Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Military administration in the Confederacy : the Army of Tennessee, 1862-1864 Gow, June I. 1970

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1970_A1 G68.pdf [ 12.33MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0093318.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0093318-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0093318-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0093318-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0093318-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0093318-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0093318-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0093318-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0093318.ris

Full Text

MILITARY ADMINISTRATION IN THE CONFEDERACY: THE ARMY OF TENNESSEE, 1 8 6 2 - 1 8 6 4 by —. June I . Gow M. A. (Hons.), U n i v e r s i t y of Glasgow, 1954 A t h e s i s submitted i n p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t of the requirements f o r the degree of Doctor of Philosophy In the Department of H i s t o r y We accept t h i s t h e s i s as conforming t o the r e q u i r e d standard The U n i v e r s i t y of March, B r i t i s h Columbia 1970 In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. I further agree tha permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or by his representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. Department o f V 1 \£=> The University of British Columbia Vancouver 8, Canada Date ABSTRACT In l 8 6 l the Confederacy faced a major problem i n m i l i t a r y a d m i n i s t r a t i o n . She had t o develop a system f o r the o r g a n i z a t i o n , t r a i n i n g , and d i r e c t i o n of her armies. M i l i t a r y and p o l i t i c a l leaders a l i k e recognized the problem, and drew on the m i l i t a r y theory and p r a c t i c e of the o l d United States Army i n repeated attempts to evolve an e f f e c t i v e a d m i n i s t r a -t i v e system f o r the Confederate armies. The commanders of the Army of Tennessee t r i e d t o solve the problem by a p p o i n t i n g three p r i n c i p a l a d m i n i s t r a t i v e o f f i c e r s . The c h i e f of s t a f f e x e r c i s e d a general s u p e r v i s i o n over the s e v e r a l s t a f f departments, and at h i s commander's d i s c r e t i o n a l s o a s s i s t e d In the d i r e c t i o n of l i n e operations; the adjutant general headed a department re s p o n s i b l e p r i m a r i l y f o r the issue of orders; and the i n s p e c t o r general through h i s department maintained d i s c i p l i n e and e f f i c i e n c y . The appointment of c h i e f s of s t a f f , the c o - o r d i n a t i o n of a d m i n i s t r a t i v e work at a l l command l e v e l s through a depart-mental s t r u c t u r e , and the emergence of the i n s p e c t o r general's department were a l l i n n o v a t i o n s , unknown i n the old Army. The success of these innovations v a r i e d according to the q u a l i f i c a t i o n s of each s t a f f o f f i c e r , the commander's i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of the o f f i c e r ' s r o l e , and the a b i l i t y of the two men t o work w e l l together. Success a l s o depended on the i i i w i l l i n g n e s s of subordinate l i n e commanders and j u n i o r s t a f f o f f i c e r s to accept the a u t h o r i t y of the headquarters.staff. Thus i n the Army of Tennessee f i e l d a d m i n i s t r a t i o n was conditioned l e s s by r u l e s and r e g u l a t i o n s than by personal f a c t o r s . To reduce the personal element President J e f f e r s o n Davis and the War Department wished t o e s t a b l i s h a c e n t r a l i z e d system of a d m i n i s t r a t i o n , which would increase the War Department's c o n t r o l over the f i e l d commanders, and at the same time make the s t a f f more independent of the l i n e . The commanding generals of the Army of Tennessee s u c c e s s f u l l y opposed t h i s p l a n , i n s i s t i n g on t h e i r a u t h o r i t y over t h e i r own s t a f f . The personal equation t h e r e f o r e continued to be the most s t r i k i n g feature of Confederate m i l i t a r y a d m i n i s t r a t i o n . At d i f f e r e n t l e v e l s of the m i l i t a r y h i e r a r c h y i t stimulated the t r a d i t i o n a l r i v a l r y between s t a f f and l i n e , encouraged a s i g n i f i c a n t r e j e c t i o n of the p r i n c i p l e of subordination, and co n t r i b u t e d to a l a c k of harmony between command and a d m i n i s t r a t i o n . As a r e s u l t the Confederacy f a i l e d to develop an e f f i c i e n t a d m i n i s t r a t i v e system. The f a i l u r e d e r i v e d i n part from the personal r i v a l r i e s and j e a l o u s i e s which plagued the Southern armies, and In part from the disputes i n h e r i t e d from the o l d American army over the nature and d i s t r i b u t i o n of m i l i t a r y a u t h o r i t y . TABLE OP CONTENTS INTRODUCTION CHAPTER I O r i g i n s of the Confederate S t a f f 1 8 1 7 - 1 8 6 1 PART ONE: CHIEFS OF STAFF CHAPTER I I Under A. S. Johnston, Beauregard, and Bragg March 1862-December 1 8 6 3 CHAPTER I I I Under J . E. Johnston January-July, 1 8 6 4 CHAPTER IV Under J . B. Hood July-December, 1 8 6 4 PART TWO: ADMINISTRATIVE DEPARTMENTS CHAPTER V Genesis March-June, 1 8 6 2 CHAPTER V I E v o l u t i o n J u l y 1862-December 1 8 6 3 CHAPTER V I I Decline January-December, 1 8 6 4 CHAPTER V I I I Conclusion March 1862-December 1 8 6 4 SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY APPENDIX V ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Research on the Confederate a d m i n i s t r a t i v e s t a f f would have been more d i f f i c u l t and l e s s enjoyable without the help and courtesy of many l i b r a r i a n s and t h e i r a s s i s -t a n t s . I am p a r t i c u l a r l y g r a t e f u l t o Dorothy Thomas C u l l e n , of the F i l s o n Club H i s t o r i c a l S o c i e t y ; Suzanne Cates Dodson, of the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia; Mary I s a b e l F r y , o o f the Henry E. Huntington L i b r a r y ; Connie G. G r i f f i t h , of Tulane U n i v e r s i t y ; H a r r i e t C. Owsley, of the Tennessee State L i b r a r y and Ar c h i v e s ; Elmer 0. Parker, of the N a t i o n a l A r c h i v e s ; Mattie R u s s e l l , of Duke U n i v e r s i t y ; Sam B. Smith, formerly of the Tennessee State L i b r a r y and Ar c h i v e s ; and Anne Yandle, of the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia. My e s p e c i a l thanks are due t o Grady McWhiney f o r i n v a l u a b l e c r i t i c i s m , a d vice, and encouragement throughout t h i s work. June I. Gow 1 INTRODUCTION S t a f f o f f i c e r s are apparently as unpopular w i t h h i s t o r i a n s as they have always been wi t h s o l d i e r s . Few w r i t e r s i n the extensive f i e l d of C i v i l War h i s t o r y have paid more than passing a t t e n t i o n t o the e s s e n t i a l r o l e of the s t a f f i n the o r g a n i z a t i o n and a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of the Confederate armies.''" Yet on e f f i c i e n t s t a f f work depended to a large degree the t r a n s f o r m a t i o n of a mass of raw r e c r u i t s i n t o a d i s c i p l i n e d , e f f e c t i v e f i g h t i n g f o r c e , responsive t o the w i l l of i t s commanders. I t i s the r e f o r e time that a d e t a i l e d study be made of the Confederate s t a f f system. Under that system there were a number of s t a f f depart-ments, each w i t h i t s own o f f i c e r s and i t s own s p e c i a l i s t f u n c t i o n s . The adjutant and i n s p e c t o r general's department was r e s p o n s i b l e f o r army a d m i n i s t r a t i o n ; the quartermaster and subsistence departments, f o r army supply; and the medical and ordnance departments, the a r t i l l e r y and engineer corps, f o r the p r o v i s i o n of s p e c i a l s e r v i c e s . O f f i c e r s of these departments were known c o l l e c t i v e l y as the " s t a f f , " t o d i s t i n g u i s h them from the " l i n e , " or r e s t of the army; they were a l s o sometimes known as the "general s t a f f , " i n c o n t r a s t to the a i d e s , who formed the "personal s t a f f " of a commander.^ The-departmental s t a f f served e i t h e r at the c a p i t a l , of Richmond, V i r g i n i a , or w i t h one of the Confederate armies i n the f i e l d . 2 How the system operated has never been f u l l y e xplained. E s p e c i a l l y neglected has been the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e work of the f i e l d s t a f f . T h i s study w i l l concentrate t h e r e f o r e on the important a d m i n i s t r a t i v e r o l e s of the adjutant general, i n s p e c t o r general, and c h i e f of s t a f f , as these were developed i n the Army of Tennessee, from March 1862 t o December 1864. For those t h i r t y - f o u r months the Army of Tennessee was the major Confederate force i n the West; I t fought across f i v e s t a t e s , and changed commanders f i v e times. I t s v a r i e d ex-perience provides valuable evidence about the s t r u c t u r e and f u n c t i o n s of the p r i n c i p a l a d m i n i s t r a t i v e departments, about t h e i r performance, and about the c r u c i a l r e l a t i o n s h i p between a d m i n i s t r a t i o n and command. The conclusions drawn from t h i s d e t a i l e d examination of a r e s t r i c t e d t o p i c may w e l l prove r e l e v a n t t o the whole range of Confederate m i l i t a r y a d m i n i s t r a t i o n , and c o n t r i b u t e t o our understanding of the Southern defeat. Notes 3 ^mong the exceptions are Frank Vandlver, Ploughshares  Into Swords: J o s i a h Gorgas and Confederate Ordnance ( A u s t i n : U n i v e r s i t y of Texas Press, 1952), and Rebel Brass: The  Confederate Command System (Baton Rouge: Lo u i s i a n a State U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1956); James L. N i c h o l s , The Confederate  Quartermaster i n the T r a n s - M i s s i s s i p p i ( A u s t i n : U n i v e r s i t y of Texas Press, 1964); Arthur Crego, "The Organization and Functions of the S t a f f of the Confederate Army of Tennessee," (unpublished M. A. t h e s i s , L o u i s i a n a State U n i v e r s i t y , 1965); and Richard D. Goff, Confederate Supply (Durham, N. C : Duke U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1969). 2War of the R e b e l l i o n : A Compilation of the O f f i c i a l  Records of the Union and Confederate Armies (128 v o l s . ; Washington: Government P r i n t i n g O f f i c e , 1880-1901), S e r i e s I , X, pt. 2 , 373; X V I I , p t . 2 , 6 4 8 . For a d i s c u s s i o n of the e v o l u t i o n of the meaning of "general s t a f f , " see D a l l a s D. I r v i n e , "The O r i g i n of C a p i t a l S t a f f s , " J o u r n a l of  Modern H i s t o r y , X (1938), l 6 l - 1 7 9 -4 CHAPTER I O r i g i n s of the Confederate S t a f f 1817-1861 Only w i t h the f i r i n g of Confederate guns on Port Sumter, on A p r i l 12, l 8 6 l , was i t f i n a l l y determined that the Southern s t a t e s would not be allowed to secede p e a c e f u l l y from the Union. But the leaders of the new Confederate States of America had e a r l y been aware of the s p e c i a l dangers they ran, and i n February and March had already moved to set up a m i l i t a r y o r g a n i z a t i o n capable of defending t h e i r p o l i t i c a l independence. In so doing, they leaned h e a v i l y on the example and experience of the United States army. By enactment of the P r o v i s i o n a l Congress the Confederate army acquired a b a s i c o r g a n i z a t i o n i n law. The President became commander-in-chief of a l l f o r c e s i n the Confederate s e r v i c e . A War Department was e s t a b l i s h e d as h i s executive instrument i n m i l i t a r y a f f a i r s , w i t h a Secretary of War "under the d i r e c t i o n and c o n t r o l of the P r e s i d e n t " i n charge of " a l l matters and t h i n g s connected w i t h the Army." A general s t a f f d i r e c t e d army a d m i n i s t r a t i o n and supply, a c t i n g through the f o u r departments of the adjutant and i n s p e c t o r general, the quartermaster general, the commissary general, and the surgeon general. Regulations f o r the new establishment, w i t h the a r t i c l e s of war, were adopted v i r t u a l l y without change from those of the United States Army. 1 5 Congress had, however, provided only the l e g a l s keleton of a m i l i t a r y o r g a n i z a t i o n . How the skeleton was t o be f i l l e d out would depend on the men r e s p o n s i b l e f o r d i r e c t i n g the m i l i t a r y a f f a i r s of the Confederacy—on the President and h i s executive o f f i c e r s ; on the general s t a f f ; and on the p r i n c i p a l f i e l d commanders of the Southern armies. The e f f e c t i v e n e s s of the developed o r g a n i z a t i o n would i n t u r n depend on the w i l l i n g n e s s of s o l d i e r s of a l l ranks to implement i t and abide by i t s r u l e s and methods. I t i s t h e r e f o r e important to consider the knowledge of m i l i t a r y o r g a n i z a t i o n a v a i l a b l e to the Confederacy l n l 8 6 l . That knowledge was derived p r i n c i p a l l y from the t r a i n i n g and experience o f f e r e d by the United States m i l i t a r y estab-lishment. President J e f f e r s o n Davis was h i m s e l f a graduate of West Point and a Mexican War hero, and had served as Secretary of War from 1853-1857J the c h i e f Confederate s t a f f o f f i c e r , General Samuel Cooper, had been adjutant-general of the United States Army from 1852 up t o the outbreak of the C i v i l War; and a l l s i x of the Confederacy's f u l l generals, f i f t e e n of the nineteen l i e u t e n a n t generals, and f o r t y - s e v e n of the seventy-seven major generals were former United States o f f i c e r s . The United States M i l i t a r y Academy at West Poi n t c o n t r i b u t e d 304 p r o f e s s i o n a l l y t r a i n e d o f f i c e r s t o the Southern cause, and the army l 8 l of the 464 Confederate 2 general o f f i c e r s . There was t h e r e f o r e a strong p r o f e s s i o n a l nucleus upon whose knowledge the Confederacy could draw i n developing i t s m i l i t a r y o r g a n i z a t i o n . 6 The great m a j o r i t y of these o f f i c e r s had o r i g i n a l l y teen t r a i n e d i n m i l i t a r y s k i l l s at West P o i n t , where, among t h e i r other s t u d i e s , they had been introduced t o the s t r a t e g i c and 3 t a c t i c a l t h e o r i e s of Baron Antoine H e n r i Jomini. On the b a s i s of h i s campaign experience under Napoleon, Jomini had w r i t t e n a number of books which e s t a b l i s h e d him as^an important m i l i t a r y t h i n k e r . Most famous was h i s P r e c i s de l ' A r t de l a Guerre, which provided the p r i n c i p l e s and examples i n which West Poi n t cadets were i n s t r u c t e d . The cadets studied Jominian theory through the l e c t u r e s and w r i t i n g s of Pro f e s s o r Dennis Hart Mahan, and through two Jomini-based t e x t s , Elements of M i l i t a r y A r t and Science by Henry Wager H a l l e c k , and R i f l e and L i g h t I n f a n t r y T a c t i c s by W i l l i a m Joseph Hardee. Although Jomini's thought was mainly concerned w i t h the p r i n c i p l e s of s t r a t e g y and t a c t i c s , the former Napoleonic s t a f f o f f i c e r was a l s o i n t e r e s t e d i n m i l i t a r y o r g a n i z a t i o n , and p a r t i c u l a r l y i n the r o l e of the s t a f f . That r o l e was e s p e c i a l l y important, he maintained, as "a good S t a f f has the 4 merit of being more durable than the genius of any one man." That a s s e r t i o n demonstrated Jomini*s awareness that by the 19th century s t a f f f u n c t i o n s involved much more than the s o l u t i o n of narrow l o g i s t i c a l problems. Quartering troops and ensuring adequate s u p p l i e s was as important as ever, but 5 even more s i g n i f i c a n t was the r o l e of the general s t a f f . M i l i t a r y genius was an e r r a t i c q u a l i t y , and while a Napoleon had no need of a c h i e f of s t a f f , l e s s e r men might w e l l r e q u i r e help i n t h e i r a d m i n i s t r a t i v e and command r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s . 7 Where, f o r example, a general commanded, not by v i r t u e of genius, but by rank or s e n i o r i t y , a good s t a f f was e s s e n t i a l t o counterbalance h i s inadequacies. In that a l l - t o o - f r e q u e n t s i t u a t i o n i t was p a r t i c u l a r l y important to have a t a l e n t e d 6 c h i e f of s t a f f . Jomini knew w e l l the d i f f i c u l t y of f i n d i n g such a man. To have "grown gray In the d u t i e s of a quartermaster" would not q u a l i f y him f o r the assignment, nor would the personal f a v o r of a commander who might choose an o f f i c e r whose weaknesses only complemented h i s own. The good c h i e f of s t a f f must be a man of "undoubted a b i l i t y , " f a m i l i a r w i t h " a l l the various branches of the a r t of war," and capable of working i n "perfect harmony" wi t h h i s general. These requirements could a l l be met, Jomini argued, i f the commander were allowed to s e l e c t h i s own c h i e f of s t a f f , but from a c a r e f u l l y prepared 7 l i s t of s u i t a b l y q u a l i f i e d o f f i c e r s . A good appointment was e s s e n t i a l i n view of the developing f u n c t i o n s of the c h i e f of s t a f f . Jomini i n d i c a t e d how the development had occurred: ...when war began to be waged without camps, movements became more complicated, and the s t a f f o f f i c e r s had more extended f u n c t i o n s [than quartermastering ]. The c h i e f of s t a f f began t o perform the duty of t r a n s m i t t i n g the conceptions of the general t o the most d i s t a n t p o i n t s of the t h e a t e r of war, and of p r o c u r i n g f o r him the necessary documents f o r arranging plans of operations. The c h i e f of s t a f f was c a l l e d to the a s s i s t a n c e of the general In arranging h i s plans, to give i n f o r m a t i o n of them to subordinates i n orders and i n s t r u c t i o n s , t o e x p l a i n them and to supervise 8 t h e i r execution both i n t h e i r ensemble and i n their-minute d e t a i l s ; h i s d u t i e s were, t h e r e f o r e , e v i d e n t l y connected w i t h a l l the operations of a campaign.8 In the t h e o r i s t ' s view, these f u n c t i o n s were " i n t i m a t e l y connected w i t h the most important s t r a t e g i c a l combinations." P r o p e r l y c a r r i e d out, they would a l l o w the g e n e r a l - i n - c h i e f to concentrate on the supreme d i r e c t i o n of m i l i t a r y operations, l e a v i n g d e t a i l s of execution t o competent s t a f f o f f i c e r s . T h i s system would only be e f f e c t i v e , however, i f no personal ambitions or r i v a l r i e s were allowed t o i n t e r f e r e w i t h the necessary a u t h o r i t y of the c h i e f of s t a f f , and i f the c h i e f had f u l l knowledge of a l l business t r a n s a c t e d between the 9 general and the i n d i v i d u a l s t a f f departments. Jomini was p e r f e c t l y e x p l i c i t about the i m p l i c a t i o n s of the r o l e he assigned the c h i e f of s t a f f , i n t e n d i n g i t t o ensure an e f f i c i e n t command system. He explained h i s theory: . . . I t h i n k i t safe t o conclude that the best means of o r g a n i z i n g the command of an army, i n d e f a u l t of a general approved by experience, i s — 1st. To give the command t o a man of t r i e d bravery, bold i n the f i g h t , and of unshaken firmness i n danger. 2nd. To a s s i g n , as h i s c h i e f of s t a f f , a man of h i g h a b i l i t y , of open and f a i t h f u l c h a r a c t e r , between whom and the commander there may be p e r f e c t harmony. The v i c t o r w i l l gain so much g l o r y that he can spare some to the f r i e n d who has c o n t r i b u t e d t o h i s success.... I t i s true that t h i s double command i s more obJeotionable than an undivided one...; but when there i s no great general t o lead the armies i t i s c e r t a i n l y the p r e f e r a b l e system.10 9 The c h i e f of s t a f f was thus, where necessary, a f u l l p a r t i c i p a n t i n a d u a l command system. Jomini d i d not neglect the peace-time r o l e of the general s t a f f . At a permanent establishment i n the nation's c a p i t a l the s t a f f would accumulate a l l h i s t o r i c a l , s t a t i s t i c a l , g e ographical, t o p o g r a p h i c a l , and s t r a t e g i c data r e l e v a n t t o the m i l i t a r y purposes of the country. They would a l s o be charged w i t h preparing contingency plans f o r war. The s t a f f establishment would develop not only the p r a c t i c a l aspects of i t s work, but should a l s o advance i t s t h e o r e t i c a l under-standing of the s t a f f r o l e . 1 ' 5 ' The t h e o r i e s of the P r e c i s de l ' A r t de l a Guerre were accorded great respect i n American m i l i t a r y c i r c l e s d u r i n g 12 the antebellum p e r i o d . Perhaps e q u a l l y worthy of r e s p e c t , i n the American context, were Jomini's r e s e r v a t i o n s about the p o l i t i c a l f a c t o r s Involved i n m i l i t a r y a f f a i r s . Where the s p i r i t of the country was h o s t i l e t o m i l i t a r y i n s t i t u t i o n s , he warned, p o l i t i c i a n s would court p o p u l a r i t y and power by a t t a c k i n g the a r m y — s p e c i f i c a l l y , by denying i t adequate f i n a n c i a l support. This tendency would be e s p e c i a l l y marked In those c o u n t r i e s which feared any growth i n executive 1^ power. J For American o f f i c e r s , accustomed t o Congressional s t r i c t u r e s about m i l i t a r y a p p r o p r i a t i o n s , the warnings must have seemed p a r t i c u l a r l y r e l e v a n t . Jomini was of course a European, d e r i v i n g h i s m i l i t a r y p r i n c i p l e s from a European experience. But through the i n s t r u c t i o n given at West Point t o succeeding generations of 10 cadets h i s t h e o r i e s were incorporated i n t o an American t r a d i t i o n , and i n l 8 6 l became part of the Confederate m i l i t a r y i n h e r i t a n c e . As o f f i c e r s of the United States Army, West Point graduates became f a m i l i a r w i t h the p r a c t i c e , as w e l l as w i t h the theory, of m i l i t a r y a d m i n i s t r a t i o n . From the l 8 2 0 s , at l e a s t , an a d m i n i s t r a t i v e system e x i s t e d by which the United States d i r e c t e d i t s m i l i t a r y a f f a i r s , and experience under t h i s system n a t u r a l l y conditioned Confederate Ideas of s t a f f o r g a n i z a t i o n and f u n c t i o n s . As Secretary of War from 1817-1825, John C a l d w e l l Calhoun was concerned t o b r i n g s i m p l i c i t y , e f f i c i e n c y , and economy to the p r e v i o u s l y c h a o t i c a f f a i r s of the War Department. In a repor t t o Congress he explained the importance of h i s proposed r e o r g a n i z a t i o n : ...no part of our m i l i t a r y o r g a n i z a t i o n r e q u i r e s more a t t e n t i o n i n peace than the general s t a f f . I t Is i n every s e r v i c e i n v a r i a b l y the l a s t In a t t a i n i n g p e r f e c t i o n ; and i f neglected i n peace, when there i s l e i s u r e , i t w i l l be impossible, i n the midst of the hurry and b u s t l e of war, to b r i n g i t t o p e r f e c t i o n . I t i s i n peace th a t i t should r e c e i v e a p e r f e c t o r g a n i z a t i o n , and that the o f f i c e r s should be t r a i n e d t o method and p u n c t u a l i t y , so t h a t , at the commencement of a war, i n s t e a d of c r e a t i n g anew, nothing more should be necessary than t o give i t the necessary enlargement.... With a d e f e c t i v e s t a f f , we must c a r r y on our m i l i t a r y operations under great disadvantages, and be exposed, p a r t i c u l a r l y at the commencement of a war, to great l o s s e s , embarrassments, and d i s a s t e r s . 14 Congress must th e r e f o r e act t o provide the appropriate l e g i s l a t i o n f o r a "perfect o r g a n i z a t i o n " of the War Department; i t would then be the "proper sphere" of the executive arm to 15 apply the laws. 1 1 According t o Calhoun, the p e r f e c t o r g a n i z a t i o n had three i n t e r a c t i n g p a r t s . Permanent s t a f f bureaus, located i n Washington and headed by the adjutant general's department, would d i r e c t m i l i t a r y a d m i n i s t r a t i o n ; the s e n i o r general of the army would e x e r c i s e m i l i t a r y command; and the c i v i l i a n S e c retary of War, a c t i n g as the P r e s i d e n t ' s executive agent i n m i l i t a r y a f f a i r s , would supervise and co-ordinate adminis-t r a t i o n and command. Emory Upton, an Important advocate of s t a f f reform some f i f t y years l a t e r , b e l i e v e d t h a t t h i s system would have provided f o r the United States Army " a l l the advantages of the most modern s t a f f o r g a n i z a t i o n . " 1 ^ Calhoun's plan had, however, some s i g n i f i c a n t d e f e c t s . When determining the s i z e and composition of the army, Congress had f a i l e d t o provide supernumerary o f f i c e r s f o r l 8 temporary secondment to s t a f f duty. The r o t a t i o n system of l i n e and s t a f f duty which Calhoun had o r i g i n a l l y intended t h e r e f o r e became i m p r a c t i c a b l e , and o f f i c e r s s e l e c t e d f o r s t a f f work remained w i t h the department t o which they had been assigned. A l s o i t chanced that from 1825-1860 department c h i e f s enjoyed unusually long tenure of t h e i r o f f i c e s ; i n those t h i r t y - f i v e years there were, f o r example, only two c h i e f a d j u t a n t s , two i n s p e c t o r s , two quartermasters, and one 1 9 commissary. Each department thus added c o n t i n u i t y of personnel t o the n a t u r a l c o n t i n u i t y of i n t e r e s t d erived from i t s s p e c i a l i z e d f u n c t i o n . As a r e s u l t the s t a f f departments acquired considerable i n f l u e n c e i n the m i l i t a r y establishment, and sought t o aggrandize t h e i r r o l e . 