THE ARMY OF THE POTOMAC: THE REBELS PREPARING TO RETREAT; The Visit of the President to the Army (10/5/1862)

New York Times - Times Machine ^ | 10/5/1862

[Homer_J_Simpson]

WASHINGTON, Saturday, Oct. 4.

We have the story brought in by deserters, that LEE is making every preparation to retreat as soon as appearances convince him of MCCLELLAN's intention to make an immediate attack.

The rebel cavalry made a reconnoissance into Leesburgh yesterday, but it is not understood that they made any attempt to hold the place.

PHILADELPHIA, Saturday, Oct. 4.

The second edition of the Washington Star contains the following;

"Deserters and prisoners coming within our lines at Harper's Ferry in the last forty-eight hours seem to agree that Gen. LEE is now making every preparation to retreat with his whole army so soon as Gen. MCLELLAN may move against him. We give this STORY for what it may be worth."

At noon, to-day, it was ascertained that the rebel force at the Rappahannock Station consisted of three regiments of Infantry and two of cavalry. Their present duty is to patrol the South bank of the river from the Springs to below Kelly Mills.

A report was received at noon to-day, that yesterday afternoon a small rebel cavalry force entered Leesburgh on a reconnoissance.

Maj.-Gen. McClellan, Commanding, &c.:

GENERAL: Your report of yesterday, giving the results of the battles of South Mountain and Antietam, has been received and submitted to the President. They were not only hard-fought battles, but well-earned and decided victories.

The valor and endurance of your army in the several conflicts which terminated in the expulsion of the enemy from the loyal State of Maryland, are creditable alike to the troops and to the officers who: commanded them.

A grateful country, while mourning the lamented dead, will not be unmindful of the honors due to the thing. H.W. HALLECK, General-in-Chief.

Correspondence of the Boston Traveller.

HARPER's FERRY, Va., Wednesday, Oct. 1, 1862.

[Homer_J_Simpson]

Free Republic University, Department of History presents U.S. History, 1861-1865: Seminar and Discussion Forum
The American Civil War, as seen through news reports of the time and later historical accounts

First session: November 21, 2015. Last date to add: May 2025.
Reading: Self-assigned. Recommendations made and welcomed.

Posting history, in reverse order

https://www.freerepublic.com/tag/by:homerjsimpson/index?tab=articles

To add this class to or drop it from your schedule notify Admissions and Records (Attn: Homer_J_Simpson) by reply or freepmail.

Link to previous New York Times thread

https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/4098092/posts

[Homer_J_Simpson]

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

[Homer_J_Simpson]

The Army of the Potomac: The Rebels Preparing to Retreat – 2
Our Army Correspondence: The President’s Visit – 2-3
The Battle of Antietam: A Visit to the Battle-field – 3
The War in Kentucky: Save Arrival of Gen. Morgan’s Force at Greenupsburgh, on the Ohio – 3-4
Gen. Buell’s Department: Reception of Gen. Buell’s Troops at Louisville – 4-5
An Ovation to the President: Enthusiastic Reception in Frederick on His Return to Washington – 5
The War on the Mississippi: Destruction of the Town of Randolph, for Harboring Guerrillas – 5
News from Washington: War Gazette – 5-6
Editorial: One Secret of Rebel Success and How to Match It – 6-7
Editorial: The Logic of Rebel Alarm – 7
Editorial: The Position in Kentucky – 7
Editorial: Pork and Beans – 7-8
Editorial: What the Opposition is Composed of – 8

[jobim]

At age 70 I at last concluded that the North (ie federal government) had no moral justification to attack the South.

But this epiphany came with the conclusion that all of our wars (excepting the Revolutionary War and the immediate assistance in helping the Allies in WWII, but not firebombing Germany & Tokyo, and of course the catastrophic immorality that was Hiroshima & Nagasaki) have been unjustified.

It has been extremely difficult to accept that our Republic has been 200 years on the wrong side, and continues to be so. The corruption of our federal government & intelligence through association with organized crime and international banking, pushed ahead by the mil/indus complex, has been our hallmark.

Manifest Destiny has really been Manifest Corruption.

[BroJoeK]

"Today" in southwest Tennessee, the Battle of Hatchie's Bridge, the war's 152nd engagement, a Union victory.

