the more dubious evidence of veterans such as Walter Washington Williams, makes Woolson the last undisputed Civil War veteran to die.

Written by C. Keith Hansley

Sources:

• The Civil War, a documentary by Ken Burns. PBS, 1990. 
• http://www.civilwaralbum.com/misc13/williams1.htm 
• http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/the-last-civil-war-veterans-who-lived-to-be-over-100-or-did-they-180947577/ 
• http://www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2013/04/the-last-surviving-veteran-of-the-civil-war/ 
• http://civilwarsaga.com/albert-woolson-the-last-civil-war-veteran/     

There Was A Brawl On The Senate Floor Between A Senator And A Congressman At The Onset Of The U. S. Civil War

If You Think Modern U. S. Politics Is Rough, Check Out What Happened Between Congressman Preston Brooks and Senator Charles Sumner In 1856 

 (Congressman Brooks Beating Senator Sumner, by John L. Magee (c.1820–c.1870), [Public Domain] via Creative Commons)

Charles Sumner, a member of the Free-Soil Party and an ally of the Republican Party, was elected to the United States Senate in 1851. The top priority of Sumner and the Free-Soil Party was to quarantine slavery and not let it spread to new U. S. territories.

Though Sumner’s stalwart stance against the expansion of slavery gained him many enemies, it was a single speech in 1856, titled “Crime Against Kansas,” that would bring his life into mortal danger. In the speech, Sumner launched into a vitriolic verbal attack against the states (and state representatives) that supported slavery. He targeted two Democrat Senators in particular: Stephen Douglas from Illinois and Andrew Butler from South Carolina. Unfortunately for Sumner, by criticizing Senator Butler, he unknowingly drew the ire of South Carolina Democrat Congressman Preston Smith Brooks—Senator Butler was a relative and friend of Congressman Brooks. When he heard of the “Crime Against Kansas” speech, Preston Brooks, a veteran from the Mexican-American War, immediately sought to restore the honor of his tarnished relative.

In a rage, Congressman Preston Brooks marched into the Senate chamber on May 22, 1856. The Senate had just ended its business for the day, and Senator Sumner was gathering his belongings and tidying copies of his speeches, totally unaware of the approaching South Carolinian statesman. It was then that Congressman Brooks cracked Senator Sumner over the head with a metal-tipped cane. He continued to relentlessly bludgeon Sumner until the man fell unconscious, only ending his assault when nearby Senators pulled Congressman Brooks away from his prey.

Senator Sumner took more than three years to recover from the brutal beating. The assailant, Congressman Preston Brooks, faced very little repercussions for his actions; he only faced a moderate monetary fine. Brooks soon resigned from the House of Representatives and returned to South Carolina, the first state to secede from the Union to start the United States Civil War in 1861.

Written by C. Keith Hansley.

Sources:

• https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/minute/The_Caning_of_Senator_Charles_Sumner.htm 
• http://www.history.com/topics/charles-sumner 
• https://www.britannica.com/biography/Charles-Sumner 
• http://www.ushistory.org/us/31e.asp 
• http://bioguide.congress.gov/scripts/biodisplay.pl?index=B000885     

United States General William Tecumseh Sherman Suffered A Culinary Shock During the Mexican-American War

(Portrait of General W. T. Sherman by George Peter Alexander Healy (1818–1894), [Public Domain] via Creative Commons)

During the Mexican-American War (1846-1848), a future Union General of the U.S. Civil War, W. T. Sherman, was stationed in various locations around the California front. Sherman’s main base was at Monterey, but he also traveled up and down the Saunas River and ventured into the wooded foothills of the Gavillano Mountain.

In that mountainous location, Sherman and his party found shelter in the home of a Señor Gomez. The man lived in a two-story adobe home with a fenced-in front yard. The U.S. soldiers arrived at Gomez’s property just as dusk began to fall. Señor Gomez was sitting down for dinner when Sherman and his companions tethered their horses to the fence around the front of the home.

Gomez invited the soldiers into his home and divided the meal (luckily a large portion) between himself and his guests. Sherman eagerly received a dish of rabbit, slathered in a wonderful-smelling red sauce. As an east coast American, Sherman, who had been born in Ohio and was later stationed in the U.S. southern states, believed the red sauce to be derived from tomatoes. Without any caution, Sherman gulped down a large spoonful of the rabbit in the sauce, expecting a taste of mild and watery tomato paste. The horrifying realization only occurred after the sauce was swallowed—it was pure red pepper. Here are Sherman’s own words on the embarrassing situation:

“The allowance, though ample for one, was rather short for three, and I thought the Spanish grandiloquent politeness of Gomez, who was fat and old, was not over-cordial. However, down we sat, and I was helped to a dish of rabbit, with what I thought to be an abundant sauce of tomato. Taking a good mouthful, I felt as though I had taken liquid fire; the tomato was chile colorado, or red pepper, of the purest kind. It nearly killed me, and I saw Gomez’ eyes twinkle, for he saw that his share of supper was increased—I contented myself with bits of the meat, and an abundant supply of tortillas.”

Source

• Memoirs of General W. T. Sherman by W. T. Sherman. Delaware: Renaissance Classics, 2012.