12 That r o l e was an ambiguous one. O r i g i n a l l y e s t a b l i s h e d t o advise a c i v i l i a n Secretary of War and t o r e l i e v e him of the burdensome d e t a i l s of m i l i t a r y a d m i n i s t r a t i o n , the Washington s t a f f bureaus looked t o the Secretary as t h e i r 20 proper s u p e r i o r . At the same time the bureau o f f i c e r s held rank i n a m i l i t a r y h i e r a r c h y of which the l e g i t i m a t e head was the commanding general. A s s o c i a t e d , t h e r e f o r e , w i t h both a d m i n i s t r a t i o n and command, the s t a f f bureaus became embroiled i n the running d i s p u t e s between the Secretary and the commanding general. The disputes were t o become n o t o r i o u s — a n " o f f e n s i v e sore," reported one army a u t h o r i t y on command problems; bearing "an Intimate r e l a t i o n w i t h d i s a s t e r s and maladminis-21 t r a t i o n , judged another. The b a s i s f o r the disputes l a y In the Secretary's c l a i m to give orders d i r e c t l y t o army o f f i c e r s , through the agency of the adjutant general's department, r a t h e r than through the commanding general. The general understandably r e j e c t e d t h i s c l a i m , a s s e r t i n g that no c i v i l i a n S e c r e t a r y , without m i l i t a r y rank, could issue d i r e c t orders to men who stood i n a s t r i c t m i l i t a r y h i e r -archy of s u p e r i o r i t y and sub o r d i n a t i o n ; orders could only be issued through the r e g u l a r chain of command, which was headed by the general. Calhoun found a temporary s o l u t i o n to the q u a r r e l , by r e t a i n i n g the Secretary's r i g h t t o give orders while p r o v i d i n g that the commander should always be informed of the i n s t r u c t i o n s i s s u e d . I t proved impossible, 13 however, to reach any agreed d e f i n i t i o n of the a u t h o r i t y e x e r c i s e d by each man, and controversy over the c o n t r o l of the army raged t i l l the end of the century between the 22 p o l i t i c a l and m i l i t a r y branches of army command. A n a t u r a l focus f o r the p o l i t i c a l - m i l i t a r y r i v a l r i e s were the two p r i n c i p a l agents of m i l i t a r y a d m i n i s t r a t i o n , the adjutant general and the i n s p e c t o r general. The -adjutant general's department had r i s e n from r e l a t i v e l y humble o r i g i n s as a "department on horseback," "without form and v o i d " of permanent o r g a n i z a t i o n , t o become ...the r i g h t arm of the m i l i t a r y establishment, the medium of i t s orders and commands, the custodian of i t s records and a r c h i v e s , the guardian of i t s documentary and best evidence, from the muster of the humblest e n l i s t e d man t o the.commission of the commander-in-chief, 23 and the orders on the f i e l d of a p i t c h e d b a t t l e . The i n s p e c t o r s , by c o n t r a s t , had very d i f f e r e n t f u n c t i o n s , and were re s p o n s i b l e f o r i n s p e c t i n g the s t a t e of army t r a i n i n g , d i s c i p l i n e , supply, a d m i n i s t r a t i o n , and command. There was some doubt whether they ever developed a departmental o r g a n i z a t i o n , and C o l o n e l R. B. Marcy, Union i n s p e c t o r general throughout the C i v i l War, argued that the i n s p e c t o r s had always been viewed "as i n d i v i d u a l i n s p e c t o r s , assigned to the headquarters of the army f o r the Department of War f o r i n s p e c t i o n s e r v i c e , and placed upon a f o o t i n g s i m i l a r t o that 24 of s e n i o r aides-de-camp." In s p i t e of these d i f f e r e n c e s the i n s p e c t o r s and the adjutants were u s u a l l y a s s o c i a t e d w i t h one another i n the m i l i t a r y mind. The i n s p e c t o r s , however, played a l e s s e r r o l e i n command r e l a t i o n s h i p s than d i d the more h i g h l y developed adjutant general's department. 14 Just as I t was never found p o s s i b l e t o s e t t l e the d i s -pute between the Secretary of War and the commanding general, so d i d the r o l e of the adjutant general's department remain undetermined. In 1829 the adjutant g e n e r a l , C o l o n e l Roger Jones, t r i e d t o c l a r i f y h i s department's p o s i t i o n , c l a i m i n g f o r i t a dua l r o l e . He d i s t i n g u i s h e d between i t s adminis-t r a t i v e and i t s s t r i c t l y m i l i t a r y d u t i e s ; f o r the f i r s t , the department was r e s p o n s i b l e t o the Sec r e t a r y , and f o r the second, t o the army commander, t o whom the adjutant general stood i n the r e l a t i o n s h i p of c h i e f of s t a f f . Jones waxed l y r i c a l over "the harmony and r a t i o n a l i t y of t h i s b e a u t i f u l system," which, he a s s e r t e d , the general was t r y i n g t o subvert by i n t e r f e r i n g w i t h the department i n i t s a d m i n i s t r a t i v e c a p a c i t y . What the adjutant general wanted was t o e s t a b l i s h the greatest p o s s i b l e degree of independence f o r h i s own department, which would d e a l d i r e c t l y with the Secretary of 25 War, i n most cases by-passing the commanding general. These claims had s e r i o u s i m p l i c a t i o n s , not only at general headquarters i n Washington, but throughout the army. A r i v a l r y developed between s t a f f and l i n e o f f i c e r s , with each acknowledging h i s own chain of command; there was a general l a c k of the subordination due the commander-in-chief from the s t a f f ; and j u n i o r commanders i n posts across the country found themselves and t h e i r s t a f f s subject t o d i r e c t i v e s 26 from the Washington bureaus. Upton, w i t h strong opinions derived from h i s own m i l i t a r y experience, o u t l i n e d the process of s t a f f aggrandize-ment : 15 Instead of acknowledging the genera 1-in-chief, under the P r e s i d e n t , as the m i l i t a r y head of the Army, the c h i e f s of s t a f f corps have magnified the d u t i e s of the Secretary ,of War and have p r e f e r r e d t o look to him, not only as the c h i e f of a d m i n i s t r a -t i o n , but as t h e i r sole and l e g i t i m a t e m i l i t a r y s u p e r i o r . Under his. p r o t e c t i o n , they have t o a large degree withdrawn the operations of t h e i r departments, from'the c o n t r o l and even i n s p e c t i o n , of the g e n e r a l - i n - c h i e f and other m i l i t a r y commanders. This system, i t should be borne i n mind, i s e x c l u s i v e l y our own. The c h i e f s of s t a f f corps c o n t i n u a l l y issue orders t o t h e i r subordinates, i n v o l v i n g large expenditures of money, which orders may or may not be t r a n s m i t t e d through the d i v i s i o n or department commanders on whose s t a f f t h e i r subordinates are s e r v i n g . In t h i s manner...the c h i e f s of s t a f f corps...have, contrary t o the p r a c t i c e i n f o r e i g n armies, appropriated to them-selves much of the a u t h o r i t y of d i v i s i o n and department commanders. 27 C l e a r l y Upton shared the opinion of many o f f i c e r s that the s t a f f departments were using t h e i r a d m i n i s t r a t i v e powers t o usurp the a u t h o r i t y of the l i n e commanders. Of e s p e c i a l concern was the p o s s i b i l i t y that the adjutant general's department would u l t i m a t e l y d i r e c t the army. This would occur, argued a Senate M i l i t a r y A f f a i r s Committee i n 1828, i f the o f f i c e of commander-in-chief were ever a b o l i s h e d . The army would then f a l l under the c o n t r o l , i n m i l i t a r y as l n a d m i n i s t r a t i v e matters, of the Secretary of War; but as most S e c r e t a r i e s lacked m i l i t a r y background, c o n t r o l would i n f a c t be e x e r c i s e d by t h e i r p r o f e s s i o n a l a d v i s o r s , the c h i e f s of the permanent s t a f f departments. The adjutant general, as the p r i n c i p a l a d m i n i s t r a t i v e o f f i c e r , whose work brought him i n t o contact w i t h a l l branches of the army, would become the c h i e f of s t a f f of the army, and the 16 e f f e c t i v e d i r e c t o r o f - - a l l i t s a f f a i r s . Such a development, though i t accorded w i t h Jomini's elevated concept of the c h i e f of s t a f f ' s r o l e , was not acceptable to American c r i t i c s of the growing s t a f f power. They b e l i e v e d , w i t h Upton, that the adjutant general's department had never r i s e n above "the drudgery of mere r o u t i n e , " and was i l l - e q u i p p e d by e i t h e r t r a i n i n g or experience f o r a more re s p o n s i b l e r o l e . A commanding general was th e r e f o r e e s s e n t i a l to the army, they concluded, f o r h i s presumed m i l i t a r y s k i l l s , and as a neces-28 sary check on an ambitious s t a f f . A contentious t r a d i t i o n was thus part of the Confederate m i l i t a r y i n h e r i t a n c e . Southern leaders who had once served i n the American army were f a m i l i a r w i t h the long q u a r r e l s of successive S e c r e t a r i e s of War and army commanders, and w i t h the c o n t i n u i n g r i v a l r y between s t a f f and l i n e o f f i c e r s . I n e v i t a b l y t h e i r e a r l y experience would i n f l u e n c e to some degree the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e system adopted f o r the Confederate army, and i t s e f f e c t i v e n e s s . One Southern o f f i c e r i n the antebellum army who showed an e a r l y i n t e r e s t i n s t a f f work was Braxton Bragg, l a t e r a f u l l general of the Confederacy, but i n the e a r l y l840s a 29 r e l a t i v e l y i n s i g n i f i c a n t l i e u t e n a n t of a r t i l l e r y . Bragg was a n a t u r a l l y troublesome o f f i c e r , s u s c e p t i b l e to i n s u l t , and c r i t i c a l of those i n a u t h o r i t y over him. In 1844-1845, through the columns of the Southern L i t e r a r y Messenger, he launched a sweeping a t t a c k on the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of the American army, which was, he considered, an imperfect and 17 almost d i s o r g a n i z e d m i l i t a r y establishment." At f a u l t , Bragg charged, were the Secretary of War, who had exaggerated h i s true r o l e as the P r e s i d e n t ' s adjutant general i n t o a c l a i m t o the m i l i t a r y command of the army; the commanding general, W i n f i e l d S c o t t , who used h i s p o s i t i o n t o destroy h i s p r o f e s -s i o n a l r i v a l s and t o advance h i s p o l i t i c a l ambitions; and the s t a f f departments, c o l l e c t i v e l y s t i g m a t i z e d as "composed of ignorant and useless o f f i c e r s , " "fawning ;sycophant[ s ] , " and 32 " p r o f i c i e n t s i n the subtle a r t of p l e a s i n g i n high p l a c e s . " Bragg's only heroes were the j u n i o r o f f i c e r s of the l i n e , who were d i s c r i m i n a t e d against i n rank, pay, and assignments, t o the advantage of the s t a f f . B i t t e r l y he complained that the l i n e of the army had become "only an appendage t o the S t a f f , 33 a s o r t of preparatory school f o r S t a f f o f f i c e r s . " In t h i s frame of mind Bragg was l i t t l e i n c l i n e d t o welcome the suggestion of the quartermaster general, t h a t o f f i c e r s should be given a l t e r n a t i n g tours of duty, w i t h the l i n e and w i t h the s t a f f . Bragg regarded t h i s proposal as i n s u l t i n g t o any p r o f e s s i o n a l o f f i c e r , who, he a s s e r t e d , had not entered the army t o become one of the "corn, c o a l , or pork merchants" of the quartermaster's department. Moreover, i n wartime, he argued, the proper place f o r experienced o f f i c e r s was wi t h t h e i r regiments, which should not be de-p r i v e d of t h e i r best leaders t o f i l l out s t a f f departments already too l a r g e ; promising o f f i c e r s would only be ruin e d by assignment t o s t a f f duty, and i n that case i t would be best 34 i f they never returned t o t h e i r regiments. 18 Obviously Bragg opposed the e x i s t i n g system of a permanent s t a f f , and a l s o r e j e c t e d i t s a l t e r n a t i v e , the r o t a -t i o n of l i n e and s t a f f d u t i e s . I t was t h e r e f o r e d i f f i c u l t t o see where s t a f f personnel was t o come from, but Bragg provided ho answer, other than to suggest that most quartermaster and 35 some ordnance d u t i e s could be performed by c i v i l i a n s . His b a s i c proposal was to reduce s u b s t a n t i a l l y the s i z e and expense of the e x i s t i n g s t a f f departments. Thus Bragg o f f e r e d l i t t l e that was c o n s t r u c t i v e i n h i s a r t i c l e s on m i l i t a r y a d m i n i s t r a t i o n . T h e i r s i g n i f i c a n c e l i e s r a t h e r i n what they r e v e a l of the t r a d i t i o n a l r i v a l r y between s t a f f and l i n e , expressed i n the h o s t i l e comments of a f u t u r e Confederate commander. The Confederate President had a l s o been involved i n the antebellum disp u t e s over a d m i n i s t r a t i o n and command i n the o l d United States Army. As Secretary of War, from 1853-1857, J e f f e r s o n Davis had engaged i n a s e r i e s of notorious q u a r r e l s 36 w i t h the commanding gener a l , W i n f i e l d S c o t t . Though open personal a n t i p a t h i e s heightened the disagreement, i t s o r i g i n s l a y i n the o l d c l a i m t h a t the Secretary could issue orders to army o f f i c e r s on h i s own a u t h o r i t y . This c l a i m Davis exer-c i s e d , through h i s adjutant general, Samuel Cooper—Cooper was l a t e r t o be adjutant general of the Confederacy. Davis maintained that any act of the Secretary of War was " i n l e g a l contemplation the act of the P r e s i d e n t , and as such...to be respected and obeyed"; he c i t e d numerous precedents to show that the War Department was accustomed to g i v i n g d i r e c t orders 19 to f i e l d commanders, "passing over the Commanding General and a l l others that stood between"; and asserted that h i s use of the adjutant general was i n no way improper or a v i o l a t i o n of 37 h i s authority.. Davis a l s o turned t o h i s advantage the f a c t t h a t S c o t t ' s army headquarters were l o c a t e d , not i n Washington w i t h the War Department and the s t a f f bureaus, but i n New 38 York. i n a l e t t e r t o President P i e r c e the Secretary ex-p l a i n e d that, the i n e v i t a b l e delays i n communicating w i t h S c o t t , together with the general's " p e r s i s t e n t disobedience," r e q u i r e d that " a l l orders a f f e c t i n g the army g e n e r a l l y should be com-municated only by the War Department, through the o f f i c e of the Adjutant General of the army."39 S c o t t i n h i s t u r n charged t h a t the Secretary had arrogated t o h i m s e l f a l l m i l i t a r y power, when i t should have been shared w i t h the commanding gene r a l ; that the Secretary was:in e f f e c t the c h i e f of s t a f f of the P r e s i d e n t , and so could not issue orders independently, but only on the P r e s i d e n t ' s a u t h o r i t y ; and t h a t the instrument of Davis's usurpation was the adjutant g e n e r a l , who issued commands, not only t o s t a f f o f f i c e r s , but t o the whole army, on the a u t h o r i t y of the Secretary alone. This s i t u a t i o n , Scott fulminated, was the e q u i v a l e n t of having a sergeant-major issue orders t o h i s regiment, i n the name of i t s a d j u t a n t , and without 40 reference t o the commanding o f f i c e r . S c o t t l o s t h i s b a t t l e w i t h Davis. Supported by P i e r c e , and by a r a t h e r ambiguous pronouncement by the Attorney 41 General, the Secretary was able t o a s s e r t h i s a u t h o r i t y 20 over the War Department, the s t a f f , and the l i n e of the army. From 1855 t o the outbreak of the C i v i l War, the commanding general v i r t u a l l y ceased t o e x e r c i s e command of the army. Davis had triumphed i n the s t r u g g l e f o r supremacy between the p o l i t i c a l arm of m i l i t a r y government and a r e c a l c i t r a n t 42 general. While at the War Department the f u t u r e Confederate President d i d not confine h i s a t t e n t i o n to the d i s p u t e s with S c o t t , but a l s o demonstrated an i n t e r e s t i n a d m i n i s t r a t i v e reform. Davis considered the e x i s t i n g system, of a permanent s t a f f corps w i t h i t s own o f f i c e r s and i t s own h i e r a r c h y , i n e f f i c i e n t both i n i t s immediate s t a f f d u t i e s and i n i t s r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s t o the army as a whole. A permanent corps was weak, he argued, because i t r e s t r i c t e d the experience of i t s o f f i c e r s t o s t a f f work, making them u n f i t f o r the l i n e command t o which t h e i r rank might e n t i t l e them, or occasion r e q u i r e of them; a l s o , a permanent system d i d not a l l o w f o r the c o r r e c t i o n of any e r r o r s i n the s e l e c t i o n of s t a f f o f f i c e r s . These f a u l t s would disappear i f o f f i c e r s were assigned only t e m p o r a r i l y to s t a f f , and returned t o the l i n e when the assignment was over. The army would acquire a large body of o f f i c e r s t r a i n e d i n both f i e l d s of duty, and competent i n a l l the r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s appropriate t o t h e i r rank; the s t a f f departments would have the widest p o s s i b l e range f o r s e l e c t i o n of t h e i r personnel, and, while r e t a i n i n g those w i t h s p e c i a l a p t i t u d e f o r s t a f f work, would be able t o r e t u r n l e s s u s e f u l o f f i c e r s t o t h e i r regiments. What Davis wanted was to 21 r e p l a c e the e x i s t i n g separation of s t a f f and l i n e , w i t h i t s attendant h o s t i l i t i e s , by an i n t e g r a t i o n which would remove " a l l grounds of controversy and o b j e c t i o n t o the rank and 43 e x e r c i s e of command by s t a f f o f f i c e r s . " In 1856, i n h i s o f f i c i a l r eport t o the President and Congress, the Secretary returned to h i s suggestions f o r a d m i n i s t r a t i v e reform, r e - I t e r a t i n g h i s concern over the r e l a t i o n s h i p of s t a f f and l i n e : I t i s s c a r c e l y to be doubted that the phrase " l i n e of the army" meant the army of the confederation, and included a l l i t s o f f i c e r s , whether s t a f f or regimental. But subsequent l e g i s l a t i o n , c r e a t i n g s p e c i a l corps or departments composed of o f f i c e r s whose d u t i e s do not i n v o l v e the command of troops, has given r i s e t o , and perhaps produced, a n e c e s s i t y f o r a c o n s t r u c t i o n of the phrase " l i n e of the army," which places regimental and s t a f f o f f i c e r s i n a r e l a t i o n i n c o n s i s t e n t w i t h the general p r i n c i p l e s of s u b o r d i n a t i o n , and which must sometimes s e r i o u s l y embarrass, I f not defeat, the great purposes of a campaign. B e l i e v i n g that o f f i c e r s of the army should, w i t h as few exceptions as p r a c t i c a b l e , have rank e f f e c t i v e f o r purposes of command, I have heretofore presented a p r o p o s i t i o n f o r r e o r g a n i z a t i o n , which, among other t h i n g s , was designed to secure g e n e r a l l y t o o f f i c e r s of the s t a f f that knowledge which can only be acquired by the performance of company and regimental duty. To the views heretofore communicated, i n r e l a t i o n t o the r e o r g a n i z a t i o n of the army, I have only to add t h a t a d d i t i o n a l experience has but con-firmed them. 44 But i n s p i t e of Davis's earnest advocacy, h i s proposals were not put i n t o e f f e c t t i l l the end of the c e n t u r y . ^ The Secretary had no more success w i t h h i s other, l e s s sweeping, recommendations. He wished to add three b r i g a d i e r generals t o the army establishment, so that rank and a u t h o r i t y could be given the adjutant general and two i n s p e c t o r s general. Since the d u t i e s of the adjutant general i n the 22 American army were those which i n other armies would be given to the c h i e f of s t a f f , Davis argued, the adjutant should have "as h i g h rank as any other member on the s t a f f w i t h him, and 46 as the department commanders." Inspectors a l s o , from the s p e c i a l nature of t h e i r d u t i e s , r e q u i r e d h i g h rank, t o ensure respect and co-operation, although Davis apparently b e l i e v e d that t h e i r f u n c t i o n s would wither away i n wartime, e s p e c i a l l y d u r i n g a c t i v e campaigns. P a r t l y f o r that reason, and p a r t l y because of t h e i r d u t i e s , the Secretary opposed the commission of o f f i c e r s permanently and s o l e l y f o r the i n s p e c t i o n s e r v i c e . Thus by l86l J e f f e r s o n Davis could look back on a va r i e d m i l i t a r y experience. He knew the army as a pr o f e s -s i o n a l o f f i c e r , and as i t s c i v i l i a n d i r e c t o r . As a r e s u l t he was f a m i l i a r w i t h the problems of high command, and had decided opinions on m i l i t a r y a d m i n i s t r a t i o n . I n e v i t a b l y h i s i n s i d e knowledge of the antebellum m i l i t a r y establishment of the United States would Inform h i s r o l e as c h i e f executive and commander-in-chief of the Confederacy. C l e a r l y the Confederate i n h e r i t a n c e was a c o n t r o v e r s i a l one. But i n s p i t e of the disputes over theory and p r a c t i c e there was a co n t i n u i n g t r a d i t i o n by which the o l d army c a r r i e d out I t s r o u t i n e d u t i e s . That t r a d i t i o n was expressed i n the United States A r t i c l e s of War and the Army Regulations, both adopted v i r t u a l l y e n t i r e by the Confederacy; and i t a l s o appeared i n a m i l i t a r y d i c t i o n a r y published i n l86 l . The d i c t i o n a r y was not e x a c t l y f r e e of c o n t r o v e r s y - - i t s author was C o l o n e l Henry Lee S c o t t , West Point graduate, son-in-law 23 4 8 and long-time aide-de-camp to General W i n f i e l d S c o t t , and some of h i s d i c t i o n a r y d e f i n i t i o n s favored the general's i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of disputed matters. Nevertheless S c o t t ' s M i l i t a r y D i c t i o n a r y became one of the standard reference works of the::.Civil War p e r i o d , and was quoted at length i n a f i e l d 4 9 manual f o r s t a f f o f f i c e r s . i t provided a valuable key to both m i l i t a r y thought and t e c h n i c a l achievement i n the United States Army at the outbreak of the C i v i l War. According t o C o l o n e l S c o t t , the f u n c t i o n of a d m i n i s t r a -t i o n was t o execute the law; m i l i t a r y a d m i n i s t r a t i o n i n the United States was headed by the Secretary of War, under the orders of the P r e s i d e n t ; the agents of a d m i n i s t r a t i o n were the s t a f f bureaus of the War Department; and a d m i n i s t r a t i o n was d i s t i n c t from command. The D i c t i o n a r y was s p e c i f i c on t h i s l a s t p o i n t : A d m i n i s t r a t i o n i s c o n t r o l l e d by the head of an executive department of the government, under the orders of the P r e s i d e n t , by means of l e g a l l y appointed a d m i n i s t r a t i v e agents, w i t h or without rank, while Command, or the d i s c i p l i n e , m i l i t a r y c o n t r o l , and d i r e c t i o n of m i l i t a r y s e r v i c e of o f f i c e r s and s o l d i e r s can be l e g a l l y e x e r c i s e d only by the m i l i t a r y h i e r a r c h y , at the head of which i s the c o n s t i t u t i o n a l commander-in-chief of the army, navy, and m i l i t i a , f o l l o w e d by the commander of the army, and other m i l i t a r y grades created by Congress. Scott thus emphasized the dual system of m i l i t a r y c o n t r o l 50 which Davis had opposed. Again according t o the D i c t i o n a r y , a l l army a d m i n i s t r a -t i o n was c e n t r a l i z e d i n the War Department, under the d i r e c t i o n 51 of the Secretary and the c h i e f s of the v a r i o u s s t a f f bureaus. 24 The bureaus were simply the Washington headquarters of the s t a f f departments, which a l s o operated w i t h army detachments and at army posts across the country. S c o t t d i s t i n g u i s h e d three s t a f f groups s e r v i n g w i t h a f i e l d detachment: 1. The General S t a f f , c o n s i s t i n g of a d j u t a n t s -general and a s s i s t a n t - a d j u t a n t s - g e n e r a l ; aides-de-camp; i n s p e c t o r s - g e n e r a l and a s s i s t a n t - i n s p e c t o r s -general. The f u n c t i o n s of these o f f i c e r s c o n s i s t not merely i n d i s t r i b u t i n g the orders of commanding generals, but a l s o i n r e g u l a t i n g camps, d i r e c t i n g the march of columns, and f u r n i s h i n g t o the commanding general a l l necessary d e t a i l s f o r the e x e r c i s e of h i s a u t h o r i t y . T h e i r d u t i e s embrace the whole range of the s e r v i c e of the t r o o p s , and they are hence p r o p e r l y s t y l e d general s t a f f - o f f l e e r s . 2. S t a f f Corps, or s t a f f departments. These are s p e c i a l corps or departments, whose d u t i e s are confined t o d i s t i n c t branches of the s e r v i c e . The engineer corps and t o p o g r a p h i c a l engineers are such s t a f f corps. The ordnance, quartermasters', subsistence, medical and pay departments are such s t a f f departments. 3. The Regimental S t a f f embraces regimental o f f i c e r s and non-commissioned o f f i c e r s charged with f u n c t i o n s , w i t h i n t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e regiments, a s s i m i l a t e d to the d u t i e s of a d j u t a n t - g e n e r a l s , quartermasters and commissaries. Each regiment has a regimental adjutant and a regimental quartermaster, appointed by the c o l o n e l from the o f f i c e r s of the regiment. 52 Of the three branches, Scott was most concerned w i t h the general s t a f f , which was the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e arm not only of the Secretary but a l s o of the commanding generals. The general s t a f f o f f i c e r , he wrote, r e q u i r e d a knowledge of horse-manship and swordsmanship; should be f a m i l i a r w i t h topography, f o r e i g n languages, and m i l i t a r y a d m i n i s t r a t i o n ; must have studied t a c t i c s , and be able t o judge m i l i t a r y p o s i t i o n s . Only then could he " i n the tumult of b a t t l e , or under c r i t i c a l circumstances, second h i s general by a i d i n g him i n t e l l i g e n t l y 25 i n w a r l i k e operations"; and only then, "stimulate and e n l i g h t e n the troops by h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of the orders he c a r r i e s , by h i s i n t u i t i v e knowledge of t h e i r t a c t i c a l p o s i t i o n , by h i s coup d ' o e i l , by the p r o p r i e t y of h i s counsels, and by the v i g o r of h i s impulsions." L i t t l e wonder, then, that Scott b e l i e v e d i t e s s e n t i a l that general s t a f f o f f i c e r s have had experience w i t h troops, and t h a t he opposed the permanent s t a f f system which denied i t s o f f i c e r s that experience. With Davis, t h e r e -f o r e , S c o t t advocated the a l t e r n a t i o n of s t a f f and l i n e 53 d u t i e s The D i c t i o n a r y defined the d u t i e s of the departments making up the general s t a f f . The adjutant general's department had bureau d u t i e s , of making out and i s s u i n g orders, r e c e i v i n g r e p o r t s and r e t u r n s , c a r r y i n g on correspondence w i t h adminis-t r a t i v e and l i n e o f f i c e r s , and keeping the records and papers of the army; the department a l s o had a c t i v e d u t i e s , of s e t t i n g up camps, checking guard-posts, mustering and i n s p e c t i n g troops, forming parades and l i n e s of b a t t l e , t a k i n g care of d e s e r t e r s and p r i s o n e r s , making reconnaissances, and c a r r y i n g out any other t a s k s that might be assigned. Some of these d u t i e s p r o p e r l y belonged t o the i n s p e c t i o n s e r v i c e , and the a s s i s t a n t adjutants general were a l s o e x - o f f i c i o a s s i s t a n t i n s p e c t o r s general. The Inspection s e r v i c e reported on the d i s c i p l i n e , t r a i n i n g , equipment, and s u p p l i e s of the troops; and on the a b i l i t y and e f f i c i e n c y of a l l o f f i c e r s . Together the a d j u t a n t s and the i n s p e c t o r s performed the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e d u t i e s of the general s t a f f . 