Tennessee 1862 Engagements

Date	Engagement	Military Units	Losses	Victor
Feb 6	Fort Henry, TN	Union Army of TN + West Flotilla (Grant, Foote ~15,000) & Confederate Army of Cent KY (Tilghman ~3,200)	Union 40-total, Confederates 79-total (15 killed)	USA
Feb 14-16	Fort Donelson, TN	Union Army of the Tennessee + Mississippi River Squadron (Grant, Foote 24,531) & Confederate Army of Central KY + garrison (Floyd, Pillow, Buchner 16,171)	Union 2,691-total (507-killed), Confederates 13,846-total (327-killed)	USA
April 6-7	Shiloh, TN	Union Army of West Tennessee (Grant, Buell ~63,000) & Confederate Army of Mississippi (AS Johnson, Beauregard ~40,335)	Union 13,047-total (1,754-killed), Confederate 10,699-total (1,728-killed)	USA
April 14	Fort Pillowi, TN	Union mortor boats bombard Fort Pillow	none	CSA
May 10	Plum Run Bend, TN	Union MS River Squadron (7-river ironclads), Confederate River Defense Fleet (9-wooden steamboats)	none recorded	CSA
June 6	Memphis, TN	Union MS Flotilla (Davis, Ellet+), Confederate River Defense Fleet (Montgomery, Thompson)	Union 1- total, Confederates 250-total (~35-killed)	USA
June 7-8	Chattanooga, TN	Union Army of OH (Negley 1 division), Confederate Army of KY (EK Smith)	Union 23-total, Confederates 65-total	USA
July 13	Murfreesboro, TN	Union hospital & PA cavalry (Crittended ~900, Confederate Cavalry (Forrest ~1,400)	Union 890-total (0-killed), Confederates ~150-total (0-killed)	CSA
Aug 30	Bolivar, TN	Union Army of the MS, (Leggett ~1,000), Confederate Army of the West (Armstrong -1,000)	Union unknown, Confederates unknown	Inconclusive
Oct 5	Hatchie's Bridge, TN	Union Army of MS (Ord, Hurlbut, 12,000), Confederate Army of West TN (Van Dorn, Price ~20,000)	Union 500-total (75?-killed), Confederates 400-total (60?-killed)	USA

Of 152 total engagements, recent Union victories have brought the totals to 66 victories each, 20 inconclusive.

Summary of Civil War Engagements as of October 5, 1862:
Engagements in Confederate states:

State	Union Victories	Confederate Victories	Inconclusive	Total Engagements
South Carolina	2	2	1	5
Virginia	7	26	11	44
North Carolina	5	1	0	6
Florida	2	0	0	2
Louisiana	3	1	0	4
Tennessee	6	3	1	10
Arkansas	4	0	1	5
Georgia	1	0	0	1
Mississippi	3	1	0	4
Total Engagements in CSA	33	34	14	81

Engagements in Union states/territories:

State	Union Victories	Confederate Victories	Inconclusive	Total Engagements
Maryland	3	0	1	4
West Virginia	9	3	2	14
Missouri	12	12	1	25
New Mexico	5	8	0	13
Kentucky	4	6	2	12
Oklahoma	0	3	0	3
Total Engagements in Union	33	32	6	71
Total Engagements to date	66	66	20	152

The war's total casualties have now reached 234,000 including over 27,000 killed in action.

[BroJoeK]

jobim: "At age 70 I at last concluded that the North (ie federal government) had no moral justification to attack the South."

You mean to say, at age 70 your mental dementia reached the level that you can no longer distinguish right from wrong, or good from evil, or patriot from treason -- so my sympathies to you and your late brain, FRiend.

jobim: "But this epiphany came with the conclusion that all of our wars (excepting the Revolutionary War and the immediate assistance in helping the Allies in WWII, but not firebombing Germany & Tokyo, and of course the catastrophic immorality that was Hiroshima & Nagasaki) have been unjustified."

So, having lost your own mind you wish now to join with other insane anti-Americans -- Democrats, Communists, socialists, but I repeat myself -- in an orgy of self-flagellation and self-destruction of the noble experiment which was the United States of America.

jobim: "It has been extremely difficult to accept that our Republic has been 200 years on the wrong side, and continues to be so. The corruption of our federal government & intelligence through association with organized crime and international banking, pushed ahead by the mil/indus complex, has been our hallmark.
Manifest Destiny has really been Manifest Corruption."