26 The D i c t i o n a r y d i d i n c l u d e one other c l a s s of o f f i c e r on the general s t a f f . Aides-de-camp were not members of any s t a f f department, but the c o n f i d e n t i a l a s s i s t a n t s of t h e i r commander, appointed p e r s o n a l l y by him, and r e c e i v i n g orders from him alone. S c o t t , however, considered these o f f i c e r s t o be e x - o f f i c i o a s s i s t a n t a djutants general, and l i s t e d them among the general s t a f f . 5 5 No mention at a l l was made of the c h i e f of s t a f f , p o s s i b l y because there was no l e g a l p r o v i s i o n i n the American army f o r such an o f f i c e r . The omission was strange neverthe-l e s s , since the term was one f a m i l i a r t o American o f f i c e r s , and appeared i n the f i e l d manual on s t a f f . The d u t i e s of the c h i e f of s t a f f i n the French army were included t h e r e , the e d i t o r e x p l a i n e d , as they provided "valuable and i n t e r e s t i n g " suggestions of what might be added t o the American system. The c h i e f of s t a f f t r a n s m i t t e d the orders of the general, him-s e l f executed s p e c i f i c f i e l d assignments, co-ordinated the work of the v a r i o u s s t a f f departments, and provided h i s commander w i t h a l l necessary i n f o r m a t i o n about troops, posts, marches and other m i l i t a r y operations. "Next to the commander," the manual a s s e r t e d , "the c h i e f of s t a f f i s the man of the whole army who can do the most good i f he i s capable, and the most harm i f d e f i c i e n t , i n a b i l i t y . " As success could only be achieved through the "zealous and methodical co-operation" of the subordinate s t a f f , the c h i e f must give s p e c i a l a t t e n t i o n 56 t o the proper d i v i s i o n of d u t i e s among h i s o f f i c e r s . 27 Thus there was no shortage i n the m i l i t a r y i n f o r m a t i o n a v a i l a b l e t o the Confederacy. In the theory taught at West P o i n t , i n the p r a c t i c e of the antebellum m i l i t a r y e s t a b l i s h -ment, and i n the r e g u l a t i o n t e x t s of the o l d army, Southerners could f i n d models f o r t h e i r own system of m i l i t a r y a d m i n i s t r a -t i o n . On the success w i t h which they adapted e x i s t i n g s t a f f concepts, or developed new ones, would depend i n large degree the performance of the Confederate armies. Notes 28 War of the R e b e l l i o n : A Compilation of the O f f i c i a l  Records of the Union and Confederate Armies (128 v o l s . ; Washington: Government P r i n t i n g O f f l e e , 1880-1901), S e r i e s IV, I , 9 6 , 106, 114-115, 131. 2 E l l s w o r t h E l i o t , J r . , West Poi n t i n the Confederacy (New York: G. A. Baker and Company, Inc., 1 9 4 l ) , p. 324; H. C. Corbin and R. P. Thian, compilers, L e g i s l a t i v e H i s t o r y  of the General S t a f f of the Army of the United S t a t e s , 1775-1901 (Washington: Government P r i n t i n g O f f i c e , 1901), p. 52; F r a n c i s B. Heitman, H i s t o r i c a l R e g i s t e r and D i c t i o n a r y  of the United States Army... 1789-1903 (2 v o l s . ; Urbana: U n i v e r s i t y of I l l i n o i s Press, 19S5), II, 176-179; E l i o t , West P o i n t i n the Confederacy, pp. 9-10. 29 ^For a d i s c u s s i o n of Jomini"s thought, see Crane B r i n t o n , Gordon A. C r a i g , and F e l i x G i l b e r t , "Jomini," Makers of Modern  Strategy: M i l i t a r y Thought from M a c h i a v e l l i t o H i t l e r , Edward Mead E a r l e , ed. (Pr i n c e t o n : P r i n c e t o n U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1 9 4 l ) , pp. 77-92; Michael Howard, "Jomini and the C l a s s i c a l T r a d i t i o n i n M i l i t a r y Thought," The Theory and P r a c t i c e of  War: Essays Presented t o Captain B. H. L i d d e l l Hart, Michael Howard, ed. (London: C a s s e l l and Company, L t d . , 1965), pp. 5-20. The e f f e c t of Jomini's ideas on American m i l i t a r y thought has been examined i n David Donald, " R e f i g h t i n g the C i v i l War;" L i n c o l n Reconsidered: Essays on the C i v i l War Era (2nd e d i t i o n ; New York: Vintage Books, 1956), pp. 82-102; T. Harry W i l l i a m s , "The M i l i t a r y Leadership of North and South," Why the North Won the C i v i l War, David Donald, ed. (New York: C o l l i e r Books, 1962), pp. 33-54. ^Corbin and Thian, L e g i s l a t i v e H i s t o r y , pp. 3, 5-5 A n t o i n e H e n r i Jomini, The A r t of War, G. H. Mendell and W. P. C r a i g h i l l , t r a n s l a t o r s ( P h i l a d e l p h i a : J . B. L i p p i n c o t t and Company, 1862), pp. 252-257. 6 I b i d . , pp. 55, 57. 7 l b i d . , pp. 56, 57, 253. 8 I b i d . , P. 253. 9 l b i d . , pp. 254, 256. 1 0 I b i d . , P. 59. n I b i d . , pp. 4 9 - 5 0 . 30 1 2Howard, "Jomini and the C l a s s i c a l T r a d i t i o n i n M i l i t a r y Thought," p. 15, claims that "...Jomini's a n a l y s i s remained v a l i d as a b a s i s f o r a manual of s t a f f d u t i e s " t i l l 1914. 1 3 j o m i n i , The A r t of War, pp. 45-^7. ^ L . D. I n g e r s o l l , A H i s t o r y of the War Department of  the United States (Washington: F r a n c i s B. Mohun, 1879), pp. 9 0 , 91. 1 5 I b i d . , p. 93. ^ R u s s e l l F. Weigley, H i s t o r y of the United States Army (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1967), PP. 134-135; Leonard D. White, The J e f f e r s o n i a n s : A Study i n A d m i n i s t r a t i v e  H i s t o r y , 1801-1829 (New York: The Free Press, 1965), PP- 246-249; Samuel P. Huntington, The S o l d i e r and the State: The  Theory and P o l i t i c s of C i v i l - M i l i t a r y R e l a t i o n s (New York: Vintage Books, 1957), p. 208. -^Emory Upton, The M i l i t a r y P o l i c y of the United States (Washington: Government P r i n t i n g O f f i c e , 1917)/ p. 151. l 8 I b i d . , pp. 151-152, 180. ^ c o r b i n and Thian, L e g i s l a t i v e H i s t o r y , pp. 52, 8 6 , 140, 238. 2 0 I n g e r s o l l , War Department,pp. 2 6 , 93* 105, 106; W i l liana H. C a r t e r , The American Army ( I n d i a n a p o l i s : The Bobbs-M e r r i l l Company, Inc., 1915), p. 171. 31 21 C a r t e r , American Army, p. 196; Upton, M i l i t a r y P o l i c y , P. 159. 2 2 C a r t e r , American Army, p. 185j Upton, M i l i t a r y P o l i c y , pp. 145-147, 155-159; W i l l i a m H. C a r t e r , C r e a t i o n of the  American General S t a f f , Senate Document No. 119, 6 8 t h Cong., 1st Sess., 1924, p. 2; Weigley, United States Army, pp. 135-139-; White, The J e f f e r s o n i a n s , pp. 239-245; Leonard D. White, The-Jacksonlans: A Study i n A d m i n i s t r a t i v e H i s t o r y , 1829-1861 (New York: The Free Press, .1965), pp. 190-196; T. Harry W i l l i a m s , Americans at War: The Development of the  American M i l i t a r y System (New York: C o l l i e r Books, 1962), pp. 51-52. 2 3 l n g e r s o l l , War Department, pp.. 139-140. 2 ^ I b i d . , pp. 144-145, quoting Colonel Marcy. 25 C a r t e r , American Army, pp. 188-192, quoting Roger Jones, "A n a l y s i s of the theory of the S t a f f which surrounds the S ecretary of War," January 24, 1829. The adjutant general was not alone i n h i s claims f o r independence. See I n g e r s o l l , War Department, pp. 314-317, quoting S. V. Benet, " H i s t o r i c a l Statement of the Rise and Progress of the Ordnance Department," 1876. 26 Upton, M i l i t a r y P o l i c y , p. 155; C a r t e r , American Army, p. 193. 2 7 U p t o n , M i l i t a r y P o l i c y , p. 159. 32 28 Upton, M i l i t a r y P o l i c y , pp. 155-159, 2 6 2 - 2 6 4 . See a l s o A. Howard Meneely, The War Department, l 8 6 l : A Study i n M o b i l i z a t i o n and A d m i n i s t r a t i o n (New York: Columbia Univer-s i t y Press, 1928), pp. 2 5 - 2 7 . C a r t e r , American Army, pp. 185-186, claims t h a t In the p o s t - C i v i l War period the adjutant general d i d become the r e a l commander of the army. 2Q ^For a d i s c u s s i o n of Bragg at t h i s e a r l y stage of h i s career, see Grady McWhiney, Braxton Bragg and Confederate  Defeat: Volume I , F i e l d Command (New York: Columbia U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1969), pp. 2 6 - 5 1 . 3 0 A S u b a l t e r n , "Notes on Our Army," Southern L i t e r a r y  Messenger, X ( i 8 4 4 ) , 8 6 - 8 8 , 155-157, 2 4 6 - 2 5 1 , 2 8 3 - 2 8 7 , 373-377, 750-753; XI (1845), 3 9 - 4 7 , 105-109. McWhiney, Braxton Bragg, pp. 3 5 - 3 6 , i d e n t i f i e s the author as Bragg. 31 A Sub a l t e r n , "Notes on Our Army," X, 8 6 . 3 2 I b i d . , 247, 251. 3 3 I b i d . , 251. 3 4 I b i d . , 2 5 0 - 2 5 1 . 3 5 I b i d . 33 S^For correspondence r e v e a l i n g these q u a r r e l s , see Dunbar Rowland, ed., J e f f e r s o n Davis, C o n s t i t u t i o n a l i s t . H i s L e t t e r s , Papers, and Speeches (10 v o l s . ; Jackson, Miss.; M i s s i s s i p p i Department of Archives and H i s t o r y , 1923), Tl, 472-525. A l s o , Weigley, United States Army, pp. 192-194; White, The Jacksonians, pp. 194-196. 3 7Rowland, Davis, I I , 475-476, 497. A p o l i t i c a l h o s t i l i t y towards Pr e s i d e n t s T a y l o r and Pi e r c e had caused Sc o t t t o move h i s headquarters t o New York. Weigley, United States Army, p. 193; Meneely, War Department, l86l, pp. 29-30. 3 9Rowland, Davis, I I , 510-511. 4°Ibid., 473, 478, 482, 516. 4 l I b i d . , 508, 521. 4 2 c a r t e r , American Army, p. 185; Weigley, United States  Army, p. 194. 43 Rowland, Davis, I I , 399-406, quoting from the Report of the Secretary of War, December 4, 1854. 44 ^ I b i d . , I l l , 77. 45 C a r t e r , C r e a t i o n of the American General S t a f f , pp. 49-50, and passim. 34 4 6Rowland, Davis, I I , 4 0 3 . 4 ? I b i d . , 403-404. "Henry Lee S c o t t , " Appleton's Cyclopedia of American  Biography (7 v o l s . ; New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1 8 8 8 - 1 9 0 0 ) , V, 442. L. S c o t t , M i l i t a r y D i c t i o n a r y (New York: Greenwood Press, 1968, c. 1861), passim, and W. P. C r a i g h i l l , The Army  O f f i c e r ' s Pocket Companion: p r i n c i p a l l y designed f o r S t a f f O f f i c e r s i n the F i e l d (New York: D. Van Nostrand, 1863, c. 1861), passim. C r a i g h i l l recommended tha t a l l o f f i c e r s possess, among other works, a copy of the M i l i t a r y D i c t i o n a r y . See O f f i c e r ' s Companion, p. 298. 5°Scott, M i l i t a r y D i c t i o n a r y , pp. 15-17, 2 3 3 - 2 3 5 . Huntington, The S o l d i e r and the S t a t e , pp. 2 0 8 - 2 1 1 , argues that the system of dual c o n t r o l had become i n s t i t u t i o n a l i z e d by the 1830s, and formed a co-ordinate p a t t e r n of m i l i t a r y a d m i n i s t r a t i o n "probably unique i n the h i s t o r y of American p u b l i c a d m i n i s t r a t i o n . " 5 1 S c o t t , M i l i t a r y D i c t i o n a r y , p. 234. 35 J I b i d . , pp. 570-571. This d e f i n i t i o n appeared verbatim i n C r a i g h i l l , O f f i c e r ' s Companion, pp. 47-48. C a r t e r , C r e a t i o n of the American General S t a f f , p. 32, agrees t h a t i n the 19th century American army the adjutant general's department and the i n s p e c t o r general's department together formed the c l o s e s t approximation t o a General S t a f f ; he p o i n t s out, however, that the term "General S t a f f " was ofte n mistakenly a p p l i e d t o a l l branches of the s t a f f . 5 3 s e o t t , M i l i t a r y D i c t i o n a r y , p. 572. ^ I b i d . , pp. 14, 369-370; Revised Regulations f o r the  Army of the United S t a t e s , l 8 6 l ( P h i l a d e l p h i a : ; J . G. L. Brown, 1861), p. 71. ^ s c o t t , M i l i t a r y D i c t i o n a r y , p. 21 . ^ C r a i g h i l l , O f f i c e r ' s Companion, pp. 3 , 16-17. PART ONE: CHIEFS OF STAFF 37 CHAPTER I I U n d e r A. S. J o h n s t o n , B e a u r e g a r d , a nd B r a g g M a r c h 1862-December 1863 The C o n f e d e r a t e f o r c e s i n t h e W e s t , l a t e r t o be known a s t h e Army o f T e n n e s s e e , 1 f i r s t a s s e m b l e d a t C o r i n t h , M i s s i s s i p p i , i n M a r c h 1862. W i t h them were A l b e r t S i d n e y J o h n s t o n , P. G. T. B e a u r e g a r d , a nd B r a x t o n B r a g g . I n s u c c e s s i o n t h e s e t h r e e men commanded t h e Army o f T e n n e s s e e , J o h n s t o n t i l l h i s d e a t h on t h e b a t t l e f i e l d a t S h i l o h on A p r i l 6, B e a u r e g a r d t i l l s i c k n e s s b r o u g h t h i s r e l i e f f r o m command i n J u n e , a nd B r a g g 2 f r o m J u n e 1862 t o December 1863. A l l t h r e e commanders a p p o i n t e d a c h i e f o f s t a f f t o h e l p them d i r e c t t h e army, b u t t h o s e c h o s e n by B r a g g were t o p r o v e t h e most i n f l u e n t i a l , due t o t h e l o n g s e r v i c e o f t h e i r g e n e r a l . When G e n e r a l B r a g g t o o k o v e r f r o m B e a u r e g a r d i n t h e summer o f ]862, t h e o f f i c e o f c h i e f o f s t a f f d i d n o t l e g a l l y e x i s t . No p r o v i s i o n h a d b e e n made f o r s u c h a n a p p o i n t m e n t i n t h e a c t s p a s s e d b y C o n g r e s s i n 1861 " f o r t h e e s t a b l i s h m e n t a nd o r g a n i z a t i o n o f a g e n e r a l s t a f f f o r t h e Army o f t h e C o n f e d e r a t e 113 S t a t e s o f A m e r i c a . " N e v e r t h e l e s s t h e p r o b l e m s I n v o l v e d i n m a k i n g a n u n d i s c i p l i n e d mass o f e n t h u s i a s t i c v o l u n t e e r s i n t o a n e f f e c t i v e m i l i t a r y i n s t r u m e n t l e d i n p r a c t i c e t o a c o n s i d e r a b l e e x t e n s i o n o f t h e s t a f f b e y o n d t h a t d e f i n e d by C o n g r e s s . The most o b v i o u s e x t e n s i o n was t h e a p p o i n t m e n t o f c h i e f s o f s t a f f b y t h e g e n e r a l s commanding t h e f i e l d a r m i e s 38 of the Confederacy. Because the o f f i c e d i d not l e g a l l y e x i s t , however, i t followed n a t u r a l l y that no d e f i n i t i o n of the r o l e of c h i e f of s t a f f had been e s t a b l i s h e d . This s i t u a t i o n was c o r r e c t e d i n June 1864, when a new s t a f f act provided f o r the appointment as c h i e f of s t a f f of "a general o f f i c e r , who s h a l l be charged, under the d i r e c t i o n of the general,with the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of h i s army."^ But i n 1862, there was nothing i n the Confederate Army r e g u l a t i o n s e i t h e r to j u s t i f y Bragg i n a p p o i n t i n g a c h i e f of s t a f f , or t o help him determine what the r o l e of t h a t o f f i c e r should be. In d e f a u l t of such r e g u l a t i o n s , two sources presumably i n f l u e n c e d Bragg i n h i s view of the c h i e f of s t a f f . The f i r s t , and probably the most important, was h i s experience i n the United S t a t e s Army. At West Point he had been exposed to the Jominian theory of the c h i e f of s t a f f , as sharing i n the r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s of command. Since 1813 a Congressional act had provided f o r the appointment of a b r i g a d i e r general who would combine the o f f i c e of adjutant and i n s p e c t o r general 5 of the p r i n c i p a l army w i t h that of i t s c h i e f of s t a f f . But t h i s p r o v i s i o n was t o be a p p l i e d at the P r e s i d e n t ' s d i s c r e t i o n , and d u r i n g the Mexican War no such appointment was made, e i t h e r i n the army of Major General Zachary T a y l o r , w i t h which 6 Bragg had served, or i n that of Major General W i n f i e l d S c o t t . For Bragg, the o f f i c e of c h i e f of s t a f f i n the o l d United S t a t e s Army t h e r e f o r e e x i s t e d i n theory only. • The second i n f l u e n c e on Bragg's view of the c h i e f of s t a f f was h i s own b r i e f experience i n that o f f i c e i n the 39 Confederate army, under General A l b e r t Sidney Johnston. On March 2 9 , 1862, Bragg had been appointed c h i e f of s t a f f t o Johnston i n these terms: "Maj. Gen. Braxton Bragg, i n a d d i t i o n t o h i s d u t i e s as commander of the Second Army Corps, i s announced as c h i e f of s t a f f t o the commander of the f o r c e s . " 7 This appointment was unusual by any standards. According t o Confederate r e g u l a t i o n s there was no such o f f i c e as c h i e f of s t a f f j and the p r a c t i c e of the United States Army had b i t t e r l y opposed any combination of command and s t a f f d u t i e s . Yet here the d u t i e s of c h i e f of s t a f f were combined o w i t h the command of the l a r g e s t corps i n Johnston's army. The only explanation of Bragg's appointment which takes i n t o account h i s double d u t i e s i n l i n e and s t a f f was given by Q the adjutant general of the army, Co l o n e l Thomas Jordan. Jordan was a clo s e f r i e n d of General Beauregard, at that time second i n command of the army, and i n a l e t t e r t o him a f t e r the war wrote: Major General Bragg was nominally appointed c h i e f of the general s t a f f , a p o s i t i o n borrowed from c o n t i n e n t a l European armies, although there was no such o f f i c e provided by law...in the Confederate m i l i t a r y o r g a n i z a t i o n , which, however, was not regarded as m a t e r i a l at the time, as General Bragg was not t o be detached or at a l l d i v e r t e d from the command of h i s corps; and i n f a c t h i s assignment to the p o s i t i o n was i n order simply t o enable him, at some p o s s i b l e exigent moment on the f i e l d , t o give orders i n the name of General Johnston, a power which both the Commander-in-Chief and your-s e l f d e s i r e d t h a t General Bragg should have i n c e r t a i n e x i g e n c i e s . 10 Thus as c h i e f of s t a f f Bragg would assume no s t a f f d u t i e s , but r e t a i n the command of h i s corps, and be ready t o assume 40 r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r the army as a whole. The c h i e f of s t a f f became i n e f f e c t t h i r d i n command of the army. 1 1 The unusual device of using a s t a f f appointment t o ensure rank e f f e c t i v e f o r purposes of command was probably made necessary by the f a c t t h a t Bragg would otherwise be out-ranked by the l e s s 12 experienced Major General Leonidas Polk. Jordan's ex p l a n a t i o n of the e x t r a o r d i n a r y s i t u a t i o n i n which Bragg was both c h i e f of s t a f f and commander of a corps of 14,000 men i s supported by Bragg's record as c h i e f of s t a f f . Throughout March 1862, detachments of men were assembling at C o r i n t h , M i s s i s s i p p i , w i t h the i n t e n t i o n of combining under the command of General Johnston. Bragg described these f o r c e s as "an heterogeneous mass, i n which there was more enthusiasm than d i s c i p l i n e , more c a p a c i t y than knowledge, and more v a l o r than i n s t r u c t i o n . " He estimated t h e i r number as 40,000, and wrote of the t a s k of o r g a n i z i n g them, e s p e c i a l l y i n regard t o p r o v i d i n g arms and ammunition, as "simply a p p a l l i n g . " In t h i s Bragg was d e s c r i b i n g the problems f a c i n g Johnston as commander 13 In c h i e f . They d i d not face Bragg as c h i e f of s t a f f u n t i l a f t e r h i s appointment on March 29. Any c o n t r i b u t i o n that he made as c h i e f of s t a f f t o the o r g a n i z a t i o n of the army at C o r i n t h must th e r e f o r e have occurred between March 29 and the p r e l i m i n a r y movements on A p r i l 3 which culminated i n the B a t t l e of S h i l o h on the 6th and 7th. The c h i e f s of the var i o u s s t a f f departments were r e q u i r e d to meet d a i l y with Bragg, but there i s l i t t l e evidence, e i t h e r i n the O f f i c i a l Records or i n the 41 r e c o r d book k e p t a t army h e a d q u a r t e r s I n C o r i n t h , t h a t B r a g g 1 4 p l a y e d a n a c t i v e s t a f f r o l e . He d i d h e l p t o o r g a n i z e J o h n s t o n ' s army b e f o r e i t moved a g a i n s t t h e F e d e r a l f o r c e s a t S h i l o h , b u t he d i d s o , n o t a s c h i e f o f s t a f f , b u t i n h i s 15 c a p a c i t y a s a s e n i o r l i n e commander. F u r t h e r , a l t h o u g h B r a g g r e m a i n e d n o m i n a l l y c h i e f o f s t a f f u n t i l May 6, l 8 6 2 , 1 ^ t h e r e i s no m e n t i o n o f him i n t h a t r o l e i n army r e c o r d s . The r e l a t i v e s l i g h t n e s s o f t h e e v i d e n c e f o r B r a g g ' s p e r f o r m a n c e a s c h i e f o f s t a f f i n a n a d m i n i s t r a t i v e r o l e t h e r e f o r e s u p p o r t s J o r d a n ' s c o n t e n t i o n t h a t t h e a p p o i n t m e n t was n o m i n a l , e n s u r i n g t h a t B r a g g r a n k e d n e x t t o J o h n s t o n and B e a u r e g a r d , w h i l e r e t a i n i n g a s h i s p r i m a r y r e s p o n s i b i l i t y t h e command o f h i s c o r p s . B r a g g ' s p e r s o n a l e x p e r i e n c e a s c h i e f o f s t a f f was t h u s h i g h l y u n u s u a l . I t was s i g n i f i c a n t a s t h e f i r s t i n d i c a t i o n t h a t t h e r o l e o f c h i e f o f s t a f f m i g h t be s o m e t h i n g more t h a n t h a t o f a n a d m i n i s t r a t i v e o f f i c e r w i t h o u t r e l a t i o n t o t h e r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s o f command. T h i s i d e a was t o r e a p p e a r l a t e r , b o t h i n t h e Army o f T e n n e s s e e an d i n t h e C o n g r e s s i o n a l Committee on M i l i t a r y A f f a i r s a t Richmond. But B r a g g ' s e x p e r i e n c e i n t h e s p r i n g o f 1862 was s i g n i f i -c a n t f o r more t h a n h i s s p e c i f i c r o l e a s c h i e f o f s t a f f . He had gone t o C o r i n t h w i t h a r e p u t a t i o n f o r o r g a n i z i n g a b i l i t y , and f r o m M a r c h 4 worked h a r d t o b r i n g some o r d e r i n t o t h e g a t h e r i n g a r m y . 1 7 B r a g g , a t t h a t t i m e a m a j o r g e n e r a l w i t h a l i n e command and no s t a f f a p p o i n t m e n t , was i n v o l v e d I n p r o b l e m s o f o r g a n i z a t i o n and s u p p l y w h i c h c o u l d have been r e g a r d e d a s 42 the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of a c h i e f of s t a f f . In t h i s work he showed the concern and t a l e n t f o r a d m i n i s t r a t i v e d e t a i l which l a t e r c h a r a c t e r i z e d him as commander of the Army of Tennessee, and so i n f l u e n c e d the development of the s t a f f system i n that army. The e f f e c t of Bragg's personal i n t e r e s t i n s t a f f work was t o be most marked i n h i s r e l a t i o n s w i t h h i s c h i e f s of s t a f f . On assuming command of the Western Department and i t s p r i n c i p a l army, Bragg reappointed as c h i e f of s t a f f the r e c e n t l y promoted B r i g a d i e r General Thomas Jordan, who had served under Beauregard as j o i n t c h i e f of s t a f f and adjutant 18 general. The reason f o r Jordan's appointment was almost c e r t a i n l y the p r a c t i c a l one of p r e s e r v i n g s t a f f c o n t i n u i t y as f a r as p o s s i b l e . A l s o , Beauregard had o f f e r e d Bragg the use 19 of h i s s t a f f . The choice of Jordan i n d i c a t e d the q u a l i f i c a -t i o n s which Bragg considered d e s i r a b l e i n a c h i e f of s t a f f . In a l l , the general appointed four c h i e f s of s t a f f i n 20 h i s eighteen months as commander of the Army of Tennessee. These were Thomas Jordan, George W i l l i a m Brent, Johnson K. Duncan, arid W i l l i a m Whann M a c k a l l . Jordan, Duncan, and M a c k a l l were a l l graduates of West P o i n t , M a ckall i n the c l a s s of '37, of which Bragg had a l s o been a member. Jordan and Ma c k a l l had fought i n the Mexican War, and had records which included both l i n e and s t a f f s e r v i c e . Duncan had been too young f o r the Mexican War, and i n h i s s e r v i c e had experienced only l i n e command. A l l three were b r i g a d i e r s when appointed as c h i e f of s t a f f . At the time of t h e i r appointment Jordan 43 was f o r t y - t h r e e years o l d , Duncan t h i r t y - f i v e , and Maekall f o r t y - s i x . Bragg, h i m s e l f a p r o f e s s i o n a l s o l d i e r , obviously p r e f e r r e d West Poi n t t r a i n i n g , p r o f e s s i o n a l f i e l d experience, and general o f f i c e r rank i n h i s c h i e f s of s t a f f . 