Even a demented old person like yourself can still look at a glass of water and see it as half-full or half-empty -- that's your choice, the glass or water doesn't care how you look at it.
But in the case of the USA, you're looking at the greatest country in human history and noticing a blemish here or there, and you then insanely declare: because of these blemishes, the USA is wholly corrupt and unworthy.

Again, my sympathies to you and your late brain, FRiend.

[BroJoeK]

"Editorial: One Secret of Rebel Success and How to Match It – 6-7"

The "secret" here refers to Stonewall Jackson and J.E.B. Stuart's greater mobility & dash than anything the Union has done.
Our editors point to the British Army which uses a special "Land Transportation Corps" to handle logistics, as opposed to the Union Army which hired civilians, often the least reliable.

It's an important point, as they say -- amateurs discuss tactics, professionals discuss logistics.
Pres. Lincoln was not a military expert, and referred to the Union's best logistician -- Maj. Gen. Halleck -- as, "little more than a first rate clerk."

[jobim]

SHUT UP! he explained.

It’s comical how ad hominem takes the place of analysis in a response from someone charging another with dementia.

One wonders if all attempts at discussion with such a person will conclude with name-calling.

History is complex and takes time to make sense of. In this case of my gross generalizations of America’s foreign relations history, I am willing to look at every particular of every war. I have done some of this.

I risk further colorful descriptions of my mental and moral states by saying that I also have concluded that our Constitution was a wrong turn. The Anti-Federalists who opposed Madison and sought to hold fast to states’ rights as delineated in the Articles of Confederation have been proved correct.

[BroJoeK]

jobim: "SHUT UP! he explained.
It’s comical how ad hominem takes the place of analysis in a response from someone charging another with dementia."

Naw... I'm simply recognizing your words as the rantings of dementia, not rational discourse.

jobim: "One wonders if all attempts at discussion with such a person will conclude with name-calling."

Accurately naming dementia is not just "name-calling".

jobim: "History is complex and takes time to make sense of.
In this case of my gross generalizations of America’s foreign relations history, I am willing to look at every particular of every war.
I have done some of this."

No, you haven't -- all you've done is insanely selected only the negative data, confirmed or not, while ignoring everything positive regardless of how well established.

jobim: "I risk further colorful descriptions of my mental and moral states by saying that I also have concluded that our Constitution was a wrong turn.
The Anti-Federalists who opposed Madison and sought to hold fast to states’ rights as delineated in the Articles of Confederation have been proved correct."

Right, in other words you are an insanely committed anti-American treasonous Democrat!
The same people who:

1. Opposed ratification of the Constitution in 1788.

2. Proposed the Nullification Doctrine in 1798.

3. Threatened secession against President Jackson in 1832.

4. Declared secession, Confederacy and war against the United States in 1861.

5. Trampled the Constitution in its mad rush to impose its "progressive" socialist agenda from the time of Woodrow Wilson to the present day.

Our Democrats have been at war -- political or physical -- against the United States since Day One.
Only their issues & supporters have changed, their opposition to the United States Constitution has remained a constant of our now 234 year history.

[jobim]

I just read your FR profile. You came to this forum early on, 6 years behind me. We are close in age.

You served in VN and I thank you for your service. I say this to all the soldiers I meet because I know that they fought out of love of country. I’m sure you did as well. I dropped out of college in 1971, not finding a reason to be there at age 19, and went home to await the draft, which never came because the draft law ended in the Spring and Congress took a few months to revote on it, and by the time they did, the draft was for guys a year younger than me. There were 70,000 of us awaiting the draft after taking the physical, and it never came.

For the record, I do not suffer from dementia. Let’s drop that, shall we?

I am not Democrat. I went to Asia for some years and returned to Vote for Reagan ‘80 and all GOP ever since. I have worked for Conservative candidates in most elections. There is nothing I detest more than statism. Two of the most important books of our lifetime are Witness and Gulag Archipelago.

I have a dear love for our Nation, but not for our national government. Wilson? Surely you are kidding. Progressivism? I have stood against it in all manner of ways. In point of fact, I believe that the Party system is our demise. Uniparty.

Have you read any of the Anti-Federalist Papers? I am not suggesting that we can go back in time, only that their fundamental premise of liberty best protected by states cannot be easily dismissed. The Swamp that engulfed Trump and runs our entire federal government is not to be extirpated. Our only recourse is to seek the protection of our liberty within states.

I am open to an alternative explanation, but I just don’t see one.

[rxh4n1]

The War on the Mississippi: Destruction of the Town of Randolph, for Harboring Guerrillas

War is getting grimmer. Another little town destroyed.