2 1 These preferences are confirmed by a b r i e f c o n s i d e r a t i o n of two men whom Bragg wished to appoint, without succeeding i n so doing. Although they were not West P o i n t e r s , both men had some m i l i t a r y background, experience, and the necessary rank. Major General Richard T a y l o r was the son of Zachary T a y l o r , and had campaigned w i t h h i s f a t h e r i n Mexico. In August 1862 Bragg requested h i s assignment t o the Army of Tennessee as c h i e f of s t a f f , an ambitious request, i n view of Taylor's rank, 22 and one which was not granted. His other attempt was t o secure the s e r v i c e s of B r i g a d i e r General James E. Slaughter, who had attended V i r g i n i a M i l i t a r y I n s t i t u t e , fought i n Mexico, and served as i n s p e c t o r general on the s t a f f s of Bragg and A. S. Johnston i n l 8 6 l - l 8 6 2 . But i n e a r l y 1863, when Bragg made h i s o f f e r , Slaughter was i l l and unable t o accept the appointment. J The only apparent exception i n Bragg's choice of accep-t a b l e c h i e f s of s t a f f was Lieutenant C o l o n e l Brent. A lawyer i n c i v i l l i f e , w i t h no m i l i t a r y background, Brent became a l i n e o f f i c e r of the 17th V i r g i n i a Regiment i n l 8 6 l , and was l a t e r s e l e c t e d f o r s t a f f work by Beauregard, who obviously thought h i g h l y of him. Beauregard made Brent a c t i n g c h i e f of s t a f f i n May 1862, i n Jordan's temporary absence, and con-sidered him "an i n t e l l i g e n t , g a l l a n t , and m e r i t o r i o u s o f f i c e r . " 44 Thus Brent had some m i l i t a r y experience, but he lacked the other p r o f e s s i o n a l q u a l i f i c a t i o n s , i n c l u d i n g general o f f i c e r ' s rank. Bragg d i d use him as c h i e f of s t a f f , but only l n a temporary c a p a c i t y , when the o f f i c e was vacant. The temporary nature of the assignment i n d i c a t e d that Bragg s t i l l h e l d t o h i s customary requirements. Through t h e i r s e r v i c e records Bragg's c h i e f s of s t a f f revealed both t h e i r own i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of t h e i r r o l e , and the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of t h e i r commander. These records make i t p o s s i b l e to determine whether there was any c l a r i f i c a t i o n or e v o l u t i o n of s t a f f p r a c t i c e . On J u l y 17, 1862, B r i g a d i e r General Thomas Jordan was announced i n general orders as c h i e f of s t a f f . Other s t a f f appointments were a l s o made, but, s i g n i f i c a n t l y , none of an adjutant general. The d u t i e s of th a t o f f i c e were c a r r i e d out by Jordan, who continued to act as he had done under Beauregard i n May 1862, when he had been both c h i e f of s t a f f and adjutant general. He had then issued only two orders i n the f i r s t c a p a c i t y , compared w i t h eleven i n the second. Of the t h i r t y -three communications sent out over Jordan's signature as c h i e f of s t a f f to Bragg, twenty-six f e l l Into the category of general orders, s p e c i a l orders, and c i r c u l a r s , and were p r o p e r l y the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of the adjutant general's department. Of the incoming correspondence, only three messages were addressed t o Jordan as c h i e f of s t a f f . I t seems c l e a r that i n s p i t e of h i s impressive t i t l e Jordan was p r i m a r i l y concerned w i t h the ro u t i n e a d m i n i s t r a t i v e d u t i e s of an adjutant general. J 45 I t i s true that Jordan was discontented under Bragg, but t h i s was not due t o any f e e l i n g of f r u s t r a t i o n In h i s r o l e as c h i e f of s t a f f . He claimed t h a t he had only accepted the appointment with Bragg because he knew that Beauregard would wish i t , and because he f e l t i t h i s duty t o the Confederate cause t o do so. Jordan maintained that some of h i s f e l l o w s t a f f o f f i c e r s were incompetent, and feared f o r t h e i r e f f e c t on the army's f u t u r e . He wrote of the c h i e f quartermaster, Lieutenant C o l o n e l L. W. O'Bannon, that he was "a complete o b s t r u c t i o n , who might do very w e l l t o adm i n i s t e r i n peace times the d u t i e s of a post quartermaster a t a two company post on the Texas f r o n t i e r , " and of i n s p e c t o r general J . E. Slaughter that he "means w e l l , but has n e i t h e r the education nor n a t u r a l a b i l i t y f o r the important place he holds." Jordan represented Bragg's s t a f f changes as a conspiracy t o get r i d of those o f f i c e r s who had served under Beauregard, and revealed t h a t he was himself i n v o l v e d i n the f a c t i o n a l d i s p u t e s . This was har d l y the a c t i o n of a r e s p o n s i b l e c h i e f of s t a f f , but I t provided the key t o the b a s i c reason f o r Jordan's d i s c o n t e n t . He wished t o serve Beauregard, not Bragg, and as e a r l y as J u l y 7, w i t h i n a week of h i s u n o f f i c i a l appointment by Bragg, Jordan was w r i t i n g t o h i s former commander that he would j o i n him as soon as Beauregard was given another assignment. When Jordan d i d leave the Army of Tennessee, i t was t o become c h i e f of s t a f f i n Beauregard's new South C a r o l i n a department. In none of t h i s i s there any i n d i c a t i o n of d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n on Jordan's part that h i s r o l e as Bragg's c h i e f of s t a f f was l i t t l e 26 d i f f e r e n t from that of an adjutant general. 46 Jordan's l i m i t e d r o l e r e f l e c t e d e i t h e r Bragg's opinion of the o f f i c e r , or h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of the o f f i c e . In e i t h e r case, the general proposed t o leave on h i s f i r s t major campaign without h i s c h i e f of s t a f f . In l a t e August 1862 the Army of Tennessee was preparing t o invade Kentucky, and the orders d i r e c t i n g the o r g a n i z a t i o n and the movements of the Army a l s o o u t l i n e d Jordan's d u t i e s . The c h i e f of s t a f f was t o stay behind at army headquarters i n Chattanooga, Tennessee, t o super-v i s e the c l e r k s and the records, and t o forward any necessary 27 papers. 1 C e r t a i n l y Jordan had complained t o Beauregard on August 14 that he was s u f f e r i n g from rheumatism, and on August 17 had been assigned t o the duty of the s u p e r v i s i o n and r e o r g a n i -z a t i o n of exchanged p r i s o n e r s of war at Jackson, M i s s i s s i p p i . ^ Even so, i t was strange that on the 2 5 t h Bragg should choose t o dispense with the immediate s e r v i c e s of h i s c h i e f of s t a f f . Apparently Bragg regarded Jordan as only one among h i s s e v e r a l a d m i n i s t r a t i v e o f f i c e r s , and expected t o replace him f o r campaign purposes w i t h an a s s i s t a n t adjutant g e n e r a l . ^ During Jordan's tenure of the o f f i c e , t h e r e f o r e , from the r e o r g a n i z a t i o n of the Army of Tennessee at Tupelo to i t s departure from Chattanooga on the Kentucky campaign, the r o l e of Bragg's c h i e f of s t a f f can hardly be d i s t i n g u i s h e d from that of an adjutant general. From l a t e August t i l l October 1, 1862, Bragg conducted h i s campaign i n Kentucky without a c h i e f of s t a f f . He found t h a t he needed a s s i s t a n c e , however, and on October 2 appointed Lieutenant C o l o n e l George W i l l i a m Brent as h i s p r i n c i p a l s t a f f 47 o f f i c e r . Brent had been s e r v i n g t e m p o r a r i l y w i t h the s t a f f of General E. K i r b y Smith, commanding the Army of Kentucky. Brent's new p o s i t i o n w i t h Bragg was somewhat ambiguous; s p e c i a l orders announced him as "Chief of the S t a f f of the Commanding G e n e r a l — I n the Dept. of Orders," while Brent i n h i s d i a r y described h i m s e l f as " c h i e f of orders," an adjutant's t i t l e . But as the orders he Issued i n Bragg's name are signed by Brent as "Chief of S t a f f and A s s i s t a n t Adjutant General," he was 30 presumably recognized as Bragg's new c h i e f of s t a f f . H i s appointment continued the cl o s e a s s o c i a t i o n of the r o l e s of c h i e f of s t a f f and adjutant general. Brent's experience as a s t a f f o f f i c e r had been v a r i e d . He had served i n the departments of adjutant g e n e r a l , i n s p e c t o r g e n e r a l , and judge advocate, and under Beauregard had been 31 a c t i n g c h i e f of s t a f f . Of h i s appointment by Bragg, however, Brent recorded that he f e l t "very d i s t r u s t f u l of my experience and a b i l i t y t o discharge the d u t i e s of the p o s i t i o n . Gen. Bragg i s s a i d t o be d i f f i c u l t t o please. He t o l d me, that he was e x a c t i n g 'but t r i e d t o be j u s t . ' " 3 2 Uncertain i n h i s new p o s i t i o n , Brent was u n l i k e l y t o see h i s r o l e as c h i e f of s t a f f and a s s i s t a n t adjutant general as i n any way d i f f e r e n t from the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e assignment c a r r i e d out by Jordan. The d e t a i l e d d i a r y kept by Brent from October 1862 to December 1863 provides a valuable record of h i s s e r v i c e on Bragg's s t a f f i n the Army of Tennessee. The d i a r y i s p r i n c i -p a l l y a day-to-day account of the business of the Army, and deals w i t h the r e c e i p t of i n f o r m a t i o n , the issue of orders, 48 and the making of o f f i c i a l r e p o r t s and r e t u r n s . The paperwork was obviously demanding, and at one p o i n t Brent described h i s o f f i c e as one i n which "Court M a r t i a l orders and records f l o a t about i n endless p r o l i x i t y . " 3 3 ^ t no p o i n t i s there any i n -d i c a t i o n that Brent was expected t o coordinate the work of the various s t a f f departments, or that he was asked to a s s i s t i n implementing t a c t i c a l or s t r a t e g i c d e c i s i o n s . The o f f i c i a l a c t i v i t i e s recorded i n the d i a r y are those of the adjutant general's department, and Brent seems i n no way disappointed w i t h h i s r o l e . Had he been so, he could probably have returned t o the s t a f f of Beauregard, who was a s k i n g the War Department f o r him. Brent f i r s t heard of Beauregard's request on November 21 , the day a f t e r he had been replaced as c h i e f of s t a f f , but Brent's d i a r y makes no mention of any wish f o r h i s own t r a n s f e r . 3 ^ Although Bragg considered Brent only a temporary c h i e f of s t a f f , he was f u l l y s a t i s f i e d w i t h h i s o f f i c e r ' s work i n the Army of Tennessee. When Brent l e f t the Army b r i e f l y In the summer of 1863, Bragg wrote of h i s "valuable s e r v i c e s , " saying that "with great regret the commanding general d i s s o l v e s h i s o f f i c i a l connection w i t h C o l o n e l Brent, who by h i s i n t e l l i g e n c e , d i l i g e n c e , and u r b a n i t y , has won the confidence of h i s s u p e r i o r s and the respect of a l l . " 3 5 I n !864, when Bragg was no longer a f i e l d commander but s e r v i n g as a d v i s o r t o J e f f e r s o n Davis, Brent went to Richmond to act on Bragg's s t a f f . A l l evidence a v a i l a b l e supports the view that Bragg considered Brent a valuable s t a f f o f f i c e r , whether he was a c t i n g as temporary 49 c h i e f of s t a f f or as adjutant general. There was no d i f f e r e n c e i n p r a c t i c e . be-t,we.en h i s r o l e s i n e i t h e r p o s i t i o n ; both f i t t e d the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e d u t i e s of adjutant g e n e r a l , meeting the demands which Bragg made i n d i s c r i m i n a t e l y of h i s c h i e f of s t a f f and of h i s adjutant general's department. On November 20, 1862, B r i g a d i e r General Johnson K. Duncan was announced as c h i e f of s t a f f i n the Army of Tennessee. H i s d u t i e s were defined as "general, extending t o a l l the d i f f e r e n t departments of the s e r v i c e , " and Bragg l a t e r described h i s p o s i t i o n as "second only i n importance t o tha t of commander-in-c h i e f of an army." 3 7 Duncan's appointment followed a request by President Davis, made i n mid-October, that Bragg should nominate a b r i g a d i e r general as adjutant and i n s p e c t o r general of h i s army. 3 8 No c l e a r connection can be shown between the request and the appointment, but, as Duncan was the only b r i g a d i e r assigned to Bragg 1s s t a f f at tha t time, the connection does seem probable. In that case Duncan's appointment again r e f l e c t e d the a s s o c i a t i o n i n Bragg's mind of the c h i e f of s t a f f w i t h the adjutant and/or i n s p e c t o r general. But Bragg apparently intended the d u t i e s of the c h i e f of s t a f f t o be more extensive than p r e v i o u s l y , w i t h a supervisory and c o o r d i n a t i n g character reaching beyond the adjutant and i n s p e c t o r general's department. Bragg a l s o Implied a clo s e and important r e l a t i o n -ship between the commander and h i s c h i e f of s t a f f , reminiscent of h i s own experience i n tha t o f f i c e . An e x c e p t i o n a l feature of Duncan's record p r o h i b i t s any study of a p o s s i b l e change i n Bragg's concept of the c h i e f of 50 s t a f f . F i v e days before the c h i e f ' s appointment, Bragg had been unable t o send Duncan to Mobile, where a competent o f f i c e r was d e s perately needed, because he was "very i l l . " That t h i s was no exaggeration became evident on December 18, 1862, when Duncan died " a f t e r a p a i n f u l and p r o t r a c t e d i l l n e s s . " 3 9 There i s nothing i n the O f f i c i a l Records t o i n d i c a t e that he had ever been able t o enter upon h i s s t a f f d u t i e s . In s e l e c t i n g Duncan, Bragg might have intended a more extensive r o l e f o r h i s c h i e f of s t a f f , but he could h a r d l y have considered that o f f i c e r an e s s e n t i a l element i n the e f f e c t i v e operation of h i s army. Such d u t i e s as might have been assigned t o Duncan were c a r r i e d out e i t h e r by Bragg hi m s e l f or by Brent, then a s s i s t a n t adjutant general. No new c h i e f of s t a f f was appointed u n t i l A p r i l 1863. U n t i l the end of 1862, t h e r e f o r e , i t appears t h a t n e i t h e r i n the Confederate army r e g u l a t i o n s nor i n the experience of the Army of Tennessee was there any r e a l departure from the o l d United States Army concept of the c h i e f of s t a f f as an a d m i n i s t r a t i v e o f f i c e r who might on occasion be appointed t o t h a t p o s i t i o n , h o l d i n g i t c o n j o i n t l y w i t h that of adjutant and/or i n s p e c t o r general. This view was apparently shared by Bragg, as commanding gener a l , and by Jordan and Brent, as h i s two p r i n c i p a l s t a f f o f f i c e r s . By 1863, however, c e r t a i n changes were beginning t o take place i n the o f f i c i a l concept of s t a f f f u n c t i o n s . According t o Jordan, Bragg's own experience as c h i e f of s t a f f had been r e l a t e d t o command r a t h e r than to a d m i n i s t r a t i v e f u n c t i o n , 51 while Bragg had w r i t t e n of Duncan that he was second i n importance only to h i m s e l f . This idea of the c h i e f of s t a f f as something more than an adjutant general was debated i n Richmond i n the s p r i n g of 1863. Reorganization of the Confederate s t a f f system had begun to i n t e r e s t the Confederate Congress, and one of i t s most v o c i f e r o u s proponents was Senator Louis Trezevant W i g f a l l of Texas. One of W i g f a l l ' s ideas, known t o be under d i s c u s s i o n i n 1863, was r e l a t e d to the r o l e of c h i e f of s t a f f , and appeared i n a l e t t e r he wrote to General Joseph E. Johnston, concerning the p o s s i b l e replacement of Bragg as commander of the Army of Tennessee by Johnston. In c o n s i d e r i n g what might be done t o reorganize that Army a f t e r the defeat of Murfreesboro, W i g f a l l wrote: " I f you take command of that Army and he[ Bragg] remains w i t h i t as second i n command he w i l l I judge be entrusted w i t h i t s a d m i n i s t r a t i o n as Chief of S t a f f , p r a c t i c a l l y i f not by name."^ The Senator's proposal had important i m p l i c a t i o n s , f o r i t a s s o c i a t e d the second i n command of the army wi t h i t s c h i e f of s t a f f , and defined the d u t i e s of the c h i e f of s t a f f as those of the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of the army as a whole. The c h i e f of s t a f f was thereby elevated from h i s accepted p o s i t i o n w i t h i n the adjutant general's department, t o one i n which he stood at the head of a d m i n i s t r a t i o n , outside any one depart-ment, p r o v i d i n g the l i n k between army o r g a n i z a t i o n and army command. In such a p o s i t i o n he ceased to be merely a channel f o r the communication of orders, and became i n a d d i t i o n an a d v i s o r i n reaching d e c i s i o n s and an a s s i s t a n t i n c a r r y i n g them out. 52 I t Is impossible t o say whether Bragg was aware of these Ideas of the r o l e of the c h i e f of s t a f f , as they were being debated i n Richmond. C e r t a i n l y he was i n t e r e s t e d i n s t a f f reform. On January 8 , 1863, he t r i e d t o e s t a b l i s h a s t a b l e s t a f f o r g a n i z a t i o n i n the subordinate commands of the Army of Tennessee, by o r d e r i n g : General o f f i c e r s , on being r e l i e v e d , w i l l d i r e c t a l l general s t a f f o f f i c e r s s e r v i n g w i t h them to r e p o r t immediately to t h e i r successors. In no case w i l l they remove them from t h e i r p o s i t i o n s without s p e c i a l a u t h o r i t y . The aides of a general are the only exceptions t o t h i s r u l e . 4 l On January 13 he p r o h i b i t e d the use of cadets on the s t a f f of general o f f i c e r s , d e s c r i b i n g them as "boys and students, t o be taught, not teachers of men, t h e i r s u p e r i o r s . " ^ He a p p l i e d f o r , and on A p r i l 2 r e c e i v e d , permission to delegate d u t i e s of r o u t i n e t o an " i n t e l l i g e n t s t a f f o f f i c e r of rank." 1* 3 g u t these i m p l i e d changes i n s t a f f p r a c t i c e cast no s p e c i f i c l i g h t on Bragg's ideas of the f u n c t i o n s of c h i e f of s t a f f . Whether there was any change i n that respect can only be determined by examining the record of Bragg's l a s t c h i e f of s t a f f , appointed l n A p r i l 1863. B r i g a d i e r General W i l l i a m Whann Mac k a l l was a very d i f f e r e n t man from Jordan, t o whom s e r v i c e i n the Army of Tennessee was only an i n t e r l u d e , and from Brent, whose d i a r y suggested an awareness of h i s non-professional background. Well thought of by the p r i n c i p a l Confederate generals, M a c k a l l was able t o w r i t e i n October 1862 that "every Genl. i n the Conf. S t a t e s , Lee, the two Johnstons, Beauregard and Bragg 53 have e i t h e r sought unasked my promotion or my s e r v i c e s or both, and each i n t u r n before I had sought or communicated 45 w i t h them." Mackall's p r o f e s s i o n a l advancement had been f r u s t r a t e d i n the e a r l y years of the C i v i l War, p a r t l y by the 46 antagonism of President Davis, and p a r t l y by a s e r i e s of unlucky assignments. Instead of going w i t h A l b e r t Sidney Johnston t o C o r i n t h and becoming adjutant general of the combined armies, M a c k a l l went to take command i n an impossible s i t u a t i o n a t Madrid Bend, on the M i s s i s s i p p i , and was o b l i g e d t o surrender h i s e n t i r e f o r c e . A f t e r h i s exchange as a p r i s o n e r of war, he l o s t the chance of t a k i n g a brigade com-mand i n Bragg's army j u s t before the B a t t l e of Murfreesboro, and was sent i n s t e a d t o the r e l a t i v e l y unimportant D i s t r i c t 47 of the G u l f . 1 Chance had thus conspired t o deprive M a c k a l l of the promotion t o which h i s t r a i n i n g , h i s r e c o r d , and the e s t i m a t i o n of h i s p r o f e s s i o n a l colleagues seemed to e n t i t l e him, l e a v i n g him a v a i l a b l e i n 1863 f o r appointment as c h i e f of s t a f f . As a man of considerable p r o f e s s i o n a l r e p u t a t i o n , who was at the same time a personal f r i e n d of Bragg's immediate s u p e r i o r , General J . E. Johnston, and of Bragg him-48 s e l f , M a c k a l l was much more l i k e l y t o play an a u t h o r i t a t i v e r o l e as c h i e f of s t a f f i n the Army of Tennessee than had been e i t h e r Jordan or Brent. Mac k a l l ' s appointment was announced i n general orders on A p r i l 17, 1 8 6 3 . ^ Brent noted i n h i s d i a r y , " I have seen him, and judge him t o be a p l a i n s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d earnest o f f i c e r . " ^ 0 The d i a r y then broke o f f , and was not resumed 5 4 t i l l August. Brent explained the gap as due f i r s t to sickness and then to h i s t r a n s f e r t o V i r g i n i a . , which took place on May 8 . There i s no i n d i c a t i o n of animosity against M a c k a l l , e i t h e r then or l a t e r . Brent's absence from the Army of Tennessee from May t o l a t e J u l y Is s i g n i f i c a n t , t h e r e f o r e , not because of any s t a f f d i s s e n s i o n i t might have I n d i c a t e d , but because a hew adjutant general was appointed i n Brent's place. The new o f f i c e r was Lieutenant C o l o n e l Harvey W. Walter, whose 51 p r i n c i p a l s t a f f experience had been as judge advocate. For the f i r s t time i n Bragg's army the o f f i c e s of c h i e f of s t a f f and adjutant general were a c t i v e l y held by two d i f f e r e n t men, and f o r the f i r s t time the f u n c t i o n s of these o f f i c e s were c l e a r l y separated. Mackall was the channel of communication between Bragg and h i s immediate subordinates, e s p e c i a l l y on matters r e l a t i n g t o detached commands, recon-naissance, and the execution of orders f o r troop movements. Walter d e a l t almost e x c l u s i v e l y with the issue of general 52 and s p e c i a l orders. Thus began a d i v i s i o n of the r o l e p r e v i o u s l y played by a j o i n t c h i e f of s t a f f and adjutant general. Moreover, there was an extension of the r o l e of c h i e f of s t a f f . In becoming the means whereby the commander d i r e c t e d h i s subordinates, the c h i e f of s t a f f was i n v o l v e d , to a g r e a t e r degree than ever before, i n t a c t i c a l matters, and p o s s i b l y a l s o i n s t r a t e g y . For example, from June 2 6 t o J u l y 7 , 1 8 6 3 , the Army of Tennessee was engaged i n the movement of i t s f o r c e s from Tullahoma t o Chattanooga. A d e t a i l e d record of the movement 55 was kept by Lieutenant W. B. Richmond, aide-de-camp t o Lieutenant General Leonldas Polk, commander of one of Bragg's 53 army corps.-'-' Richmond's notes show tha t M a c k a l l issued ten of the t h i r t e e n orders t o Polk necessary f o r the s u c c e s s f u l execution of the movement; tha t he attended the conference h e l d on June 29 by Bragg and h i s two corps commanders, Polk and Lieutenant General W i l l i a m J . Hardee, t o determine whether t o h a l t and give b a t t l e to the approaching enemy; and that he d i d not h e s i t a t e t o reprimand Polk f o r i n e f f i c i e n c y i n p r o v i s i o n i n g h i s men and f o r abandoning h i s guns. Mackall's part i n d i r e c t i n g and c o o r d i n a t i n g the movement was obviously c o n s i d e r a b l e . The new d i v i s i o n of the d u t i e s of c h i e f of s t a f f and adjutant general may have been intended by Bragg. He was re s p o n s i b l e f o r the two appointments, and i t i s u n l i k e l y that he saw the r e l a t i v e l y inexperienced Walter as more than an adjutant general concerned w i t h the r o u t i n e paperwork of a d m i n i s t r a t i o n . General Johnston, at t h i s time Bragg's imme-d i a t e s u p e r i o r , b e l i e v e d on the other hand that f o r any e f f e c t i v e o r g a n i z a t i o n of the Army of Tennessee M a c k a l l was "a b s o l u t e l y n e c e s s a r y . " 5 ^ Mackall's r o l e was a l l the more important as Bragg was unwell i n the summer of 1863, enfeebled t o the poin t where Hardee considered h i s commander's c o n d i t i o n SS as endangering the army.^ But whether Bragg or M a c k a l l , or both, had been re s p o n s i b l e f o r the change i n s t a f f o r ganiza-t i o n , i t proved only temporary. 56 On J u l y 26 Brent was re-assigned t o the Army of Tennessee, and was appointed adjutant general, while Walter 56 resumed h i s p o s i t i o n as judge advocate. Brent was accustomed to Bragg's e a r l i e r p r a c t i c e of r e s t r i c t i n g the d u t i e s of a s i n g l e c h i e f of s t a f f and adjutant general t o the adminis-t r a t i v e f u n c t i o n s of the adjutant general's department; M a c k a l l , however, saw h i s own r o l e d i f f e r e n t l y . "...You.: have been pleased t o put me i n t o a p o s i t i o n , " he wrote t o Bragg, "by which I am brought day by day i n observation of your s t a f f , and t o a c e r t a i n extent s e p a r a t i n g you from them."57 Thus Ma c k a l l as c h i e f of s t a f f stood outside any one department, acted as intermediary between command and s t a f f , and r e l i e v e d Bragg of at l e a s t some of h i s a d m i n i s t r a t i v e r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s . Brent and M a c k a l l now had t o work together, at a time when Inc r e a s i n g s t r a i n was being put upon the s t a f f system by the events which culminated i n the B a t t l e of Chickamauga on September 19-20. There i s no suggestion of any personal c o n f l i c t between the two men. When Mac k a l l resigned h i s p o s i t i o n Brent noted i n h i s d i a r y , " I part w i t h him w i t h great regret--an i n v a l u a b l e and f a i t h f u l o f f i c e r , a courteous s o l d i e r , an a f f a b l e g e n t l e -man and a true f r i e n d . " ^ M a c k a l l f o r h i s part reported of Brent: "He was a most e x c e l l e n t and i n t e l l i g e n t o f f i c e r and n 5 9 we had served without anything unpleasant ever o c c u r r i n g . ^ The t r o u b l e , as f a r as Ma c k a l l was concerned, l a y wit h Bragg. The d i s t i n c t i o n between the d u t i e s of c h i e f of s t a f f and adjutant g e n e r a l , so c l e a r l y r e f l e c t e d i n the s t a f f correspondence of May, June, and J u l y , disappeared a f t e r 57 Brent's r e t u r n . V i r t u a l l y a l l the outgoing communications from Bragg's headquarters, of whatever nature, were sent by 60 the adjutant general. This change i n work d i s t r i b u t i o n was a l r e a d y apparent i n August, and was accentuated d u r i n g the Chickamauga campaign. There was l i t t l e time to spare f o r paper work, and i t was not unreasonable that i n these circum-stances the burden of o f f i c e a d m i n i s t r a t i o n should f a l l h e a v i l y on Brent. But the i n c r e a s i n g weight of the adjutant general's work probably r e s u l t e d l e s s from any conscious r e - a l l o c a t i o n of s t a f f d u t i e s than from Bragg's empiric use of whatever s t a f f agency was at hand t o c a r r y out h i s orders. Mackall 6 l saw t h i s as p a r t of "Bragg's insane d e s i r e t o do patchwork" --to i n v o l v e h i m s e l f i n a d m i n i s t r a t i v e d e t a i l s which were p r o p e r l y beneath the a t t e n t i o n of a commanding general and should have been delegated t o one of h i s s t a f f . The e a r l i e r d i v i s i o n of a d m i n i s t r a t i v e r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s had given way t o a s i t u a t i o n i n which c e r t a i n d u t i e s might be c a r r i e d out by the commander, the c h i e f of s t a f f , or the adjutant general, as the needs of the moment appeared t o d i c t a t e . To Mackall's d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n w i t h t h i s s i t u a t i o n was added a growing d i s t r u s t of Bragg as a commander. The c h i e f of s t a f f ifound h i s general o b s t i n a t e , i r r a t i o n a l , and without good judgment. To h i s wife M a c k a l l confided h i s opinions of Bragg: Between ourselves he has more than once Issued orders f o r the movement of the Army--would scarce l i s t e n t o my o b j e c t i o n s and yet I have gone to bed p e r f e c t l y s a t i s f i e d t h a t the movement would never be made and had the orders revoked before morning. 58 I f he don't want news t o be t r u e , he w i l l l i s t e n t o n o t h i n g - - ' I t can't be so i s h i s reasoning' and i f i t prove true he i s not prepared t o meet i t . . . . I t e l l you f r a n k l y I am a f r a i d of h i s Generalship and would t h i n k the cause of our country f a r b e t t e r placed i n other hands... he has not genius...he w i l l f a i l i n our hour of need. 62 H i s mind i s not f e r t i l e , nor i s h i s judgement good. M a c k a l l doubted h i s a b i l i t y t o exert any c o n s i s t e n t i n f l u e n c e on such a person. He thus f e l t f r u s t r a t e d both as an a d m i n i s t r a t i v e c h i e f and as an a s s i s t a n t on p o l i c y or t a c t i c s . On October 10 he concluded: " I am s a t i s f i e d t h a t Bragg cannot u s e f u l l y command t h i s army and tha t I can do no good f o r i f Mr. D [ a v i s ] s u s t a i n s him he w i l l be too e l a t e d t o l i s t e n to reason." F i n a l l y , convinced that as c h i e f of s t a f f to Bragg he had no u s e f u l r o l e t o p l a y , M a c k a l l asked t o be r e l i e v e d of h i s assignment. The order r e l i e v i n g M a c k a l l was issued on October 16, 1863. In i t Bragg was generous w i t h h i s p r a i s e of the c h i e f of s t a f f : With a g r a t e f u l sense of the d i s t i n g u i s h e d s e r v i c e s rendered by t h i s accomplished o f f i c e r i n the h i g h p o s i t i o n he has f i l l e d , the commanding general tenders him h i s c o r d i a l thanks and wishes him a l l success and happiness i n h i s f u t u r e career. The general and the army w i l l long f e e l the s a c r i f i c e made i n sparing the s e r v i c e s of one so d i s t i n g u i s h e d f o r c a p a c i t y , p r o f e s s i o n a l acquirements, and u r b a n i t y . 64 By c o n t r a s t , when the p o s s i b i l i t y arose i n J u l y 1864 t h a t M a c k a l l might once more f i n d h i m s e l f c h i e f of s t a f f t o Bragg, he refused ever t o serve Bragg again, p r e f e r r i n g i n s t e a d t o 65 give up h i s s t a f f p o s i t i o n . y 59 The r e l a t i o n s between Bragg and the man who was t o be h i s l a s t c h i e f of s t a f f thus underwent a s i g n i f i c a n t change between A p r i l and October 1863. The d i v i s i o n of s t a f f d u t i e s made i n the e a r l i e r months i n d i c a t e d a c l a r i f i c a t i o n and extension of the r o l e of c h i e f of s t a f f which apparently s a t i s f i e d both Bragg and M a c k a l l . The l a t e r pressures of the Chickamauga campaign not only upset t h i s d i v i s i o n , but a l s o r a i s e d i n Mackall's mind the more seriou s question of Bragg's f i t n e s s f o r command. The combination of these f a c t o r s caused Mackall's r e s i g n a t i o n . I n s o f a r as the f i n a l c l a s h between the two men was over s t a f f matters, i t r e s u l t e d from t h e i r d i f f e r i n g i n t e r p r e t a -t i o n s of the r o l e of c h i e f of s t a f f . Mackall's was the more p r e c i s e . To him, the c h i e f of s t a f f should d i r e c t the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of the army, r e l i e v e the commander i n c h i e f of d e t a i l , and a s s i s t i n the planning and execution of f i e l d o perations. To Bragg, however, the c h i e f of s t a f f remained only one of a group of s t a f f o f f i c e r s , among whom adminis-t r a t i v e d u t i e s would be d i v i d e d as the commander at any p a r t i c u l a r time saw f i t . The two i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s i n d i c a t e d that by October 1863 there was s t i l l no agreed d e f i n i t i o n of the r o l e of the c h i e f of s t a f f . No appointment was made i n M ackall's p l a c e , and Bragg r e v e r t e d t o h i s former p r a c t i c e , using Brent i n the double r o l e of c h i e f of s t a f f and adjutant general up u n t i l Bragg's own removal from command i n December 1863. 60 In p r a c t i c e , then, the l a c k of any formal Confederate p r o v i s i o n f o r a c h i e f of s t a f f meant that the appointment and the r o l e of that o f f i c e r depended completely on h i s commanding general. In the s p r i n g of 1862, under Generals A. S. Johnston and Beauregard, the c h i e f of s t a f f was part of the s t r u c t u r e of army command,, a r o l e according w i t h Jominian theory and European experience. Under General Bragg, however, from June 1862 t o December 1863, the c h i e f of s t a f f was u s u a l l y a s s o c i a t e d w i t h the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e o f f i c e and f u n c t i o n s of the adjutant general, f o l l o w i n g the ideas, though not the formal p r a c t i c e , of the o l d United S t a t e s Army. Whatever Bragg's i n t e n t i o n s , he proved u n w i l l i n g t o share the ro u t i n e r e s p o n s i -b i l i t i e s of command w i t h h i s s e n i o r s t a f f o f f i c e r , and was even r e l u c t a n t t o delegate the d e t a i l s of a d m i n i s t r a t i o n . The general p r e f e r r e d , i n sho r t , to act as h i s own c h i e f s t a f f 66 o f f i c e r , r e t a i n i n g c o n t r o l of the army i n h i s own hands as f a r as p o s s i b l e . T i l l l a t e 1863, t h e r e f o r e , the r o l e of c h i e f of s t a f f i n the Army of Tennessee remained e s s e n t i a l l y undeveloped. 6 l Notes xWar of the R e b e l l i o n : A Compilation of the O f f i c i a l  Records of the Union and Confederate A m i e s (128 v o l s . ; Washington: Government P r i n t i n g O f f i c e , 1880-1901), S e r i e s I, XX, pt. 2, 4 l l ( c i t e d h e r e a f t e r as OR, w i t h a l l references t o S e r i e s I, unless otherwise i n d i c a t e d ) . For the sake of s i m p l i c i t y the Western army w i l l be c a l l e d the Army of Tennessee throughout, even though that t i t l e was not f o r m a l l y adopted t i l l November 2 0 , 1862. 0 The m i l i t a r y background of t h i s s t a f f study can be fol l o w e d i n Stanley F. Horn, The Army of Tennessee (Norman, Okla.: U n i v e r s i t y of Oklahoma Press, 1953). For a b r i e f o u t l i n e , see Appendix. 3oR, S e r i e s IV, I, 114-115, 163-164. 4 l b i d . , I l l , 498. H. C. Corbin and R. P. Thian, compilers, L e g i s l a t i v e  H i s t o r y of the General S t a f f of the Army of the United S t a t e s , 1775-1901 (Washington: Government P r i n t i n g O f f i c e , 1901), p. 72. ^The highest ranking s t a f f o f f i c e r s were c o l o n e l s , s e r v i n g as i n s p e c t o r s . See the Mexican War Reports of Generals  T a y l o r and S c o t t , Senate Executive Document No. I, 3 0 t h Cong., 1st Sess., 1847, pp. 1 3 2 f f . ; and J u s t i n H. Smith, The War wit h  Mexico (2 v o l s . ; Gloucester, Mass.: Peter Smith, 1963)* II* 366. 62 70R, X, pt. 2, 371-8 I b i d . , 382. ^Cf. J . Stoddard Johnston, i n W i l l i a m Preston Johnston, The L i f e of General A l b e r t Sidney Johnston (New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1879), p. 546; and David Urquhart t o P. G. T. Beauregard, August 14, 1878, P i e r r e Gustave Toutant Beauregard Papers, Duke U n i v e r s i t y , Durham, North C a r o l i n a . 1 0Thomas Jordan, " R e c o l l e c t i o n s of General Beauregard's Service In West Tennessee i n the Sprin g of 1862," Southern  H i s t o r i c a l S o c i e t y Papers, V I I I (1880), 409. The same expl a n a t i o n appears i n almost i d e n t i c a l wording i n A l f r e d Roman, M i l i t a r y Operations of General Beauregard (2 v o l s . ; New York: Harper and Bro t h e r s , 1883), I , 268-269. The expl a n a t i o n was thus presumably confirmed by Beauregard, who was the r e a l author of Roman's work. See T. Harry W i l l i a m s , P. G. T. Beauregard: Napoleon i n Gray (New York: C o l l i e r Books, 1962), pp. 369-386. "^The term, " t h i r d i n command," was used by a former s t a f f c a p t a i n t o describe Bragg's p o s i t i o n . J . B. Cumming, "War R e c o l l e c t i o n s , " ( t y p e s c r i p t i n the Southern H i s t o r i c a l C o l l e c t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y of North C a r o l i n a , Chapel H i l l ) , p. 6. 63 1 2 P o l k had graduated from West Point i n 1827, but resigned from the Army almost immediately afterwards. He took orders and became an E p i s c o p a l bishop, remaining i n the Church t i l l 1861. He was then commissioned i n the Confederate s e r v i c e w i t h the rank of major general. H i s p r a c t i c a l m i l i t a r y experience was thus much i n f e r i o r t o that of Bragg. Ezra J . Warner, Generals i n Gray (Baton Rouge: L o u i s i a n a State U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1 9 5 9 ) , pp. 2 4 2 - 2 4 3 . 1 3 B r a x t o n Bragg, quoted i n Johnston, A l b e r t Sidney  Johnston, pp. 5 4 8 - 5 4 9 -l 40R, X, p t . 2 , 373, 379* 387; Bragg-Beauregard Head-quarters Book, C i v i l War Papers, L o u i s i a n a H i s t o r i c a l A s s o c i a t i o n C o l l e c t i o n , Howard-Tilton Memorial L i b r a r y , Tulane U n i v e r s i t y , New Orleans; C i r c u l a r , C o r i n t h , Miss., March 31* 1862, i b i d . 15 Charles P. Roland, A l b e r t Sidney Johnston: S o l d i e r of  Three Republics ( A u s t i n : U n i v e r s i t y of Texas Press, 1964), pp. 314-315; Grady McWhiney, Braxton Bragg and Confederate  Defeat: Volume I , F i e l d Command (New York: Columbia Univer-s i t y Press, 1969), PP. 212-216. l 60R, X, p t . 2, 500. 1 7 I b i d . , V I I , 258, 920:-921; X, pt. 2, 2 9 7 - 2 9 8 , 301. See a l s o McWhiney, Braxton Bragg, pp. 2 0 2 - 2 1 8 . 64 l 80R, XVII, p t . 2, 648; X, p t . 2, 500. 1 9 I b l d . , X V I I , pt. 2., 640, 2 Q I b i d . , 648; XX, pt. 2, 4 l l ; X X I I I , p t . 2, 777; George W i l l i a m Brent, Compiled Service Records of Confederate General and S t a f f O f f i c e r s and Nonregimental E n l i s t e d Men, Record Group 109, War Department C o l l e c t i o n of Confederate Records, N a t i o n a l A r c h i v e s , Washington, D. G. ( c i t e d h e r e a f t e r as CSR). 21 B i o g r a p h i c a l i n f o r m a t i o n about s t a f f o f f i c e r s i s u s u a l l y d i f f i c u l t t o o b t a i n , and must be pieced together from many sources. U s e f u l , and r e a d i l y o b t a i n a b l e , are: Mark M. Boatner, I I I , C i v i l War D i c t i o n a r y (New York: David McKay Company, Inc., 1959): E l l s w o r t h E l i o t , J r . , West Point i n  the Confederacy (New York: G. A. Baker and Company, Inc., 1941); Ezra J . Warner, Generals i n Gray. The o f f i c i a l L i s t of  S t a f f O f f i c e r s of the Confederate States Army, 1861-1865 (Washington: Government P r i n t i n g O f f i c e , l 8 9 l ) provides a valuable record of the assignments of each s t a f f o f f i c e r , but these records are not always complete. 22 Richard T a y l o r , D e s t r u c t i o n and Reconstruction: Personal Experiences of the Late War (New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1 9 0 0 ) , p. 99-6 5 2 3OR, VII, 9 2 0 - 9 2 1 j X, pt. 2 , 3 7 3 ; A. J . Foard t o Bragg, Mobile, A l a . , January 3 1 , 1 8 6 3 , Braxton Bragg Papers, W i l l i a m P. Palmer C o l l e c t i o n , Western Reserve H i s t o r i c a l S o c i e t y , Cleveland, Ohio. 24 Although Brent had no p r o f e s s i o n a l m i l i t a r y q u a l i f i c a t i o n s f o r hig h rank i n the army, h i s c i v i l i a n career showed evidence of a b i l i t y and d i s t i n c t i o n . He.graduated from the U n i v e r s i t y of V i r g i n i a i n 1 8 4 2 , p r a c t i s e d law, was a member of the V i r g i n i a Senate, a r e p r e s e n t a t i v e i n the st a t e c o n s t i t u t i o n a l convention of 186O -1861 , and a signatory of the ordinance of secession. When the C i v i l War broke out he was f o r t y years o l d . George Brown Goode, V i r g i n i a Cousins (Richmond, Va.: J . W. Randolph and E n g l i s h , 1 8 8 7 ) , pp. 239-240; George W i l l i a m Brent, S. Bassett French B i o -g r a p h i c a l Sketches, V i r g i n i a State L i b r a r y , Richmond. See a l s o OR, X, pt. 2 , 5 3 1 , 6 0 1 - 6 0 2 . 2 5 I b i d . , XVII, p t . 2 , 648; X, pt. 2 , 4 9 7 - 5 3 1 ; XVI, pt. 2 , 742 - 7 6 3 ; X V I I , p t . 2 , 6 3 5 - 7 0 3 . General orders, s p e c i a l orders, and c i r c u l a r s are addressed t o the army as a whole, or to u n i t s or i n d i v i d u a l s w i t h i n the army. As o f f i c i a l o rders, f o l l o w i n g a p r e s c r i b e d form, they were u s u a l l y issued by the adjutant general's department. They were not personal communications between the general and h i s sub^ or d i n a t e s . 66 26 Jordan's opinions are t o be found i n three l e t t e r s w r i t t e n by him to Beauregard, on J u l y 7, August 7, and August 14, 1862; OR, XVII, p t . 2, 640-642, 669-671, 6 7 9 - 6 8 0 . H i s new assignment appears i n XIV, 609. 2 7 I b i d . , XVI, p t . 2, 780. 2 8 I b i d . , 762-763. 2^The o r g a n i z a t i o n of s t a f f f o r the Kentucky campaign i n f a c t included three a s s i s t a n t a djutants general. I b i d . , 780. 3°Special Orders No. 8 , Lexington[ Ky.] , October 2, 1862, Brent, CSR; George W i l l i a m Brent D i a r y , October 2, 1862, Bragg Papers [ the d i a r y ' s author i s i d e n t i f i e d i n June I . Gow, "The Johnston and Brent D i a r i e s : A Problem of Authorship," C i v i l War H i s t o r y , XIV ( 1 9 6 8 ) , 46 - 5 0 ] ; OR, XVI, p t . 2, 8 7 4 -875, 9 0 6 - 9 0 7 . 3 1 I b i d . , X, p t . 2, 6 0 1 - 6 0 2 ; X V I I , p t . 2, 658; XVI, p t . 2, 758. 3 2 B r e n t D i a r y , October 2, 1862. 3 3 I b i d . , December 24, 1862. 3 ^ I b l d . , November 2 0 , November 21 , December 14, 1862. 3 5OR, X X I I I , p t . 2, 8 2 4 - 8 2 5 . 36W. W. Ma c k a l l t o Mrs. M a c k a l l , Dalton [ Ga.;] , March 4 , 1864, W i l l i a m Whann Ma c k a l l Papers, Southern H i s t o r i c a l C o l l e c t i o n . 67 3 7OR, XX, p t . 2, 411, 457. 3 8 I b i d . , XVI, pt. 2, 952, 958. 3 9 I b i d . , XX, p t . 2 , 403, 4 l l . Boatner suggests that Duncan died of typhoid f e v e r ; C i v i l War D i c t i o n a r y , p. 251. ^ ° L o u l s T. W i g f a l l t o J . E. Johnston, Richmond [VaJ , February 28, 1863, Joseph Eggleston Johnston Papers, Henry E. Huntington L i b r a r y , San Marino, C a l i f o r n i a . 4 l OR, XX, pt. 2, 490. 4 2 I b i d . , 496. 43 Samuel Cooper t o Bragg, Richmond [Va.] , A p r i l 2, 1863, Johnston Papers. 44 OR, X X I I I , pt. 2, 777. ^ M a c k a l l t o Mrs. M a c k a l l , Richmond [ Va., October, 1862], M a c k a l l Papers. 46 I b i d . ; G. Moxley S o r r e l l , R e c o l l e c t i o n s of a Confederate  S t a f f O f f i c e r (New York: Neale P u b l i s h i n g Company, 1905), p. 202. 4 ?Roman, Beauregard, I , 269n.; OR, V I I I , 804; XVI, pt. 2, 967-968; XX, p t . 2, 405. 48 Mackall had helped t o defend Bragg from charges of incompetence f o l l o w i n g the B a t t l e of Murfreesboro. See Bragg t o M a c k a l l , Tullahoma [Tenn.] , February 14, 1863, M a c k a l l Papers. 68 4 9OR, X X I I I , pt. 2, 777. 5°Brent D i a r y , A p r i l 17, 1863. 5 10R, X X I I I , pt. 2, 825. EJ2 ^ These conclusions were reached by a n a l y s i s of the communications recorded i n the O f f i c i a l Records as issued and received by Mac k a l l and Walter d u r i n g the per i o d that they were working together. OR, X X I I I , pt. 2, 825-933-5 3 I b i d . , p t . 1, 618-627. ^ J o h n s t o n t o M a c k a l l , Canton [ M i s s . ] , June 7, 1863, M a c k a l l Papers. 5 5OR, X X I I I , pt. 1, 623-5 6 I b i d . , pt. 2, 933. 57 Endorsement by Ma c k a l l on l e t t e r from Brent, [Chattanooga, Tenn. ] August 23, 1863, K i n l o c h Falconer, CSR. 5 8 B r e n t D i a r y , October 16, 1863. 5 9 M a c k a l l t o Mrs. M a c k a l l , Dalton [GaJ , March 4, 1864, M a c k a l l Papers. 6 oOR, X X I I I , pt. 2, and XXX, pt. 4. In the Confederate correspondence of t h i s p e r i o d , seventy-six out of eighty-two communications were issued by Brent. Only t h i r t y - f i v e belonged t o the category of general and s p e c i a l orders, and c i r c u l a r s . 69 6 l M a c k a l l to Mrs. M a c k a l l , M i s s i o n Ridge [ Tenn.] , October 3 , 1863, M a c k a l l Papers. 62 M a c k a l l t o Mrs. M a c k a l l , M i s s i o n Ridge [ Tenn.] , September 2 9 , 1863, i b i d . 63 M a c k a l l t o Mrs. M a c k a l l , M i s s i o n Ridge [ Tenn.] , October 10, October 12, 1863, i b i d . 6 4OR, XXX, p t . 4 , 756-757. 6 5 M a c k a l l t o Mrs. M a c k a l l , J u l y 13, 1864, M a c k a l l Papers. f>f> Robert E. Lee a l s o p r e f e r r e d t o act as h i s own c h i e f of s t a f f . Douglas S o u t h a l l Freeman, R. E. Lee (4 v o l s . j New York: Charles S c r i b n e r ' s Sons, 1934-1935), I I I , 2 2 8 - 2 3 0 . This does not i n d i c a t e , however, that Lee saw the r o l e of the c h i e f of s t a f f i n the same way as Bragg. 70 CHAPTER I I I Under J . E. Johnston January-July, 1864 Through most of 1863, while Braxton Bragg had been the f i e l d commander of the Army of Tennessee, General Joseph E. Johnston had held the o v e r a l l command of the Western Depart-ment of the Confederacy. E a r l y i n 1864 there occurred a curious r e v e r s a l of t h e i r r o l e s . Johnston became the f i e l d commander, while Bragg, as m i l i t a r y a d v i s o r t o President Davis, e x e r c i s e d a general though undefined s u p e r v i s i o n over the Army's a f f a i r s . . Both men reported on the Army of Tennessee's performance i n the opening months of the A t l a n t a campaign, from May t o J u l y 1864. Considering the controversy caused i n Confederate m i l i t a r y c i r c l e s by Johnston's w i t h -drawal before the Union armies of General W i l l i a m T. Sherman, from Dalton t o the o u t s k i r t s of A t l a n t a , i t was.hardly t o be expected t h a t the r e p o r t s of Johnston and Bragg would c o i n c i d e . On the subject of the s t a f f work i n Johnston's Army of Tennessee, they were f l a t l y c o n t r a d i c t o r y . 1 According to Johnston, "the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e departments had been admirably conducted," f o r which the commander gave c r e d i t t o h i s c h i e f of s t a f f . Bragg, on the other hand, wrote of the "sad c o n d i t i o n " of the Army, blaming i t on the 2 a d m i n i s t r a t i v e f a i l u r e of the c h i e f of s t a f f . S i g n i f i c a n t l y , the c h i e f of s t a f f i n question was B r i g a d i e r General W i l l i a m 7 1 Whann M a c k a l l , who had served under both commanders. The dispute over Mackall's 1864 performance as c h i e f of s t a f f r e f l e c t e d the acrimony of the debate over Johnston's st r a t e g y 3 i n Georgia and the growing antagonism between Bragg and M a c k a l l ; i t a l s o provided an accurate m i r r o r f o r the whole s t a f f controversy of 1864. The dispute was over two o l d army problems which had re-appeared t o plague the Confederacy. P o l i t i c a l and m i l i t a r y spokesmen argued about the degree of independence from the War Department which a l i n e commander could p r o p e r l y e x e r c i s e , and about the m e r i t s of a permanent s t a f f corps. The immediate issue concerned the appointment of s t a f f o f f i c e r s ; should o f f i c e r s s e r v i n g w i t h f i e l d s t a f f be p e r s o n a l l y s e l e c t e d by the commanding gener a l , or be assigned from a permanent corps t r a i n e d and experienced i n the s p e c i a l d u t i e s of s t a f f work. President J e f f e r s o n Davis, who was a l s o commander-in-chief of the Confederate armies, described the c o n f l i c t as one between "a s t a f f f o r generals" and "a general s t a f f . " 4 The Confederate dispute was not new i n 1864. On March 21 , 1863, General Robert E. Lee had w r i t t e n t o Davis of the need f o r an organized corps of s t a f f o f f i c e r s "to teach others t h e i r duty, see t o the observance of orders, and t o the r e g u l a r i t y and p r e c i s i o n of a l l movement." Lee wished the s t a f f t o f u n c t i o n as a s e l f - c o n t a i n e d o r g a n i z a t i o n , w i t h detachable s t a f f u n i t s which could be moved about from one army command t o another. He deprecated the dependence of 72 s t a f f on i n d i v i d u a l commanders, and deplored the tendency t o appoint to s t a f f p o s i t i o n s "the r e l a t i v e s and s o c i a l f r i e n d s of the commanders, who, however agreeable t h e i r company, are not always the most u s e f u l o f f l e e r s . . . . " ^ Lee's a t t a c k on the absence of a s t a f f corps, and the r e s u l t i n g nepotism i n s t a f f appointments, was l a t e r renewed by an impressive a r r a y of c r i t i c s . In November 1863 a War Department report by Major Samuel W. Melton, a s s i s t a n t adjutant g e n e r a l , claimed t h a t the s t a f f system then p r a c t i s e d was "the most i n d i f f e r e n t f e a t u r e " of the Confederate Army. He charged t h a t " s t a f f o f f i c e r s are as a r u l e men too young i n years, given t o l e v i t y of mind and conduct, and absorbed i n a t t e n t i o n t o t h e i r personal concerns." Although i n d i v i d u a l l y brave, they f a i l e d to i n s p i r e respect and confidence. T h e i r appoint-ments and promotions were too much in f l u e n c e d by "personal p a r t i a l i t i e s and c o n s i d e r a t i o n s of p o l i c y and too o f t e n of nepotism," while the u n c e r t a i n t y of promotion i n the s t a f f caused the best men to p r e f e r l i n e commands. To improve the standard of s t a f f personnel, e l i m i n a t e nepotism, and provide o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r advancement based on m e r i t , Melton recom-mended the o r g a n i z a t i o n of a permanent s t a f f corps c o n t r o l l e d by the War Department. Respect f o r the s t a f f among the t r o o p s , he i n s i s t e d , was more important than p e r f e c t harmony wit h the commanding general. In the s p r i n g of 1864 Bragg joi n e d the d i s c u s s i o n . He c r i t i c i z e d the concept of f i e l d s t a f f as the personal a s s i s -t a n t s of the general, and charged that the r e s u l t of such a 73 system was f a v o r i t i s m , nepotism, and i n e f f i c i e n c y . These r a d i c a l d e f e c t s could only be cured by "time, experience i n s e r v i c e , and high m i l i t a r y education," but the e x i s t i n g s t a f f system could be much improved by f r e e i n g i t s o f f i c e r s from 7 dependence upon the changing fortunes of t h e i r commanders. The opinions and proposals of Lee, Melton, and Bragg represented the o f f i c i a l views of the War Department. On A p r i l 2 8 , 1864, Secretary of War James A. Seddon reported t o the P r e s i d e n t : Prom unavoidable circumstances, probably, the s t a f f has been too much the object of f a v o r i t i s m through the recommendations on behalf of personal f r i e n d s , or the refuge of supernumeraries or those by no n - e l e c t i o n or otherwise thrown out of the l i n e of r e g u l a r s e r v i c e . They have come t o be considered i n some measure as attaches t o the persons and fortunes of t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e generals, r a t h e r than as o f f i c e r s s e l e c t e d f o r p e c u l i a r q u a l i f i c a t i o n s and assigned t o s p e c i a l d u t i e s . In consequence of t h i s k i n d of e s t i m a t i o n , probably, they have not been allowed rank c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h e i r importance or regulated a p p r o p r i a t e l y by the standard of merit. These e v i l s i t i s most d e s i r a b l e t o remove, and i t i s r e s p e c t f u l l y suggested that the remedy may be found i n or g a n i z i n g the r e s p e c t i v e departments of the s t a f f i n t o separate corps, w i t h proper gradations i n rank, and i n a f f o r d i n g the i n c e n t i v e of advance on the e x h i b i t i o n of q u a l i f i c a t i o n s or s u p e r i o r m e r i t . 8 Davis accepted Seddon's r e p o r t , r e p e a t i n g i t s main p o i n t s i n a message t o the Confederate Congress on May 2 8 . The President then advocated "a general s t a f f , permanent i n i t s c h a r a c t e r , t r a i n e d i n i t s d u t i e s , a s p i r i n g t o promotion i n i t s own corps, and r e s p o n s i b l e t o the head of the depart-9 ment." T h i s proposal reversed h i s e a r l i e r recommendation, 74 as United States Secretary of War, when he had opposed a permanent s t a f f corps, a d v i s i n g instead an a l t e r n a t i o n of s t a f f and l i n e d u t i e s . Davis explained the change. In the s p e c i a l circumstances of the Confederacy, forced t o r a i s e l a r g e armies i n the f i g h t f o r p o l i t i c a l s u r v i v a l , there were not enough t r a i n e d and experienced o f f i c e r s f o r assignment t o s t a f f d u t i e s ; experimental appointments had t o be made; and the only way by which these untrained o f f i c e r s could be made e f f i c i e n t was by o r g a n i z i n g them i n t o a s t a f f corps. The corps d i r e c t o r would make a l l s t a f f assignments, independently of the l i n e commanders, and could thus t r a i n the s t a f f i n a range of d u t i e s , under d i f f e r e n t commanders. Organized i n t h i s way, the s t a f f corps could s o l v e , so Davis b e l i e v e d , the s p e c i a l problems of Confederate m i l i t a r y a d m i n i s t r a t i o n . 1 ^ O f f i c i a l o p i n i o n i n Richmond was thus i n fa v o r of a permanent s t a f f corps, organized by departments, and d i r e c t e d by the c e n t r a l a u t h o r i t y of the War Department. Under t h i s system, the s t a f f would f u n c t i o n as an impersonal agency, as part of a m i l i t a r y machine. But o f f i c i a l o p i n i o n d i d not go unchallenged. Strongly opposed t o a s t a f f corps c o n t r o l l e d by the War Department was Senator Louis Trezevant W i g f a l l of Texas. The Senator had l i t t l e but contempt f o r s t a f f o f f i c e r s appointed i n Richmond, and f i r m l y b e l i e v e d t h a t the s t a f f should be s e l e c t e d by the generals i n the f i e l d , who had the best opportunity of judging an o f f i c e r ' s c h aracter and a b i l i t y , i n the m i l i t a r y context i n which he was t o s e r v e . 1 1 As a member of the Senate Committee 75 on M i l i t a r y A f f a i r s , W i g f a l l was able t o i n f l u e n c e the Congressional s t a f f b i l l , of February 12, 1864. That b i l l provided f o r the appointment by the commander of a f i e l d army of a c h i e f of s t a f f , t o be "charged w i t h the general adminis-t r a t i o n " of h i s army; and of an i n s p e c t o r general, a c h i e f 12 quartermaster, a c h i e f commissary, and a c h i e f of ordnance. I f accepted, these p r o v i s i o n s would have given c o n t r o l over f i e l d s t a f f t o the l i n e commanders. Congress passed the b i l l , but Davis refused t o s i g n i t , c l a i m i n g that i t I n f r i n g e d h i s 13 executive p r e r o g a t i v e of appointment. In I t s proposals f o r s t a f f reform Congress had the support of General P. G. T. Beauregard. The former commander of the Army of Tennessee b e l i e v e d i t e s s e n t i a l that a general "be invested w i t h an u n r e s t r i c t e d , unembarrassed s e l e c t i o n of S t a f f O f f i c e r s , and thoroughly emancipated from the l e a s t s u bordination t o the views and c o n t r o l of the heads of the 14 Bureaux at Richmond." W i g f a l l a l s o consulted General J . E. Johnston, f o r whom he was s a i d t o be " v i r t u a l l y the p o l i t i c a l c h i e f of s t a f f . " Johnston had r e s e r v a t i o n s about the sugges-ted reforms, however. He was u n w i l l i n g t o a s s i g n l i n e o f f i c e r s t o s t a f f d u t i e s , as W i g f a l l had proposed, or t o conform t o any Congressional d e f i n i t i o n of what h i s s t a f f should be. But Johnston d i d agree that he should s e l e c t h i s own s t a f f o f f i c e r s , showing p a r t i c u l a r i n t e r e s t i n the appointment of a c h i e f of s t a f f . 