[BroJoeK]

jobim: "I just read your FR profile. You came to this forum early on, 6 years behind me. We are close in age."

I "lurked" for several years before signing on in 2004.

jobim: "You served in VN and I thank you for your service."

I served during the Vietnam era, three years in V Corps near the Fulda Gap, Germany. In those days the Soviet T-62s & T-64s were considered unstoppable.

jobim: "I dropped out of college in 1971, not finding a reason to be there at age 19, and went home to await the draft... "

I graduated in 1969 with a now-expired student deferment, so I both enlisted and later received a draft notice, which I ignored, already being in the service.

jobim: "For the record, I do not suffer from dementia. Let’s drop that, shall we?"

If you have allowed a natural healthy skepticism of big government generally and Democrats specifically to morph into morbid anti-American, anti-Constitution nihilism, then you are, indeed, politically demented, regardless of any medical diagnosis.

jobim: "I am not Democrat.
I went to Asia for some years and returned to Vote for Reagan ‘80 and all GOP ever since.
I have worked for Conservative candidates in most elections."

If you hate your country and hate our Constitution, then you are a Democrat, regardless of what you call yourself, or who you may have worked for.

jobim: "There is nothing I detest more than statism. "

"Statism" as defined by whom, you?
Depending on how it's defined, "statism" can be just another one of those words, like "neo-con" which has no actual meaning beyond, "I don't like you so I'm going to call you a bad name!"

"Statism" is fairly applied to Democrats, since ever bigger, more powerful government is indeed their goal.
But when conservatives start calling each other "statists", the word can lose all meaning beyond, "I don't like you."

jobim: "I have a dear love for our Nation, but not for our national government."

Our Federal Government today is a mockery of the one envisioned by our Founders in their Constitution.
It needs to be reduced in size & scope by orders of magnitude to restore the Founders original intent.
Unfortunately, most Americans don't see it that way, and so the best Republicans can aim for, short term, is halting further expansion and restoring financial sanity.
I think we could also abolish some of the most politically corrupted Federal agencies... {ahem}...

jobim: "Wilson? Surely you are kidding.
Progressivism? I have stood against it in all manner of ways.
In point of fact, I believe that the Party system is our demise. Uniparty."

In 1788 the original two parties were pro-Constitution Federalists and anti-Constitution anti-Federalists.
After ratification, the anti-Federalists under Thomas Jefferson became the anti-Administration party, sometimes called "Democratic-Republicans", but soon just "Democratics".

Out of power during the 1790s, "Democratics" criticized the Federalist administrations of Washington and Adams as "monarchists" and tyrannical over such matters as a national bank, what we today call "infrastructure" spending and protective tariffs.
However, typical of Democrats ever since, once they came to power in 1801, they themselves supported everything they had previously opposed, and more besides, most notably the Louisiana Purchase, which Jefferson himself acknowledged to be unconstitutional.

My key point about Democrats is that, since Day One, they weaponized the Constitution to stop their opponents (i.e., Federalists), but then trampled all over it when they themselves were in power.

That is the tradition Woodrow Wilson inherited and vastly expanded on during his "progressive" presidency.
It's what being a Democrat is all about.

jobim: "Have you read any of the Anti-Federalist Papers?
I am not suggesting that we can go back in time, only that their fundamental premise of liberty best protected by states cannot be easily dismissed."

Thomas Jefferson rose to power using anti-Federalist themes like the doctrine of Nullification (1798) and opposition to the Alien & Sedition Acts (also 1798).
Once in power, as President, Jefferson enforced Federal authority wherever it was challenged, notably in arresting and trying for treason his former VP Aaron Burr, for Burr's attempted secession of Louisiana.
Once in power, after 1801, Democrats supported the National Bank they'd previously opposed, supported "infrastructure" spending they'd opposed under Federalist administration, and increased the protective tariffs they'd previously criticized.

Jefferson's fellow Virginian, John Randolph, saw what Jefferson's Democratics were doing and opposed their expansion of Federal powers.
Randolph called his faction "Old Republicans" or "Tertium Quids",

"In 1806, he wrote to an ally that 'the Administration... favors federal principles, and, with the exception of a few great rival characters, federal men....
The old Republican party is already ruined, past redemption.
New men and new maxims are the order of the day.' [6]"

In effect, Randolph complained that Jefferson had turned "Democratic-Republicans" into the new big government Uni-party.
This at a time when total Federal spending amounted to 2% or 3% of US GDP.
Today it's ten times that or more, and yet Democrats seek ever to expand government even more.
There was never a majority for Randolph's "Old Republicans", though Republicans today are as near to it as ever in recent history.