1 6 76 In a l e t t e r t o Johnston i n A p r i l 1864, W i g f a l l explained the Congressional p r o v i s i o n f o r a c h i e f of s t a f f : The r i g h t t o s e l e c t a Chief of S t a f f from the general o f f i c e r s was given t o the General to r e l i e v e him from the embarrassment of having a "Second i n Command" of which Davis i s always t a l k i n g f o i s t e d on him and t o enable him t o s e l e c t from h i s generals of even the highest rank an o f f i c e r t o r e l i e v e him from d e t a i l s . 1 7 In t h i s p r o p o s a l , that the c h i e f of s t a f f would act as a second i n command, W i g f a l l was re p e a t i n g the suggestion made e a r l i e r t o Johnston at the time of the p o s s i b l e r e l i e f of Bragg a f t e r the B a t t l e of Murfreesboro. By r e j e c t i n g the February s t a f f b i l l Davis refused t o concede the general's r i g h t t o s e l e c t h i s own c h i e f of s t a f f , and by i m p l i c a t i o n denied t h a t the c h i e f of s t a f f might act as a second i n command. The amended b i l l , passed i n June 1864, r e t a i n e d the r i g h t of appointment i n the Pre s i d e n t ' s hands, and described the d u t i e s of the general o f f i c e r appointed as c h i e f of s t a f f as those of a d m i n i s t r a t i o n . I t a l s o estab-l i s h e d a general s t a f f corps, t o which a l l s t a f f o f f i c e r s would be attached, and w i t h i n which they would be promoted. The s i g n i f i c a n c e of the long debate over the Confederate s t a f f system l a y not i n the l e g i s l a t i v e reforms, however, since war c o n d i t i o n s made i t impossible t o put these i n t o 19 e f f e c t , but In the expression and c l a r i f i c a t i o n of ideas about s t a f f personnel and f u n c t i o n s . On the one hand, Davis and the War Department, supported by Lee and Bragg, wished the c r e a t i o n of a general s t a f f corps, t o be c l o s e l y c o n t r o l l e d by the c e n t r a l executive a u t h o r i t y ; w i t h i n t h i s system the c h i e f of s t a f f of a f i e l d army would be appointed by the War 77 Department, and would act as the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e a s s i s t a n t of the commander. On the other hand, the Senate Committee on M i l i t a r y A f f a i r s , dominated by W i g f a l l and supported by Beauregard and Johnston, proposed a system by which f i e l d commanders would s e l e c t o f f i c e r s f o r s t a f f duty; and f o r them the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e d u t i e s of the c h i e f of s t a f f would be so broadly I n t e r p r e t e d as to make a second i n command unnecessary. These c o n f l i c t i n g i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s were r e f l e c t e d i n the record of the Army of Tennessee under Johnston's command, from January t o J u l y , 1864. The o f f i c i a l viewpoint was ex-pressed by Bragg, as the agent of the President and the War Department; and the opposing one by Johnston, as the commander i n the f i e l d . The c h i e f of s t a f f over whom the d i f f e r e n c e s of o pinion became apparent was M a c k a l l . A f t e r l e a v i n g Bragg's s t a f f i n October 1863, B r i g a d i e r General M a c k a l l had returned t o l i n e duty, and when Johnston was assigned t o the Army of Tennessee i n December 1863 M a c k a l l was a brigade commander at E n t e r p r i s e , M i s s i s s i p p i . There he was r e s t l e s s and d i s s a t i s f i e d , convinced that the command of a brigade l i t t l e l a r g e r than a regiment would advance n e i t h e r h i s own career nor the Confederate cause. Yet he h e s i t a t e d when Johnston asked him to r e t u r n t o the Army of Tennessee as c h i e f of s t a f f . The same question which a l l o f f i c e r s assigned t o s t a f f duty had t o c o n s i d e r — w h e t h e r promotion i n the s t a f f was not slower than In the l i n e — w a s faced by M a c k a l l , and f i n a l l y discounted by him. S t a f f s e r v i c e w i t h h i s o l d f r i e n d Johnston would be more congenial than a l i n e command In which 78 h i s s u p e r i o r s i n rank were h i s j u n i o r s i n years and 20 experience. M a c k a l l accepted Johnston's o f f e r , and on January 2 6 , 1864, was announced i n general orders as c h i e f of s t a f f of the Army of Tennessee. -L Mackall's appointment was the r e s u l t of personal s t a f f s e l e c t i o n by h i s commander. The personal element i n the new c h i e f ' s appointment can 22 be seen c l e a r l y i n h i s r e l a t i o n s w i t h Johnston. The two men were cl o s e f r i e n d s , and the pressure of t h e i r m i l i t a r y r o l e s d i d not upset that r e l a t i o n s h i p , as i t had done f o r M a c k a l l and Bragg i n 1863. By c o n t r a s t , Johnston and M a c k a l l worked i n apparent harmony, and t h i s had i t s e f f e c t on the r o l e played by the c h i e f of s t a f f . General Johnston had expressed h i s b e l i e f e a r l y i n the C i v i l War that a commander i n c h i e f should avoid m i l i t a r y drudgery, and concentrate "upon grand operations alone."^^ To do so, he would need a c h i e f of s t a f f t o r e l i e v e him of r o u t i n e d u t i e s , and Johnston drew an analogy between a general o f f i c e r who would be "not A [ d j u t a n t ] G[eneral] but r e a l Chief of S t a f f " and Napoleon's c h i e f of s t a f f , who held the second 24 rank i n the French I m p e r i a l Army. Johnston was unable, however, t o f i n d an o f f i c e r acceptable both to himself and t o President Davis, who refused t o approve the appointment of C o l o n e l Benjamin Stoddert Ewe11 as c h i e f of s t a f f , on the 25 grounds t h a t he d i d not have the necessary rank. M a c k a l l was t h e r e f o r e Johnston's f i r s t o f f i c i a l c h i e f of s t a f f . 79 The general's I n t e n t i o n s f o r h i s c h i e f of s t a f f were i n d i c a t e d by the order announcing h i s appointment. This provided that " a l l communications t o c h i e f s of departments ..26 w i l l be addressed t o them as h e r e t o f o r e . Correspondence would thus not be d i r e c t e d through M a c k a l l . The r e o r g a n i z a -t i o n of the s t a f f departments of the Army of Tennessee, which had begun before the c h i e f of s t a f f r e j o i n e d the Army, would be continued under the department heads. Obviously Johnston intended M a c k a l l f o r something more than the narrow super-v i s i o n of the s t a f f departments of the army, as the head of an a d m i n i s t r a t i v e h i e r a r c h y . Indeed t h i s would not have been p o s s i b l e even had Johnston wished i t , f o r the subsistence department at Richmond claimed immediate and d i r e c t a u t h o r i t y over the departments of supply, even of an army i n the 27 f i e l d . Mackall's s t a f f r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s were to be much more extensive. H i s record of s e r v i c e under Johnston shows tha t the c h i e f of s t a f f ' s work was a s s o c i a t e d , not only w i t h a d m i n i s t r a t i o n , but a l s o w i t h command. A n a l y s i s of the correspondence of the Army of Tennessee, 28 as preserved i n the O f f i c i a l Records, provides evidence of Mackall's r o l e . During the s i x months of h i s appointment, 107 communications were sent out over Mackall's signature as c h i e f of s t a f f . Of these, only t h i r t e e n were issued i n the p e r i o d January 26 t o A p r i l 30, when the army was encamped at Dalton. The remaining n i n e t y - f o u r belong t o the campaign months of May, June, and J u l y . There i s thus l i t t l e s i g n of Mackall's p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the paperwork in v o l v e d i n the 80 r e o r g a n i z a t i o n of the Army of Tennessee while at Dalton. The Records show that t h i s was c a r r i e d out p r i n c i p a l l y through the agency of the adjutant general's department, and w i t h i n each separate s t a f f department. Mackall's work was h e a v i e s t , not i n camp, hut on campaign, when he d i r e c t e d the adminis-t r a t i o n of the army on the march and i n b a t t l e . H i s r e l a t i o n -ship was p r i m a r i l y w i t h command, r a t h e r than w i t h s t a f f . T his c o n c l u s i o n i s supported by the type of orders issued by M a c k a l l . They do not i n d i c a t e any d i r e c t or c l o s e s u p e r v i s i o n over the s t a f f departments of the army. Indeed i t was on the l a c k of such s u p e r v i s i o n that Bragg l a t e r based h i s c r i t i c i s m of Mackall's performance as c h i e f of s t a f f . M ackall's orders were addressed, not t o s t a f f , but to the subordinate commanders of the Army of Tennessee. The orders provided i n f o r m a t i o n on army movements, both Confederate and F e d e r a l , d i r e c t e d the d i s p o s i t i o n of the Confederate f o r c e s , c o n t r o l l e d t h e i r withdrawal, and organized such r e i n f o r c e -ments as were a v a i l a b l e . In t h i s task of c o o r d i n a t i n g the m i l i t a r y e f f o r t of the Army of Tennessee M a c k a l l was more than j u s t the instrument of h i s commander's w i l l . More than one t h i r d of Mackall's w r i t t e n orders were Issued on h i s own a u t h o r i t y , without any mention of Johnston. E v i d e n t l y the general regarded h i s c h i e f of s t a f f as a t r u s t e d and respon-s i b l e a s s i s t a n t , and was content t o leave a u t h o r i t y i n matters of r o u t i n e and d e t a i l t o him. The subordinate commanders u s u a l l y addressed t h e i r communications t o headquarters through M a c k a l l , and r e c e i v e d t h e i r answers from him, i n d i c a t i n g that 81 they recognized and accepted the c h i e f of s t a f f ' s eminent p o s i t i o n . Under Johnston that p o s i t i o n was much more personal a s s i s t a n t to the commanding general, than head of the s t a f f . C e r t a i n l y t h i s i s the r o l e r e f l e c t e d i n the j o u r n a l 2 9 kept by Mackall's a i d e , Lieutenant T. B. M a c k a l l . According t o the j o u r n a l , which runs from May 14 t o June 4 , the c h i e f of s t a f f f r e q u e n t l y accompanied Johnston i n the f i e l d , attended and took part i n conferences w i t h the subordinate generals, and was r e s p o n s i b l e f o r the communication of the d e c i s i o n s reached. Ma c k a l l took obvious s a t i s f a c t i o n i n h i s r e s p o n s i b l e r o l e . H i s d u t i e s brought him i n t o c l o s e a s s o c i a t i o n w i t h Johnston and the other commanders, and as c h i e f of s t a f f h i s work was important. Johnston l a t e r r e c o l l e c t e d that he and M a c k a l l had always shared the same room or t e n t , and that M a c k a l l had been present at a l l the meetings of the generals, i n h i s c a p a c i t y as c h i e f of s t a f f . J M a c k a l l described one of the meetings to h i s w i f e . "There was a great p l e r p e x i t y [ s i c ] the other day," he wrote, "and a f t e r everybody had bothered themselves--I t o l d Joe [Johnston] t h a t he had b e t t e r put h i s army--thus and so--he adopted the i d e a - - t o l d me t h a t i t was the happiest thought on t h i s campaign and had given him the greatest r e l i e f . " 3 1 Good personal r e l a t i o n s between the c h i e f of s t a f f and h i s g e n e r a l , and mutual p r o f e s s i o n a l r e s p e c t , had put M a c k a l l i n a p o s i t i o n where he might advise i n the making of command d e c i s i o n s . 82 At the same time M a c k a l l d i d exert a nominal c o n t r o l over the s t a f f . As b r i g a d i e r general he was the ranking s t a f f o f f i c e r , a poin t on which Johnston i n s i s t e d , so that the c h i e f of s t a f f could where necessary give orders t o any 32 member of the s t a f f . But the r o u t i n e a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of the Army of Tennessee was u s u a l l y c a r r i e d out by the adjutants and the Inspectors of the general s t a f f departments. Mackall's experience i n 1864 was th e r e f o r e very d i f f e r e n t from what i t had been under Bragg. Where wi t h Bragg the c h i e f of s t a f f had i n the f i n a l a n a l y s i s been only one of s e v e r a l a d m i n i s t r a t i v e o f f i c e r s , w i t h Johnston he r e t a i n e d a p o s i t i o n of s p e c i a l r e s p o n s i b i l i t y . Where Bragg had been e r r a t i c i n h i s d e l e g a t i o n of a u t h o r i t y , Johnston was w i l l i n g to delegate r o u t i n e matters of a d m i n i s t r a t i o n and command. Where s t r a i n e d r e l a t i o n s w i t h Bragg had brought Mackall's r e s i g n a t i o n i n 1863, good r e l a t i o n s w i t h Johnston c o n t r i b u t e d t o valuable work i n 1864. The d i f f e r e n c e i n Mackall's experience w i t h Bragg and w i t h Johnston was thus due i n part to personal f a c t o r s , and i n part to d i f f e r i n g i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s of the r o l e of c h i e f of s t a f f . As Johnston's m i l i t a r y c h i e f of s t a f f , M a c k a l l c a r r i e d out i n the f i e l d the r o l e which the general's p o l i t i c a l c h i e f of s t a f f was b u s i l y advocating i n Richmond. There W i g f a l l proposed l e g i s l a t i v e p r o v i s i o n f o r a c h i e f s t a f f o f f i c e r , s e l e c t e d p e r s o n a l l y by the f i e l d commander t o a s s i s t him i n a d m i n i s t r a t i o n , i n preference t o a second i n command imposed on him by the War Department. The amendments t o the s t a f f 83 b i l l prevented the I n s t i t u t i o n a l i z a t i o n of the extended s t a f f r o l e , however, and i t remained the chance product of the co-operation of Johnston and M a c k a l l . With or without o f f i c i a l s a n c t i o n , Johnston continued t o use h i s c h i e f of s t a f f as h i s p r i n c i p a l a d m i n i s t r a t i v e a s s i s t a n t . As t h i s represented a considerable departure from the p r a c t i c e of Bragg i n 1863, i t i s not s u r p r i s i n g that the two commanders could w r i t e c o n t r a d i c t o r y r e p o r t s on Mackall's work du r i n g the A t l a n t a campaign. They simply reported i n the l i g h t of d i f f e r e n t i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s of the r o l e of the c h i e f of s t a f f , so that Johnston could c o n s c i e n t i o u s l y w r i t e of Mackall's " e x c e l l e n t a d m i n i s t r a t i o n , " J J while Bragg could be e q u a l l y convinced i n h i s c r i t i c i s m . In a d e t a i l e d report t o the President on the c o n d i t i o n of the Army of Tennessee when Johnston was r e l i e v e d of i t s command on J u l y 17, 1864, Bragg wrote: For want of a d m i n i s t r a t i o n the army was i n sad c o n d i t i o n . The r e t u r n of the 10th of J u l y w i l l show 5 0 , 0 0 0 men f o r duty and over 10,000 on e x t r a duty, a l l able-bodied, and as a general r u l e the best men i n the army.... Nearly every command i n the army has a large excess of s t a f f o f f i c e r s . . . . Lieutenant C o l o n e l Cole, c h i e f of t r a n s p o r t a t i o n , who i s here, informs me that he f i n d s more than 1 ,000 wagons and 5 , 0 0 0 mules i n excess of the number allowed by General Johnston's orders.... The most of these e v i l s r e s u l t e d from want of a d m i n i s t r a t i o n , due t o the l a t e c h i e f of s t a f f . General Hood has r e l i e v e d him.... 3^ Bragg's c r i t i c i s m s were d i r e c t e d against a f a i l u r e to observe the r e g u l a t i o n s r e l a t i n g t o the number of men on e x t r a duty, the number of s t a f f o f f i c e r s , and the amount of t r a n s p o r t a t i o n 84 a v a i l a b l e . Responsible f o r ensuring obedience t o the r e g u l a t i o n s was the i n s p e c t o r general. Colonel Edwin James Harv i e , c h i e f i n s p e c t o r of the Army of Tennessee, l a t e r explained why the r e q u i r e d monthly i n s p e c t i o n s had not been c a r r i e d out d u r i n g the A t l a n t a campaign. The Army had been Involved i n a d i f f i c u l t campaign, and had been c o n s t a n t l y i n motion; commanders and a s s i s t a n t i n s p e c t o r s had a l i k e urged the I m p o s s i b i l i t y of c a r r y i n g out i n s p e c t i o n s under these c o n d i t i o n s ; consequently, none had 3 5 been made. ^ Bragg r e j e c t e d the s p e c i a l circumstances of the A t l a n t a campaign, however, and l a i d the f u l l r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r the I r r e g u l a r c o n d i t i o n s upon M a c k a l l . That he d i d so i l l u s t r a t e d Bragg's c o n t i n u i n g b e l i e f that the r o l e of the c h i e f of s t a f f was a d m i n i s t r a t i v e i n c h a r a c t e r , c o n s i s t i n g p r i m a r i l y of the s u p e r v i s i o n of the d e t a i l s of army o r g a n i z a t i o n . Johnston, on the other hand, took a broader view of the r o l e of h i s p r i n c i p a l s t a f f o f f i c e r , a s s o c i a t i n g a d m i n i s t r a t i o n w i t h command, and judging both i n the context of an a c t i v e campaign. Where Bragg's conclusions were c r i t i c a l , Johnston's were f a v o r a b l e . The r e p o r t s of the two generals on Mackall's work thus need not be as c o n t r a d i c t o r y as they at f i r s t appear. The r e p o r t s r e f l e c t e d d i f f e r e n t conceptions of the r o l e of c h i e f of s t a f f , r e p e a t i n g i n the f i e l d the e a r l i e r controversy at Richmond, between Davis and the War Department, on the one 85 hand, and, on the other, W i g f a l l and the Senate M i l i t a r y A f f a i r s Committee. But another e x p l a n a t i o n of the d i f f e r i n g r e p o r t s i s suggested by the personal antagonisms w i t h i n the Confederate m i l i t a r y system. General Johnston was r e l i e v e d of command i n the midst of a campaign, t o be replaced by one of h i s j u n i o r commanders, Lieutenant General John B e l l Hood, whose competency, according to Johnston, r e s i d e d i n h i s "confident language." 3 7 P r e c i s e l y who recommended Johnston's removal i s s t i l l a matter f o r d i s p u t e , but a t the time Bragg was widely suspected, p a r t i c u -l a r l y by Johnston's f r i e n d s . "The c h i e f a c t o r i n a l l t h i s f o u l drama," a former s t a f f o f f i c e r informed Johnston, " . . . i s your quondam f r i e n d Braxton Bragg—he whose r e p u t a t i o n you s h i e l d e d — h e f o r whom...you had a l i e n a t e d f r i e n d s , i f not made enemies." 3 8 M a c k a l l d i d not agree that Bragg was r e s p o n s i b l e , c l a i m i n g that Bragg's post as m i l i t a r y a d v i s o r t o J e f f e r s o n Davis was only an empty t i t l e . Bragg was, Ma c k a l l confided t o h i s w i f e , "humbugged by the P r e s t . " and i n "honorable e x i l e . " 3 9 Whatever the t r u t h of the matter, the circumstances of Johnston's r e l i e f from command encouraged p a r t i s a n feuds w i t h i n the Confederate army. Mackall's sympathies l a y wi t h Johnston. Moreover, M a c k a l l would r e s i g n h i s p o s i t i o n as c h i e f of s t a f f should 40 Bragg prove t o be Johnston's replacement. C l e a r l y personal issues a f f e c t e d the r e l a t i o n s h i p of the three men, and i t i s 86 probable that they a l s o a f f e c t e d the m i l i t a r y r e p o r t s of Johnston and Bragg on Mackall's work as c h i e f of s t a f f . Johnston's p r a i s e of Ma c k a l l and Bragg's c r i t i c i s m r e f l e c t e d more than m i l i t a r y judgement. When Johnston was replaced, not by Bragg, but by Hood, Mac k a l l maintained h i s r e s o l u t i o n t o leave the Army of Tennessee w i t h h i s commander. He was r e l i e v e d as c h i e f of s t a f f on J u l y 24, 1864, at h i s own request, and not, as Bragg 41 l a t e r i m p l i e d , on Hood's i n i t i a t i v e . That Mackall would not stay on under Johnston's successor emphasized the personal element i n h i s p o s i t i o n as c h i e f of s t a f f . The personal r e l a t i o n s h i p between Johnston and M a c k a l l had determined the r o l e of the c h i e f of s t a f f , and had made i t a r e s p o n s i b l e one. Mackall's r e f u s a l , out of l o y a l t y t o Johnston, t o serve under Hood weakened the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of the Army at a c r u c i a l moment. Hood had no experience of army command, and the A t l a n t a campaign was s t i l l undecided. Yet M a c k a l l chose t o leave. The re s p o n s i b l e r o l e of the c h i e f of s t a f f i n the Army of Tennessee was destroyed by the same personal f a c t o r s which had created i t . Mackall's experience as Johnston's c h i e f s t a f f o f f i c e r demonstrated that the r o l e of the c h i e f of s t a f f depended, not on the d e f i n i t i o n of some a d m i n i s t r a t i v e p r i n c i p l e , but on the i n t e r a c t i o n of personal f a c t o r s at the m i l i t a r y and p o l i t i c a l l e v e l s of army a d m i n i s t r a t i o n . Notes 87 Joseph E. Johnston, N a r r a t i v e of M i l i t a r y Operations (New York: D. Apple ton and Company, 187*0, P- 351; War of the R e b e l l i o n : A Compilation of the O f f i c i a l Records  of the Union and Confederate Armies (128 v o l s . ; Washington: Government P r i n t i n g O f f i c e , 1880-1901), S e r i e s I , XXXVIII, pt. 3, 618 ( c i t e d h e r e a f t e r as OR, w i t h a l l references to S e r i e s I , unless otherwise i n d i c a t e d ) ; i b i d . , L I I , pt. 2, 713. 2 I b i d . , L I I , pt. 2, 713. 3 F o r the debate over Johnston's s t r a t e g y , see Johnston, N a r r a t i v e of M i l i t a r y Operations, pp. 348-349, 355-370, 5 8 8 - 6 0 2 ; John B e l l Hood, Advance and Retreat (New Orleans: Hood Orphan Memorial Fund, 1880), pp. 317-320. A l s o , G i l b e r t E. Govan and James W. Livingood, A D i f f e r e n t V a l o r : The Story of General Joseph E. Johnston, C. S. A. (I n d i a n a p o l i s and New York: The B o b b s - M e r r i l l Company, Inc., 1956), pp. 308-338; John P. Dyer, The G a l l a n t Hood (I n d i a n a p o l i s and New York: The B o b b s - M e r r i l l Company, Inc., 1950), pp. 242-253; E l l s w o r t h E l i o t , J r . , West Point  i n the Confederacy (New York: G. A. Baker and Company, Inc., 1941), pp. 97-115; Thomas Rbbson Hay, "The Davis-Hood-Johnston Controversy of 1864," M i s s i s s i p p i V a l l e y H i s t o r i c a l Review, X I (1924), 54-84. 4 OR, S e r i e s TV, I I I , 453. . 88 ^ i b l d . , I I , 448. See a l s o Douglas Southa.ll Freeman, R. E. Lee (4 v o l s . ; New York: Charles S c r i b n e r ' s Sons, 1934-1935), I I , 490. 60R, S e r i e s IV, I I , 950-951. 7 l b i d . , I I I , 316. 8 I b i d . , 327-9 l b i d . , 450. 1 Q I b i d . , 450-451. 1 3-Louis T. W i g f a l l to J . E. Johnston, V i r g i n i a [ A p r i l 1864], Joseph Eggleston Johnston Papers, Henry E. Huntington L i b r a r y , San Marino, C a l i f o r n i a . 12"Proceedings of the F i r s t Confederate Congress, 4th Session, 7 December 1863-18 February 1864," Southern  H i s t o r i c a l S o c i e t y Papers, L (1953), 420-421. 1 30R, S e r i e s IV, I I I , 452. l 4 P . G. T. Beauregard t o P i e r r e Soule, Charleston, S. C , December 8 , 1863 (copy), Johnston Papers. 15Hood, Advance and Retreat, p. 73^ ^ J o h n s t o n t o W i g f a l l , Dalton [ GaJ , March 6, A p r i l 23, A p r i l [ 2 3 ] , A p r i l 30, 1864, Louis Trezevant W i g f a l l Papers, L i b r a r y of Congress, Washington, D. C. 89 1 7 W i g f a l l t o Johnston, V i r g i n i a [ A p r i l 1 8 6 4 ] , Johnston Papers. 1 o OR, S e r i e s TV, I I I , 4 5 2 , 4 9 7 - 4 9 8 . 1 9 I b i d . , 8 3 6 - 8 3 7 . 2 0 I b i d . , XXXI, pt. 3 , 631; W. W. Ma c k a l l t o Mrs. M a c k a l l , E n t e r p r i s e [Miss.] , December 18 , 1 8 6 3 , January 7, January 9, January 11 , January 13 , 1864, W i l l i a m Whann Mack a l l Papers, Southern H i s t o r i c a l O o l l e c t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y of North C a r o l i n a , Chapel H i l l . 2 10R, XXXII, p t . 2 , 6 1 6 . 22 See Mackall's l e t t e r s t o h i s w i f e , January-July, 1864, M a c k a l l Papers. 23 Johnston t o J e f f e r s o n Davis, Manassas [VaJ , September 3 , l 8 6 l , J e f f e r s o n Davis Papers, Duke U n i v e r s i t y , Durham, North C a r o l i n a . 2^Johnston t o [Mansfield Lovelj] , F a i r f a x , Va., September 2 6 , l 8 6 l , M a n s f i e l d L o v e l l Papers, Huntington L i b r a r y . 2 5 J o h n s t o n t o B. S. Ewe11, Harrison's [ V a . ] , May 2 8 , 1862, Richard Stoddert Ewe11 Papers, m i c r o f i l m at the V i r g i n i a H i s t o r i c a l S o c i e t y , Richmond. of. ^°0R, XXXII, pt. 2 , 6 l 6 . 2 7 I b l d . , p t . 3 , 7 1 5 - 7 1 6 . 90 2 8 l b i d . , p t . 2 , 6 1 6 - 8 3 3 ; P t . 3 , 574-879; XXXVIII, pt. 4, 6 5 4 - 8 0 7 ; Pt. 5 , 8 5 8 - 9 0 7 . 2 9 I b i d . , p t . 3 , 978-991. 3°Johnston t o M a c k a l l , Savannah [Ga.], June 11, J u l y 2 0 , 1874, M a c k a l l Papers. 3 1 M a c k a l l t o Mrs. M a c k a l l , June 18, 1864, i b i d . 3 2Endorsement by Johnston, on Archer Anderson to J . B. Hood, Dalton, Ga., February 2 9 , 1864, Archer Anderson, Compiled S e r v i c e Records of Confederate General and S t a f f O f f i c e r s and Nonregimental E n l i s t e d Men, War Department C o l l e c t i o n of Confederate Records, Record Group 109, N a t i o n a l A r c h i v e s , Washington, D. C. 3 3OR, XXXVIII, pt. 3, 618. 3 4 I b j d . , L I I , p t . 2 , 713. 3 5 l b i d . , XXXVIII, p t . 5 , 956-957. 3 6 I b i d . , p t . 3, 618; Johnston, N a r r a t i v e of M i l i t a r y  Operations, p. 351. 3 70R, XXXVIII, p t . 5, 891, 892. 91 . D. Banks t o [Johnston], Montgomery [ A l a . ] , August 21 , 1864, Johnston Papers. An i n t e r e s t i n g i f s l i g h t l y ambiguous telegram sent by Bragg two days before Johnston's r e l i e f suggests that Banks was r i g h t . Bragg t o Davis (copy), A t l a n t a [Ga.], J u l y 15, 1864, C i v i l War Papers, L o u i s i a n a H i s t o r i c a l A s s o c i a t i o n C o l l e c t i o n , Howard-Tilton Memorial L i b r a r y , Tulane U n i v e r s i t y , New Orleans. 3 9 M a c k a l l t o Mrs. M a c k a l l , J u l y , J u l y 15, 1864, M a c k a l l Papers. ^ M a c k a l l t o Mrs. M a c k a l l , J u l y 13, 1864, i b i d . 4 l0R, XXXVIII, p t . 5 , 907. 92 CHAPTER IV Under J . B. Hood July-December, 1864 John B e l l Hood's appointment t o command of the Army of Tennessee was based on h i s r e p u t a t i o n as a f i g h t i n g general. He was not known t o share the concern of h i s predecessors, Bragg and Johnston, f o r e f f i c i e n t o r g a n i z a t i o n and adminis-t r a t i o n . Robert E. Lee, under whom Hood had served i n the Army of Northern V i r g i n i a , doubted whether Hood had a l l the q u a l i t i e s necessary f o r h i g h command, and suggested that he lacked experience i n army management.1 Time was t o bear out Lee's judgement as f a i l u r e s i n a d m i n i s t r a t i o n c o n t r i b u t e d t o the mounting d i s a s t e r s which made one s t a f f o f f i c e r d escribe Hood's A t l a n t a and Tennessee campaigns as "an I l i a d of woes. For Hood, as f o r h i s army, the I l i a d began when he assumed command on J u l y 17, 1864. Reaction against h i s appointment was strong, e s p e c i a l l y among those o f f i c e r s of the general s t a f f who had been most c l o s e l y a s s o c i a t e d w i t h Johnston. W i t h i n two weeks Hood l o s t three of Johnston's most important and most experienced m e n — B r i g a d i e r General W. W. M a c k a l l , c h i e f of s t a f f , C o l o n e l B. S. E w e l l , adjutant g e n e r a l , and Colonel H y p o l i t e Oladowski, c h i e f of ordnance. To replace these men was d i f f i c u l t . Since the c e n t r a l i z e d 93 s t a f f corps advocated by Davis, Bragg, Lee, and the War Department had never come i n t o being, Hood had t o f i n d new o f f i c e r s where he could. E w e l l ' s work was c a r r i e d on by h i s former a s s i s t a n t s i n the adjutant general's department, and Oladowski was replaced by Lieutenant Colonel J . M. Kennard, ordnance o f f i c e r i n Polk's o l d D i s t r i c t of Alabama, M i s s i s s i p p i , 3 and East L o u i s i a n a . More d i f f i c u l t of s o l u t i o n was the problem of f i n d i n g a new c h i e f of s t a f f . Even when allowance i s made f o r Hood's l i m i t e d choice among the o f f i c e r s a v a i l a b l e , h i s f i n a l s e l e c t i o n f o r the p o s i t i o n of c h i e f of s t a f f remains i n many respects an e x t r a o r d i n a r y one. B r i g a d i e r General F r a n c i s Asbury Shoup was a Northerner, from Indiana, who was l i v i n g i n F l o r i d a when the C i v i l War began, and Joined the Confederacy. A West Point graduate, he served as c h i e f of a r t i l l e r y t o Hardee at S h i l o h , and l a t e r as a brigade commander i n the t r a n s -M i s s i s s i p p i , at V i c k s b u r g , and at Mobile. In the s p r i n g of 1864 Shoup was assigned t o the Army of Tennessee as c h i e f of a r t i l l e r y , and i t was from t h i s p o s i t i o n t h a t he moved t o 4 become c h i e f of s t a f f on J u l y 24, 1864. At t h i r t y Shoup was the youngest by more than ten years 5 of the e f f e c t i v e c h i e f s of s t a f f of the Army of Tennessee. As a West Point man and as a b r i g a d i e r general he had both the p r o f e s s i o n a l t r a i n i n g and the rank considered appropriate t o h i s new appointment. But Shoup's previous s t a f f d u t i e s , as c h i e f of a r t i l l e r y , had been l i m i t e d t o the i n s t r u c t i o n , 94 d r i l l , and a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of h i s b a t t e r i e s , and t h e i r command 6 on the b a t t l e f i e l d . He had no experience of the much wider a d m i n i s t r a t i v e r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s of the c h i e f of s t a f f . Not only was Shoup r e l a t i v e l y inexperienced i n s t a f f work, but he a l s o had no p a r t i c u l a r i n c l i n a t i o n f o r i t . H is record r e v e a l s a decided preference f o r l i n e command, and a reluctance t o accept assignments which were not agreeable t o him. There are i n d i c a t i o n s that he was not w e l l - l i k e d - -Davis r e f e r r e d t o him as "that much abused o f f i c e r , " and the War Department, growing Impatient at Shoup 1s attempts t o be t r a n s f e r r e d t o permanent l i n e command, f i n a l l y issued a reminder that he had been commissioned as an a r t i l l e r y , not as a l i n e , o f f i c e r . I t was as an a r t i l l e r y o f f i c e r that he was assigned t o the Army of Tennessee i n 1864, over the recommendations of other o f f i c e r s made by Johnston, Bragg, and B r i g a d i e r General W. N. Pendleton, c h i e f of a r t i l l e r y i n the Army of Northern V i r g i n i a . The appointment was presumably made at the instance of Davis, who had been impressed by a report on the c a s t i n g of cannon w r i t t e n by Shoup i n 1862. But when Shoup join e d Johnston's army at DaIton i n 1864, he came as a v i r t u a l stranger, without r e p u t a t i o n . ^ Shoup's appointment as c h i e f of a r t i l l e r y could never-t h e l e s s be j u s t i f i e d by Bragg as that of "an educated and d i s c i p l i n e d s o l d i e r . " To e x p l a i n the appointment as c h i e f of s t a f f was more d i f f i c u l t . "This may s t r i k e you as inex-pedient," Bragg wrote t o Davis, "but i t i s e v i d e n t l y f o r the 95 best. He [Shoup] i s decidedly fond of t h i s k i n d of work and i s very e f f i c i e n t a t i t , w h i l s t he was not s a t i s f i e d w i t h h i s p o s i t i o n at the head of the a r t i l l e r y and had on my former o v i s i t d e s i r e d a t r a n s f e r t o an i n f a n t r y command.' Q u a l i f i e d by t r a i n i n g and experience f o r a r t i l l e r y work, by experience and preference f o r l i n e command, Shoup was se l e c t e d by Hood as h i s new c h i e f of s t a f f . The d e c i d i n g element j u s t i f y i n g an otherwise inexpedient choice was almost c e r t a i n l y Shoup's a v a i l a b i l i t y . Hood's i n t e n t i o n s f o r Jhls new c h i e f of s t a f f remain unclear. Perhaps he had none, other than that of r e p l a c i n g M a c k a l l . C e r t a i n l y i n h i s autobiography, Advance and Ret r e a t , Hood r e v e a l s no a p p r e c i a t i o n of the importance of the s t a f f r o l e i n army command and management; and when Shoup resigned a f t e r seven weeks as c h i e f of s t a f f , Hood made no formal 9 appointment t o replace him. These i n d i c a t i o n s that Hood was unaware of the p o t e n t i a l value of a c h i e f of s t a f f are confirmed by Shoup*s record. Shoup served as c h i e f of s t a f f from J u l y 24 t o September 14, 1864, a t o t a l of f i f t y - t w o days of ri g o r o u s campaigning around A t l a n t a . In tha t time, according t o the 10 O f f i c i a l Records, Shoup despatched 227 communications. These were s i m i l a r i n type t o M a c k a l l ' s , and c o n s i s t e d of l e t t e r s g i v i n g orders or information to the subordinate commanders of the army. The p r o p o r t i o n sent out without reference t o Hood's a u t h o r i t y was lower than Mackall's--28# as a g a i n s t 34^—but s t i l l c o n s i d e r a b l e . At f i r s t s i g h t i t 96 appears that Shoup's r o l e was an important one, but c l o s e r a n a l y s i s weakens t h i s f i r s t impression. In a comparable campaign p e r i o d , from May 1 t o J u l y 24, 1864, Mackall had Issued n i n e t y - f o u r orders over e i g h t y - f i v e days. His l e t t e r s t o h i s wife i n d i c a t e d t h a t the work i n v o l v e d , i n informing himself of the army's movements and needs, i n c o n s u l t a t i o n , and i n reconnaissance c o n s t i t u t e d a long and heavy day. Yet Shoup sent out more than twice the number of communications i n a t h i r d l e s s time. This suggests that he was not r e a l l y informed about what he was doing, but was instead a c t i n g merely as a s e c r e t a r y f o r Hood, w r i t i n g out orders and sending them o f f . Support f o r t h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of Shoup's r o l e i s provided by the e x t r a o r d i n a r y number of orders which he sent unsigned, 199 out of 227. The impression i s one of notes s c r i b b l e d h u r r i e d l y , i n the confusion of b a t t l e , at the commander's d i r e c t i o n , and then h a s t i l y dispatched by an a s s i s t a n t adjutant general or aide-de-camp. An unsigned note, c a r r i e d by an o f f i c e r of the general's s t a f f , might command obedience on the f i e l d ; the same note, known only t o come from the c h i e f of s t a f f , almost c e r t a i n l y would not. Both the volume and the form of Shoup's c o r r e s -pondence suggest that h i s p r i n c i p a l r o l e was not as a r e s p o n s i b l e a d m i n i s t r a t o r a s s i s t i n g i n the execution of command d e c i s i o n s , but as a constant attendant on h i s com-manding general as amanuensis. In the sense i n which the r o l e had been developed by Mackall under Johnston, Shoup was no c h i e f of s t a f f , but r a t h e r a j u n i o r member of the adjutant general's department. 1 1 97 Shoup d i d t r y t o exert some c o n t r o l over the various s t a f f departments, but i t was i n t h i s , the most res p o n s i b l e aspect of the d u t i e s assigned him, that h i s greatest f a i l u r e occurred. In the evacuation of A t l a n t a on September 1 and 2, 1864, considerable war m a t e r i a l belonging to the Army of Tennessee had t o be destroyed t o prevent i t f a l l i n g i n t o the hands of the enemy. Included i n the l o s s were twenty-eight carloads of ordnance, eighty-one c a r s , and f i v e engines. Involved i n the circumstances of the l o s s were Shoup, who as c h i e f of s t a f f gave the orders which should have r e s u l t e d i n the safe removal of the s t o r e s , Lieutenant C o l o n e l M. B. McMicken, who as c h i e f quartermaster was r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h e i r t i m e l y t r a n s p o r t a t i o n , and Lieutenant C o l o n e l J. M. Kennard, t o whom as c h i e f of ordnance most of the s t o r e s belonged. Hood a t t r i b u t e d the l o s s t o the "wanton n e g l e c t " of a c h i e f quartermaster "too much addicted t o d r i n k of l a t e t o attend to h i s d u t i e s , " and maintained that Shoup was " i n no manner to blame." Shoup, McMicken, and Kennard requested a court of i n q u i r y , and orders t o set up the court were issued on September 5- The i n q u i r y was held at the headquarters of the Army of Tennessee, presumably s h o r t l y a f t e r the 5 t h , and by the 23rd Hood was able t o report that the f i n d i n g s had been sent t o General Bragg. The court exonerated Kennard, declared McMicken " h i g h l y c u l p a b l e , " and found of Shoup that "he, not having d i s p l a y e d s u f f i c i e n t energy, or used a l l the means i n h i s possession t o see that there was a compliance w i t h h i s i n s t r u c t i o n s , i s censurable." Hood added a r i d e r t o the r e p o r t , saying that he disagreed w i t h the c r i t i c i s m of Shoup. 98 There the matter o f f i c i a l l y r e s t e d , t i l l the Secretary of War accepted the court's f i n d i n g s and published them i n March, 12 1865. Reaction i n the Army of Tennessee to the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e f a i l u r e at A t l a n t a was more immediate. On September 4 Hood requested a replacement f o r McMicken, and by the 23rd had appointed as c h i e f quartermaster Major W. F. Ayer. Shoup, de s p i t e Hood's support f o r him i n face of the court's d e c i s i o n , ceased t o issue orders on September 7, and on September 14 was r e l i e v e d a t h i s own request from h i s p o s i t i o n as c h i e f of s t a f f . He was not replaced. The d i s a s t e r at A t l a n t a had cost Hood not only valuable equipment and s u p p l i e s , but a l s o h i s c h i e f of s t a f f . 1 3 From September J onwards Shoup's d u t i e s were assumed by Lieutenant C o l o n e l A r t h u r Pendleton Mason. Mason had served 1 i n the adjutant general's department since 1862, f i r s t under Johnston and Lee i n V i r g i n i a , and then again under Johnston, i n the West. He owed h i s s t a f f commission to Johnston's per-sonal request of the War Department, and not t o any previous m i l i t a r y background. Although Mason was not a p r o f e s s i o n a l s o l d i e r , h i s continued s e r v i c e i n the same branch of s t a f f work made him an experienced a s s i s t a n t adjutant general. Johnston considered him a valuable o f f i c e r , and Hood commended the " z e a l and s t r i c t f i d e l i t y " w i t h which Mason discharged h i s d u t i e s . He was among the o f f i c e r s of Johnston's general s t a f f who stayed on when Hood took over command of the Army 14 of Tennessee. 99 Mason was never appointed t o Shoup's p o s i t i o n , but as a s s i s t a n t adjutant general he f u l f i l l e d the same r o l e that Shoup had done as c h i e f of s t a f f . Between September 14, 1864, and January 2 3 , 1865, when Hood was r e l i e v e d of h i s command, the adjutant general's department sent out a t o t a l of 207 communications. Of these, 90$ were issued by Mason, and 10$ by other members of the department; 84$ of Mason's l e t t e r s went t o f i e l d commanders, while the remainder f e l l i n t o the category of general and s p e c i a l orders; only 5$ of the t o t a l correspondence made no s p e c i f i c mention of Hood's d i r e c t i o n or a u t h o r i t y . Thus Mason c a r r i e d out d u t i e s s i m i l a r t o those of Shoup, but at the same time shared some of the burden of the work wi t h other a s s i s t a n t a d j u t a n t s , and r e t a i n e d h i s own r o l e as the s e n i o r member of the adjutant general's department. Why Hood d i d not make formal appointment of Mason as c h i e f of s t a f f can only be conjectured. The commander was s t i l l supporting Shoup against the censure of the court of i n q u i r y , and Mason lacked both the customary p r o f e s s i o n a l background and the necessary rank. But Hood's r e l a t i o n s w i t h Shoup and Mason r e v e a l h i s l i m i t e d concept of the r o l e of the c h i e f of s t a f f i n a C i v i l War army. To Hood, the c h i e f of s t a f f was not a r e s p o n s i b l e a d m i n i s t r a t i v e a s s i s t a n t , and h i s d u t i e s were not d i s t i n g u i s h e d i n any s i g n i f i c a n t way from those of an a s s i s t a n t adjutant general. In these two respects Hood's a t t i t u d e towards h i s c h i e f of s t a f f was not u n l i k e that p r a c t i s e d by Bragg i n the Army 100 of Tennessee, i n 1862 and 1863. But Bragg had r e s t r i c t e d the r o l e s of Jordan, Brent, and Mac k a l l p r i n c i p a l l y because he wished t o provide the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e d i r e c t i o n of the army hi m s e l f . His sense of the importance of a d m i n i s t r a t i o n made him u n w i l l i n g t o delegate r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r i t . Hood d i d not have t h i s sense, and consequently the Army of Tennessee under h i s command rec e i v e d co-ordinated a d m i n i s t r a t i v e c o n t r o l n e i t h e r from i t s general nor from h i s p r i n c i p a l s t a f f o f f i c e r . The r e s u l t was chaos. The chaos was not r e s t r i c t e d t o any one department. The new quartermaster was involved i n a dispute w i t h h i s t r a n s -p o r t a t i o n o f f i c e r , and the c h i e f commissary was unable to provide adequate food s u p p l i e s . The c h i e f engineer was not with the army, but busy elsewhere i n the M i l i t a r y D i v i s i o n of the West. The c h i e f of a r t i l l e r y was considered a troublesome o f f i c e r , addicted to the b o t t l e . There was no o f f i c i a l c h i e f of s t a f f , although Mason was apparently recognized as a c t i n g c h i e f . But most se r i o u s of a l l , and most d i r e c t l y a t t r i b u t a b l e to f a u l t y a d m i n i s t r a t i o n , was the f a i l u r e of Hood and Mason t o ensure the e f f i c i e n t o peration of the adjutant general's 16 department. "Orders," reported Colonel E. J . Harvie to Hood on November 3, "are d a i l y issued by the Adjutant-General of the Army, and i t i s impossible t o t e l l whether they f i n d t h e i r 17 way even as f a r as corps headquarters." H a r v i e , Inspector general of the Army of Tennessee, was s e r i o u s l y concerned 101 about the i n a b i l i t y of h i s department t o c a r r y out the r o u t i n e i n s p e c t i o n s r e q u i r e d to ensure the e f f i c i e n t a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of the army. Without these i n s p e c t i o n s , impossible under the 18 e x i s t i n g s t a f f system, the adjutant general's department had already ceased t o be a r e l i a b l e l i n e of communication between the general commanding and h i s subordinates. Harvie i m p l i e d t h a t without reforms i n s t a f f o r g a n i z a t i o n Hood would f i n d i t i n c r e a s i n g l y d i f f i c u l t t o d i r e c t and c o n t r o l the movements of h i s men. These warnings came from an o f f i c e r whose experience of s t a f f work dated from before the C i v i l War, and a l s o included 19 Confederate s e r v i c e under Lee and Joe Johnston. They came at a time when the Army was held up i n the i n v a s i o n of i t s home st a t e of Tennessee, p a r t l y by heavy r a i n s , but a l s o i n 20 large part by problems i n the s t a f f departments of supply. There i s , however, no i n d i c a t i o n that Hood paid any a t t e n t i o n to the c r i t i c i s m s d i r e c t e d by Harvie against the s t a f f system as i t then operated. The campaign i n t o Tennessee probably seemed t o Hood of more immediate importance than a s t a f f r e o r g a n i z a t i o n . Yet w i t h i n a month the Army of Tennessee was t o s u f f e r badly from the very s t a f f f a i l u r e s t h a t Harvie had warned a g a i n s t . By November 28 Hood's men had entered Tennessee, and were c o n f r o n t i n g the Fed e r a l f o r c e s under Major General John M. S c h o f i e l d at Columbia, on the south bank of the Duck r i v e r . The road from Columbia l e d no r t h , through Spr i n g H i l l and F r a n k l i n , t o the main Federal base at N a s h v i l l e . Hood 102 proposed to place the main part of h i s army across the road at S p r i n g H i l l , thus c u t t i n g o f f S c h o f i e l d ' s l i n e of w i t h -drawal from Columbia to N a s h v i l l e . The r e t r e a t i n g F e deral f o r c e s would be a t t a c k e d , routed, and captured. In t h i s movement to the enemy's r e a r Hood hoped to emulate h i s hero Stonewall Jackson, and t o make c e r t a i n of the success of the 21 plan decided t o lead the movement i n person. E a r l y on November 29 Hood moved two of h i s three army corps i n a f l a n k i n g march, c r o s s i n g the Duck r i v e r three m i l e s to the east and upstream from Columbia. Two d i v i s i o n s of Lieutenant General Stephen D. Lee's corps were l e f t i n f r o n t of Columbia t o engage S c h o f i e l d ' s a t t e n t i o n , while Hood's fo r c e marched towards Spr i n g H i l l by a road which ran east of the main p i k e . The advance corps of Major General Benjamin F r a n k l i n Cheatham a r r i v e d at S p r i n g H i l l e a r l y i n the afternoon, f i n d i n g a detachment of F o r r e s t ' s c a v a l r y already there and w a i t i n g f o r f u r t h e r orders. The supporting corps under Lieutenant General Alexander P. Stewart came up s h o r t l y a f t e r -wards. At that time the only Union fo r c e present was the small g a r r i s o n i n Spring H i l l , although S c h o f i e l d ' s men were beginning t o move on the Columbia-Franklin road. The stage seemed set f o r a s t r i k i n g Confederate v i c t o r y i n the West. That v i c t o r y was never achieved. Hood's men, i n s p i t e of t h e i r numerical s t r e n g t h , d i d not take S p r i n g H i l l , d i d not occupy the Columbia pike south of the town, and d i d not c l o s e the F r a n k l i n road t o the north. In what remained Of d a y l i g h t they f a i l e d to place themselves squarely across the 103 path of S c h o f i e l d ' 3 r e t r e a t i n g army. Fu r t h e r , d u r i n g the ni g h t they f a i l e d t o d e l i v e r any seriou s a t t a c k against the di s o r g a n i z e d F e d e r a l f o r c e s as they moved along the pike w i t h i n a quarter of a mile of the Confederate encampment. No advan-tage was taken of the favorable p o s i t i o n gained by Hood's f l a n k i n g movement. Instead the Union army was allowed to escape t o the entrenchments and f o r t i f i c a t i o n s of F r a n k l i n and N a s h v i l l e , before which the Army of Tennessee was v i r t u a l l y destroyed on November 30 and December 15. The f a i l u r e t o e s t a b l i s h the t a c t i c a l supremacy i m p l i c i t i n Hood's move t o Spri n g H i l l thus not only l o s t the Army a great v i c t o r y , but a l s o i n v o l v e d i t i n two d i s a s t r o u s d e f e a t s . The opportunity l o s t at Spri n g H i l l marked the end of Confederate hopes i n the West. The s i g n i f i c a n c e of the f a i l u r e has meant that ever since the morning of November 30, 1864, when the Union army was discovered to have escaped i n the n i g h t , s o l d i e r s and scho l a r s have t r i e d t o analyze what went wrong at Spri n g H i l l , and to a s s i g n r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r the 22 l o s t opportunity. Perhaps i n e v i t a b l y , the greatest i n t e r e s t l a y i n d i s c o v e r i n g which of the commanding generals of the Army of Tennessee was r e s p o n s i b l e f o r the repeated f a i l u r e s to a t t a c k . Consensus has i t th a t u l t i m a t e l y the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y was Hood's. As commander i n c h i e f he was present on the f i e l d , and supposedly capable of d i r e c t i n g the f o r c e s under h i s a u t h o r i t y . Hood d i d not agree t h a t he was to blame, and charged one of h i s corps commanders, Major General Cheatham, w i t h f a i l u r e t o 104 obey orders t o a t t a c k . Cheatham denied the charge, and i n h i s t u r n blamed h i s d i v i s i o n commanders, Major Generals P a t r i c k R. Cleburne, W i l l i a m B. Bate, and John C. Brown, f o r confusion over the orders t o capture S p r i n g H i l l and t o hold the road south of the town. Lieutenant General Stewart j u s t i f i e d h i s f a i l u r e to c l o s e the road to the n o r t h by c l a i m i n g that he had r e c e i v e d orders t o withdraw h i s fo r c e from one of Hood's s t a f f o f f i c e r s . From these charges and counter-charges has come a mass of c o n f l i c t i n g evidence which no-one has been able t o r e c o n c i l e . As a r e s u l t i t has never been p o s s i b l e to f i x s p e c i f i c r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r the l o s t opportunity on any 2 3 one person. No simple e x p l a n a t i o n of the Spring H i l l f a i l u r e has been found, but the c o n f l i c t i n g evidence provides one obvious c o n c l u s i o n . There was a complete l a c k of c o - o r d i n a t i o n among the Confederate commanders, and the confusion r e s u l t i n g on the f i e l d was due i n large measure to the weakness of Hood's a d m i n i s t r a t i v e system. Army headquarters were set up two miles d i s t a n t from, and out of s i g h t o f , the main o b j e c t i v e , the Columbia p i k e . Orders issued f ollowed the i n f o r m a l p a t t e r n allowed t o develop under Shoup, and were mostly v e r b a l , , 24 i n form. No record was kept at headquarters of orders sent, and communications t o f i e l d commanders were neglected. As a d i r e c t r e s u l t of t h i s haphazard and i n e f f i c i e n t a d m i n i s t r a t i o n , the chance t o s e i z e the Columbia-Franklin pike at S p r i n g H i l l was l o s t . In the l a t e afternoon of November 2 9 , Hood had 105 ordered Bate's d i v i s i o n of Cheatham's corps t o move onto the pike south of S p r i n g H i l l and t o sweep down i t towards Columbia. Cheatham was not informed of t h i s movement, and unknowingly issued orders of h i s own which had the e f f e c t of r e c a l l i n g Bate j u s t as he was about t o se i z e the road. And i t was another c o n t r a d i c t i o n i n orders, between one given p e r s o n a l l y by Hood and another borne by one of Hood's s t a f f , t h a t caused Stewart t o stop short of the F r a n k l i n pike t o the north. The fog of war had descended on the Army of Tennessee at Sp r i n g H i l l . Uninformed about what was happening i n the f i e l d , unable t o d i r e c t or co-ordinate the movements of h i s men, Hood was the v i c t i m of h i s own neglect of the s t a f f system. The l a c k of o r g a n i z a t i o n and the i n e f f i c i e n c y which Harvie had warned against e a r l y i n November, with e s p e c i a l reference to the adjutant general's department of orders, were i n large part r e s p o n s i b l e f o r the confusion on the 2 9 t h . The l o s t opportunity at Spri n g H i l l , long a t t r i b u t e d t o a f a i l u r e i n le a d e r s h i p on the part of Hood and h i s subordinate commanders, was a l s o t o a s i g n i f i c a n t degree due t o a f a i l u r e i n a d m i n i s t r a t i o n . For t h i s Hood as commander and Mason as a c t i n g c h i e f of s t a f f must bear the formal r e s p o n s i b i l i t y . The night of November 2 9 - 3 0 was t o provide f u r t h e r evidence of a d m i n i s t r a t i v e i n e f f i c i e n c y . On that night the Federal army was moving through Spr i n g H i l l on i t s way to F r a n k l i n . Confederate f o r c e s , although encamped close t o the main p i k e , made no seriou s attempt to h a l t the enemy's movement. By the f o l l o w i n g morning S c h o f i e l d ' s men had io6 escaped Hood's t r a p and were w e l l on t h e i r way t o F r a n k l i n . The chance of a s t r i k i n g Confederate v i c t o r y had been i r r e t r i e v a b l y l o s t . Three men were in v o l v e d i n t h i s f i n a l f a i l u r e — H o o d , Mason, and Cheatham. In h i s o f f i c i a l r eport t o the War Department, Hood wrote that he had received word duri n g the night of the Federal movement. He claimed that he had then sent i n s t r u c t i o n s t o Cheatham t o advance against the enemy and impede h i s march, and that these i n s t r u c t i o n s were not obeyed. Hood thus blamed Cheatham f o r the f a i l u r e , and l a t e r repeated h i s charges 25 i n h i s book. J Witness t o the events at Hood's headquarters on that same night was Governor Isham G. H a r r i s of Tennessee, volu n t a r y aide to the commanding general. H a r r i s shared a room wi t h Hood and Mason, and l a t e r gave a v e r s i o n of the n i g h t ' s events 26 s u b s t a n t i a l l y d i f f e r e n t from that of Hood. According t o H a r r i s , Hood d i r e c t e d Mason t o send Cheatham the order t o a t t a c k . Hood and H a r r i s remained i n bed, and presumably went 27 back t o sleep. The next day Mason confessed t o H a r r i s that he too had gone back to sleep, without sending o f f the order. Mason then reported what had happened t o Hood, who was f u r i o u s l y blaming Cheatham f o r the f a i l u r e to a t t a c k . Hood l a t e r t o l d H a r r i s that he no longer held Cheatham r e s p o n s i b l e , and t h a t he had sent him a l e t t e r saying so. By t h i s account of a c r u c i a l order which Mason f a i l e d t o i s s u e , H a r r i s placed the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r the f i n a l F e d eral escape on the c h i e f of s t a f f . 