[jobim]

If you have allowed a natural healthy skepticism of big government generally and Democrats specifically to morph into morbid anti-American, anti-Constitution nihilism, then you are, indeed, politically demented, regardless of any medical diagnosis.

If you hate your country and hate our Constitution, then you are a Democrat, regardless of what you call yourself, or who you may have worked for.

"Statism" as defined by whom, you?

STATISM: The practice or doctrine of giving a centralized government control over economic planning and policy.

Well, BJK, it has been a spirited discussion. Thank you for taking the time to share your research of our Nation's early history. I don't dispute it, but my interest is to find a pathway out of our present quagmire. On the personal level, I believe I have tried to keep our discussion one of respect between equals. As anyone can see from your comments I re-post here, you are lacking in charity, boxing you into your own prejudice, making you say untrue things about what I have said. So be it.

[BroJoeK]

jobim post #4: "At age 70 I at last concluded that the North (ie federal government) had no moral justification to attack the South."

That's insane. Confederates provoked war, started war, formally declared war (May 6, 1861) and waged war against the United States -- for the first year primarily in Union states & territories.

jobim post #4: "But this epiphany came with the conclusion that all of our wars (excepting the Revolutionary War and the immediate assistance in helping the Allies in WWII, but not firebombing Germany & Tokyo, and of course the catastrophic immorality that was Hiroshima & Nagasaki) have been unjustified."

That's demented, a sign of mental deterioration to the point where you can no longer tell the difference between right & wrong, good & evil, patriot & treason.

jobim post #4: "It has been extremely difficult to accept that our Republic has been 200 years on the wrong side, and continues to be so.
The corruption of our federal government & intelligence through association with organized crime and international banking, pushed ahead by the mil/indus complex, has been our hallmark."

Sorry, but that's pure crazy-talk, the sign of somebody who's lost all contact with the bigger picture of American history, just to focus laser-like on all our faults.

There's an appropriate military expression for what you've done here: "soldier, get your head out of your *ss!".

[BroJoeK]

jobim: "STATISM: The practice or doctrine of giving a centralized government control over economic planning and policy."

From Day One, the First Congress in July 1789 passed Congressman James Madison's protective tariff to raise revenues for Federal government and protect US manufacturing.
The tariff worked as intended, increasing Americans' prosperity and economic self-reliance -- is that "statism".

Less than two years later, in February 1791, Congress authorized the First National Bank, along with our first mint, to stabilize Federal finances -- is that "statism"?

Finally, we have what were then called "internal improvements" -- today "infrastructure" -- opposed by Jefferson's opposition "Democratics" in the 1790s, but supported and passed by President Jefferson in the 1800s -- is that "statism"?

How about the US Federal Reserve, established in 1913 -- is that "statism"?

How about the US 16th Amendment, Income Tax, also ratified in 1913 -- is that "statism"?

I could go on & on -- FDR's New Deal, social security, LBS's Civil Rights & "Great Society"... etc. when, exactly, does it become "statism" in your eyes?

[jobim]

I have made it clear why I consider further discussion with you untenable because any point I make at variance with your opinion would elicit ad hominem.

What remains a mystery is why you are inclined to continue discussion with me, whom you have characterized as an America-hating, dementia-riddled cretin?

No thanks.

[BroJoeK]

Jobim: "What remains a mystery is why you are inclined to continue discussion with me, whom you have characterized as an America-hating, dementia-riddled cretin?"

Sorry, but your own words characterized you as America hating and demented.
I merely accurately reported that fact.
"Cretin" is your word, not mine, I wouldn't use it in this case, since dimentia is far more likely considering how you described yourself.

Possibly you are old enough to remember watching some old Korean War era movies -- you remember, where the understrength US infantry company is ordered to attack up a mountain against seemingly infinite numbers of Chinese Communists.
One American private goes crazy with fear, crying, "all is lost, we're all going to die!" -- to which the tough old sergeant responds by drawing back and punching the soldier, with the command, "snap out of it".
The now sober soldier says, "Thanks sarge, I needed that."

So, you've had your cry, now it's time to snap out of it, soldier.

There's a political war to be won.