107 Cheatham took no w r i t t e n p a r t , at l e a s t , i n t h i s debate t i l l a f t e r the appearance of Hood's book. He then published 28 i n 1881 a point-by-point r e b u t t a l of Hood's charges. Cheatham wrote that he had been at h i s headquarters w i t h h i s c h i e f of s t a f f , Major James D. P o r t e r , and another o f f i c e r , when the order from Mason was d e l i v e r e d . The order was acted upon, but no F e d e r a l troops were found on the pi k e . To complete h i s exoneration, Cheatham quoted H a r r i s , w i t h e s p e c i a l reference t o Hood's w r i t t e n assurance that he d i d not blame Cheatham f o r the f a i l u r e at" Spring H i l l . Cheatham was apparently unaware that by i n t r o d u c i n g the H a r r i s n a r r a t i v e as a u t h o r i t a t i v e evidence i n h i s fa v o r he was at the same time c o n t r a d i c t i n g h i s own account of having r e c e i v e d the order from Mason. Of the three v e r s i o n s of the events of November 2 9 - 3 0 , n e i t h e r the account by Hood nor that by Cheatham can be r e l i e d on. Hood was t r y i n g to j u s t i f y h i m s e l f at Cheatham's expense, while Cheatham i n h i s eagerness to defend hi m s e l f c o n t r a d i c t e d h i s own argument. The exp l a n a t i o n o f f e r e d by H a r r i s , of Mason's d e r e l i c t i o n from duty, i s much more convincing. The f i r s t recorded reference to the H a r r i s s t o r y appeared 29 i n a manuscript w r i t t e n about 1867, so that i t was obviously known at a date r e l a t i v e l y close to the event. No evidence has been found of any d e n i a l of the s t o r y , e i t h e r by Mason, or on h i s b e h a l f . In 1877 H a r r i s repeated h i s account i n a 108 l e t t e r , subsequently published, to Governor James D. P o r t e r of Tennessee. This was the l e t t e r which Cheatham t r i e d t o use i n h i s defense, and Governor P o r t e r was the same man who, as c h i e f of s t a f f , had been claimed by Cheatham as a witness t o the a r r i v a l of Mason's order. When P o r t e r produced h i s own v e r s i o n of the S p r i n g H i l l a f f a i r i n 1899, he quoted at length from Cheatham's a r t i c l e of l 8 8 l . But when he reached the p o i n t i n Cheatham's n a r r a t i v e at which the order from Mason was brought by c o u r i e r t o Cheatham's headquarters, P o r t e r broke o f f . At t h i s p o i n t he replaced Cheatham's account 30 by the H a r r i s l e t t e r . P o r t e r thus r e j e c t e d Cheatham's des-c r i p t i o n of the events of the night of November 2 9 - 3 0 , t o which P o r t e r had supposedly been a witness, p r e f e r r i n g H a r r i s ' s e x p l a n a t i o n that no order had ever been sent. The evidence against Mason, i f not c o n c l u s i v e , i s very strong. H a r r i s , aide at Hood's headquarters, claimed that no order to a t t a c k F e d e r a l troops on the pike was i s s u e d - -and t h i s on Mason's co n f e s s i o n , of which no d e n i a l can be found. P o r t e r , c h i e f of s t a f f at Cheatham's headquarters, i m p l i e d that no such order was ever r e c e i v e d . There i s no 31 reason t o question the honesty e i t h e r of H a r r i s or of P o r t e r . On t h e i r evidence i t was Mason, a c t i n g c h i e f of s t a f f t o General Hood, who was immediately r e s p o n s i b l e f o r the Confederate f a i l u r e t o make a night a t t a c k a t Spri n g H i l l . Thus i t s p r i n c i p a l s t a f f o f f i c e r l o s t the Army of Tennessee the l a s t reasonable chance of a s i g n i f i c a n t v i c t o r y i n the 32 West. 109 But i n any f i n a l a n a l y s i s the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r the S p r i n g H i l l f a i l u r e must r e s t upon the commanding general. Hood was present on the f i e l d , but was unable to d i r e c t and co-ordinate the movements of h i s men i n such a way as t o b r i n g on an engagement and ensure the surrender of S c h o f i e l d ' s army. That he could not do so was due i n part to a l a c k of under-standing between the commander and h i s subordinates, and i n part to d i s r u p t i o n s i n e v i t a b l e on the f i e l d of a c t i o n . I t was a l s o due t o Hood's neglect of the s t a f f system of h i s army. Under Hood the Army of Tennessee lacked what i t had so conspicuously had under Bragg and J o h n s t o n — o r g a n i z e d d i r e c t i o n . Bragg had provided a d m i n i s t r a t i v e c o n t r o l p r i n c i p a l l y through h i s own e f f o r t s . Johnston had done so through h i s use of the s t a f f , and e s p e c i a l l y of the c h i e f of s t a f f . Hood f a i l e d t o provide d i r e c t i o n by e i t h e r method. Under him army a d m i n i s t r a t i o n developed an I n f o r m a l i t y perhaps appropriate i n a small command, but d i s a s t r o u s i n a large f o r c e . Orders were sent unsigned; many were given only v e r b a l l y ; and i t was f r e q u e n t l y impossible to t e l l whether they had been r e c e i v e d , understood, and executed. The r e s u l t was the c o l l a p s e of the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e system of the Army of Tennessee. Part of the c o l l a p s e was due t o the immense problems f a c i n g the Confederacy as a whole by the f a l l of 1864. But shortages i n the departments of supply, and d i f f i c u l t i e s w i t h s t a f f recruitment, could not by themselves e x p l a i n the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e f a i l u r e of the general s t a f f In Hood's army. The r e s p o n s i b i l i t y l a y w i t h the commander. Hood's l a c k of 110 experience i n army management, noted e a r l i e r and feared by General Lee, l e f t the Army of Tennessee 1s commander unaware of the importance of the s t a f f r o l e i n p r o v i d i n g f o r the e f f i c i e n t o r g a n i z a t i o n and a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of h i s army. Whether Shoup or Mason had any high order of a d m i n i s t r a t i v e a b i l i t y i s open t o question; but c e r t a i n l y i n the I l i a d of woes experienced by Hood's army there was no i n d i c a t i o n that the general r e a l i z e d the p o t e n t i a l use or importance of h i s c h i e f s of s t a f f . * * * * * * * * * * * From 1862-1864, i n the Army of Tennessee, the c h i e f s of s t a f f were p e r s o n a l l y s e l e c t e d by the commanding generals. The generals' r i g h t to do so, and the e f f i c i e n c y of the r e s u l t i n g system, had been s e r i o u s l y challenged i n the Richmond debates over s t a f f o r g a n i z a t i o n . But wartime con-d i t i o n s i n the Confederacy made i t impossible f o r the proponents of a c e n t r a l i z e d s t a f f corps t o put t h e i r Ideas i n t o p r a c t i c e . The supply of experienced o f f i c e r s had always been so unequal to the need f o r them that t o i n s i s t on s p e c i a l q u a l i f i c a t i o n s and t r a i n i n g f o r s t a f f s e r v i c e would have been completely u n r e a l i s t i c . In these circumstances f i e l d commanders were l a r g e l y l e f t to f i n d t h e i r own general s t a f f o f f i c e r s . Every commanding general of the Army of Tennessee decided on the appointment of a c h i e f of s t a f f t o a s s i s t i n the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e d u t i e s of command. Four of the o f f i c e r s chosen I l l were p r o f e s s i o n a l s o l d i e r s - - J o r d a n , Duncan, M a c k a l l , and Shoup--while two, Brent and Mason, were q u a l i f i e d not by formal m i l i t a r y t r a i n i n g , but by t h e i r experience i n the Confederate general s t a f f . Mason was the only o f f i c e r not fo r m a l l y appointed. As c h i e f of s t a f f , or as a c t i n g c h i e f , Jordan served f o r four months, Brent f o r nine, M a c k a l l f o r twelve, Shoup f o r two, and Mason f o r three. There was thus a considerable turnover i n c h i e f s of s t a f f . On the b a s i s of length of s e r v i c e , the two most l i k e l y t o have a f f e c t e d the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e system were Brent and M a c k a l l . Brent served longest under one commander, and Mackall f o r a longer o v e r a l l p e r i o d , under two commanders. The r o l e of the c h i e f of s t a f f was determined only i n part by the t r a i n i n g , experience, and length of s e r v i c e of the o f f i c e r h o l d i n g the p o s i t i o n . More s i g n i f i c a n t was the a t t i t u d e of the general towards h i s c h i e f of s t a f f , both as an i n d i v i d u a l and as a member of an a d m i n i s t r a t i v e system. Bragg thought h i g h l y of Brent, but p r e f e r r e d t o use him as an a s s i s t a n t a d j u t a n t , r e t a i n i n g d i r e c t i o n and c o n t r o l i n h i s own hands. The general's e a r l y welcome f o r Ma c k a l l was s t r a i n e d by the pressures of campaign, d i m i n i s h i n g the c h i e f of s t a f f ' s r o l e . By c o n t r a s t , Johnston's c o n t i n u i n g confidence In Mackall ensured him a res p o n s i b l e r o l e In a d m i n i s t r a t i o n and command. Whatever Hood's r e l a t i o n s to Shoup and Mason, however--and i n h i s autobiography he was l o y a l to both--the general's blindness to the importance of 112 the s t a f f r o l e meant tha t he f a i l e d t o make any s i g n i f i c a n t use of e i t h e r o f f i c e r . The a t t i t u d e s of the commander were i n short the most important s i n g l e element i n determining the r o l e of the c h i e f of s t a f f i n the Army of Tennessee. As a r e s u l t there was n e i t h e r c o n t i n u i t y of s e r v i c e nor of f u n c t i o n . In t h i r t y months there were s i x c h i e f s of s t a f f ; under Bragg the d u t i e s were those of an a s s i s t a n t adjutant gene r a l , under Johnston those of an a u t h o r i t a t i v e d i r e c t o r of a d m i n i s t r a t i o n , and under Hood those of a s e c r e t a r y or aide-de-camp. At the l e v e l of i t s p r i n c i p a l s t a f f o f f i c e r , the Army of Tennessee lacked a continuous a d m i n i s t r a t i v e t r a d i t i o n , and i n i t s l a s t major campaign betrayed no evidence that i t s a d m i n i s t r a t i v e d i r e c t o r s had learned anything from the Army's two and a h a l f years of f i e l d experience. Notes 113 R. E. Lee t o J e f f e r s o n Davis, J u l y 12, 1864, quoted i n John P. Dyer, The G a l l a n t Hood ( I n d i a n a p o l i s and New York: The B o o b s - M e r r i l l Company, Inc., 1950), p. 244. Dyer, Hood's most recent biographer, found him c a r e l e s s as an a d m i n i s t r a t o r , and judged that the A t l a n t a campaign was marked by poor s t a f f work. I b i d . , pp. 144, 270, 288. 2 I r v i n g Ashby Buck, Cleburne and His Command, Thomas Robson Hay, ed. (Jackson, Miss.: McCowat-Mercer Press, Inc..,. 1959), P. 229. \ a r of the R e b e l l i o n : A Compilation of the O f f i c i a l  Records of the Union and Confederate Armies (128 v o l s . ; Washington: Government P r i n t i n g O f f i c e , 1880-1901), S e r i e s I , XXXVIII, pt. 5 , 887 ( c i t e d h e r e a f t e r as OR, wit h a l l references t o S e r i e s I , unless otherwise i n d i c a t e d ) ; i b I d . , 907, 943. 4 Ezra J . Warner, Generals i n Gray (Baton Rouge: Lo u i s i a n a State U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1959), PP- 275-276; OR, X, pt. 1, 571; X I I I , 8 8 3 ; XXIV, p t . 1, 271; XXVI, pt. 2, 402; XXXII, pt. 3, 742; XXXVIII, pt. 5 , 907. ^Jordan was f o r t y - t h r e e , Brent forty-one, and Mac k a l l f o r t y - s i x when f i r s t a c t i n g as c h i e f of s t a f f . Duncan was only t h i r t y - f i v e , but d i d not l i v e t o car r y out any of h i s s t a f f d u t i e s . 60R, XXXII, pt. 3, 742. 114 7 l b I d . , XXXI, pt. 3, 851-852; L I I I , 8 8 0 ; XXXI, pt. 3, 832; XXXII, p t . 2, 697j Pt. 3, 592, 671, 686. 8 l b i d . , 671; L I I , pt. 2, 713-9 l b i d . , XXXIX, pt. 2, 836. 1 Q I b l d . , XXXVIII, p t . 5, 907-1031; XXXIX, pt. 2, 8 2 5 - 8 3 6 . "^The j o u r n a l kept by Shoup, of the operations of the Army of Tennessee while he was c h i e f of s t a f f , provides a record of the campaign, but no i n d i c a t i o n of h i s own r o l e . I b i d . , XXXVIII, p t . 3, 6 8 8 - 6 9 6 ; XXXLX, pt. 1, 8 0 3 - 8 0 4 . 1 2 I b i d . , XXXVIII, p t . 3 , 991-992; pt. 5 , 1018; XXXLX, pt. 2, 865. 1 3No new appointment was made f o r Shoup t i l l February 21, 1865, when he became c h i e f of a r t i l l e r y to Hardee. What happened t o him between September and February i s unknown. Shoup's army j o u r n a l was "continued at headquarters' 1' a f t e r h i s r e l i e f , but the O f f i c i a l Records does not make i t c l e a r whether i t was s t i l l kept by Shoup, or by someone e l s e . Hood used t h i s j o u r n a l i n w r i t i n g h i s book, and i d e n t i f i e d i t as Shoup's, even a f t e r the date of that o f f i c e r ' s r e l i e f . I f Shoup d i d remain w i t h the army, as Hood suggests, i t could h a r d l y have co n t r i b u t e d t o an o r d e r l y a d m i n i s t r a t i v e system. More probably, Hood was simply mistaken i n h i s r e c o l l e c t i o n s . I b i d . , XXXLX, pt. 1, 804; XLVII, pt. 2, 1239; John B e l l Hood, Advance and Retreat (New Orleans: Hood Orphan Memorial Fund, 1880), pp. 257, 2 9 8 - 2 9 9 . 115 14 A r t h u r Pendleton Mason, S. Bassett French B i o g r a p h i c a l Sketches, V i r g i n i a State L i b r a r y , Richmond; Hood, Advance  and Retreat , p. 311-This a n a l y s i s i s based on an examination of the Army of Tennessee correspondence i n OR, XXXLX, pt. 2, 836-889; pt. 3, 778-918; XLV, pt. 1, 1206-1262; p t . 2, 628-806. l 6 I b l d . , XXXIX^ pt. 2 , 874-876; pt. 3, 797-798; XLV, p t . 1, 1212, 1227; Dyer, The G a l l a n t Hood, p. 168. 1 70R, XXXLX, p t . 3 , 880-881. i ft Harvie complained that the a s s i s t a n t i n s p e c t o r s general at the corps, d i v i s i o n , and brigade l e v e l s were under the immediate c o n t r o l of t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e commanders, wi t h the r e s u l t that there was no organized department r e s p o n s i b l e , under Harvie's d i r e c t i o n as i n s p e c t o r .general, f o r i n s p e c t i o n i n the army. I b i d . 1-^Francis B. Heitman, H i s t o r i c a l R e g i s t e r and D i c t i o n a r y  of the United States Army... 1789-1903 (2 v o l s . ; Urbana: U n i v e r s i t y of I l l i n o i s Press, 1965)1 I , 508; Edwin James Harvie, Compiled Service Records of Confederate General and S t a f f O f f i c e r s and Nonregimental E n l i s t e d Men, War Department C o l l e c t i o n of Confederate Records, Record Group 109, N a t i o n a l A r c h i v e s , Washington, D. C. 2 00R, XXXIX, pt. 1, 808, 809; XLV, pt. 1, 662. 116 2 1Hood, Advance and Ret r e a t , pp. 282-283. For Hood's r e p o r t s on the movements of November 28-30, see OR, XLV, p t . 1, 652-658. 22 Explanations o f f e r e d by Confederates present at Spring H i l l are t o be found i n George Campbell Brown, " M i l i t a r y Reminiscences from 1861-1865," Manuscript D i v i s i o n , Tennessee State L i b r a r y and A r c h i v e s , N a s h v i l l e , Tennessee; Edwin L. Drake, ed., Annals of the Army of Tennessee ( N a s h v i l l e ; n. p., I878); Hood, Advance and Retrea t ; W. 0. Dodd, "Reminiscences of Hood's Tennessee Campaign," Southern H i s t o r i c a l S o c i e t y  Papers, LX ( l 8 8 l ) , 518-524; B. F. Cheatham, "The Lost Oppor-t u n i t y at Spring H i l l , Tennessee," i b i d . , 524-541; Buck, Cleburne and His Command; James D. P o r t e r , Confederate M i l i t a r y  H i s t o r y : V I I I , Tennessee, Clement A. Evans, ed. (New York: Thomas Y o s e l o f f , 1962 [ o r i g i n a l e d i t i o n 1899J); A. P. Stewart, "Controversy upon Hood's Campaign," Confederate Veteran, XV (1907), 425; John P. Young, "Hood's F a i l u r e at Spring H i l l , " i b i d . , XVI (1908), 25-41. Fed e r a l accounts are Henry Stone, " R e p e l l i n g Hood's Invasion of Tennessee," B a t t l e s and Leaders of the C i v i l War, Robert U. Johnson and Clarence C. B u e l , eds. (4 v o l s . ; New York: The Century Company, 1887-1888), TV, 440-464; J . D. Remington, "Cause of Hood's F a i l u r e at Spring H i l l , " Confederate Veteran, XXI (1913), 569-571; John K. S h e l l e n -berger, "The F i g h t i n g at Spri n g H i l l , Tennessee," i b i d . , XXXVI (1928), 100-103, 140-143, 188. 117 Among the secondary works which d e a l with Spring H i l l are Thomas Robson Hay, Hood's Tennessee Campaign (New York: Walter Neale, 1 9 2 9 ) ; Stanley F. Horn, The Army of Tennessee (Norman, Okla.: U n i v e r s i t y of Oklahoma Press, 1 9 5 3 ) ; and The D e c i s i v e B a t t l e of N a s h v i l l e (Baton Rouge: Loui s i a n a State U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1 9 5 6 ) ; Dyer, The G a l l a n t Hood; W i l l i a m T r a v i s Crawford, "The Mystery of Spring H i l l , " C i v i l War H i s t o r y , I ( 1 9 5 5 ) , 1 0 1 - 1 2 6 ; Sims Crownover, "The B a t t l e of F r a n k l i n , " Tennessee H i s t o r i c a l Q u a r t e r l y , XIV ( 1 9 5 5 ) , 2 9 1 - 3 2 2 . Of these works the most informative are the a r t i c l e s by Young and Crawford. 23 Remington, "Cause of Hood's F a i l u r e at Spring H i l l , " claims that he caused the confusion among the Confederate commanders. A Union spy, masquerading as a Confederate s t a f f o f f i c e r , he c a r r i e d imaginary messages and f a l s e orders among the h igh command of the Army of Tennessee, none of whom knew him, but a l l of whom accepted him. Remington's account i s unsupported by any evidence, and remains unconvincing. 11.8 24 OR, XLV, p t . 1, C o n f e d e r a t e C o r r e s p o n d e n c e , c o n t a i n s no w r i t t e n o r d e r s f o r the S p r i n g H i l l a f f a i r . I t i s t r u e t h a t these o r d e r s might have been l o s t , but H o o d ' s o t h e r campaign cor respondence f o r November-December 1864 i s not m i s s i n g . F u r t h e r , the i m p r e s s i o n o f a movement d i r e c t e d p r i n c i p a l l y by v e r b a l o r d e r s i s suppor ted by the contemporary r e p o r t s and subsequent a c c o u n t s of S p r i n g H i l l g i v e n by the v a r i o u s g e n e r a l s i n v o l v e d . 2 ^ I b i d . , 653; Hood, Advance and R e t r e a t , p. 287. of c u H a r r i s ' s account o f the even ts o f the n i g h t o f November 2 9 - 3 0 was f i r s t r e c o r d e d i n 1867-1868, i n Brown, " M i l i t a r y R e m i n i s c e n c e s f rom 1861-1865"; i t was deve loped i n g r e a t e r d e t a i l i n an 1877 l e t t e r f rom H a r r i s t o Governor James D. P o r t e r . T h i s l e t t e r was p u b l i s h e d i n D r a k e , e d . , A n n a l s o f the Army of T e n n e s s e e , p p . 4 9 - 5 0 , and i n P o r t e r , C o n f e d e r a t e M i l i t a r y H i s t o r y : V I I I , T e n n e s s e e , 148-149. 2 7 ' Tha t Hood s h o u l d remain q u i e t l y a t h i s h e a d q u a r t e r s a f t e r h e a r i n g tha t the F e d e r a l army was e s c a p i n g him seems e x t r a o r d i n a r y . P o s s i b l y he d i d not f u l l y r e a l i z e what was h a p p e n i n g . H o r n , The Army of T e n n e s s e e , p. 392, r e c o r d s a s t r o n g l o c a l t r a d i t i o n tha t Hood was drunk tha t n i g h t . D y e r , The G a l l a n t Hood , p. 2 8 8 , a t t r i b u t e s H o o d ' s i n a c t i v i t y t o p h y s i c a l e x h a u s t i o n and p a i n f rom the stump o f h i s amputated l e g . H i s menta l r e a c t i o n s may have been a f f e c t e d by some o p i a t e , such as laudanum. 119 28 Cheatham, "The Lost Opportunity at S p r i n g H i l l , " 524-533-2 9Brown, " M i l i t a r y Reminiscences from 1861-1865." I t must be admitted t h a t Major Brown was a witness u n f r i e n d l y to Mason. Both men had served on the s t a f f of Joe Johnston, and Brown considered Mason "a s e l f i s h dog" who had compounded h i s offenses by b e t r a y i n g Johnston f o r Hood. 3°Porter, Confederate M i l i t a r y H i s t o r y : V I I I , Tennessee, 146-149. 3 % a r r i s and P o r t e r were both d i s t i n g u i s h e d Tennessee p o l i t i c i a n s , s e r v i n g as Democratic Governors of the S t a t e . They were a l s o n a t i o n a l f i g u r e s , H a r r i s as U. S. Senator, and P o r t e r as Ambassador. I t i s u n l i k e l y that e i t h e r would r i s k h i s p o l i t i c a l r e p u t a t i o n by producing a f a l s i f i e d v e r s i o n of an o l d C i v i l War i n c i d e n t . N a t i o n a l Cyclopedia of American  Biography (51 v o l s . ; New York: James T. White and Company, 1898-1969), I I , 209; V I I , 211-212. 3 2This argument assumes that the Union fo r c e s were s t i l l w i t h i n range of a t t a c k by Cheatham lis corps sometime between midnight and 3 a.m. on November 30. I f t h i s was not so, Mason's f a i l u r e t o issue Hood's order becomes l e s s s e r i o u s i n i t s consequences, but r e t a i n s i t s importance as an i n d i c a -t i o n of a d m i n i s t r a t i v e weakness. PART TWO: ADMINISTRATIVE DEPARTMENTS 121 CHAPTER V Genesis March-June, 1862 The commanding generals, a s s i s t e d t o some degree by t h e i r c h i e f s of s t a f f , provided l e a d e r s h i p and d i r e c t i o n i n the Army of Tennessee, but i t s a d m i n i s t r a t i v e e f f i c i e n c y depended on the general s t a f f departments which c a r r i e d out the commanders' orders. P r i m a r i l y r e s p o n s i b l e f o r the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of the army was the adjutant and .inspector genera1's department. In the s p r i n g of l 8 6 l the Confederate Congress set up a s i n g l e adjutant and i n s p e c t o r general's department. In i t were combined the d i f f e r e n t f u n c t i o n s of the adjutant general and the i n s p e c t o r g e n e r a l , and i t was expected that one man would head the j o i n t department. This combination of d u t i e s at the highest l e v e l of the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e s t a f f continued to the lowest, where an a s s i s t a n t adjutant general was expected t o c a r r y out any tasks assigned to him, i n c l u d i n g those of i n s p e c t i o n . The system of a s i n g l e department was l a t e r subjected to severe c r i t i c i s m , on the grounds that i t d i d not recognize the importance of i n s p e c t i o n i n e s t a b l i s h i n g and mai n t a i n i n g an army as an e f f i c i e n t f i g h t i n g machine. 1 The d u t i e s of the adjutant and i n s p e c t o r general's department were set out i n the Regulations f o r the Army pf 122 the Confederate S t a t e s , which i n most cases followed word f o r word the r e g u l a t i o n s of the o l d United S t a t e s Army. The department was r e s p o n s i b l e f o r the keeping of records and f i l e s , the conduct of correspondence, and the i s s u i n g of orders, f o r a l l matters r e l a t i n g t o appointments, promotions and leaves, and f o r the o r g a n i z a t i o n of the army, from company l e v e l t o corps. To secure the adequate performance of these d u t i e s the Bureau of War i n 1864 d i v i d e d them among the r e c e p t i o n o f f i c e , the o f f i c e of orders, the appointment o f f i c e , and the o f f i c e of o r g a n i z a t i o n . The d e t a i l e d d i v i s i o n and a l l o c a t i o n of r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s , made at a d m i n i s t r a t i o n head-quarters i n Richmond, was not d u p l i c a t e d i n the Army of Tennessee. There the a d j u t a n t ' s d u t i e s were c a r r i e d out by 2 i n d i v i d u a l assignment to o f f i c e r s of the department. These f i e l d d u t i e s c o n s i s t e d i n the main of c a r r y i n g on the paperwork necessary i n any large o r g a n i z a t i o n w i t h a h i e r a r c h y of rank and the d e l e g a t i o n of a u t h o r i t y . The adjutant was t h e r e f o r e p r i m a r i l y a desk o f f i c e r , a bureaucrat f a c i n g a d m i n i s t r a t i v e problems. Hi s c l o s e s t contact w i t h the s p e c i a l demands made of the m i l i t a r y a d m i n i s t r a t o r probably l a y i n h i s r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r orders and correspondence. The adjutant was the r e g u l a r channel of communication between the commander and h i s subordinates, and issued a l l orders r e l a t i n g t o the army, or whatever u n i t of i t he served. These orders might be given i n f o r m a l l y , but they were u s u a l l y r e q u i r e d to f o l l o w a standard form, and t o be published as General Orders, or S p e c i a l Orders. Regulations defined the 123 subject matter appropriate t o each type of order: General orders announce the time and place of issues and payments, hours f o r r o l l - c a l l s and d u t i e s ; the number and k i n d of o r d e r l i e s , and the time when they s h a l l be r e l i e v e d ; p o l i c e r e g u l a t i o n s , and the p r o h i b i t i o n s r e q u i r e d by circumstances and l o c a l i t i e s ; r e t u r n s t o be made and t h e i r forms; laws and r e g u l a t i o n s f o r the army; promotions and appointments; e u l o g i e s or censures t o corps or i n d i v i d u a l s , and g e n e r a l l y , whatever i t may be Important t o make known to the whole command. S p e c i a l orders are such as do not concern the troops g e n e r a l l y , and need not be published t o the whole command; such as r e l a t e t o the march of some p a r t i c u l a r corps, the establishment of some post, the detaching of i n d i v i d u a l s , the g r a n t i n g requests, e t c . A l l general orders, and Important s p e c i a l orders, had t o be read and approved by the l i n e commander g i v i n g them before 3 they could be issued by the s t a f f o f f i c e r . With t h i s r e s e r v a t i o n , that the order i n i t s f i n a l form must be approved by the commander, orders were the r e s p o n s i -b i l i t y of the a d j u t a n t . He drew them up, and co-ordinated them, so t h a t they d i d not c l a s h but combined t o f u l f i l l :his general's i n t e n t . The adjutant was t h e r e f o r e no mere c l e r k , but the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e a s s i s t a n t of h i s commander. The mechanical d u t i e s of h i s department, such as copying orders or r e p o r t s , were c a r r i e d out by non-commissioned s o l d i e r s , s p e c i a l l y d e t a i l e d as c l e r k s . The d u t i e s of the adjutant r e q u i r e d that he spend long hours at headquarters, u s u a l l y engaged i n desk work. R e l i e f might come at the height of a campaign or i n the heat of b a t t l e , when he was o f t e n pressed i n t o s e r v i c e as a c o u r i e r i n attendance on the commander. U s u a l l y , however, he was 124 confined t o the headquarters o f f i c e of the adjutant-general's department. The r o l e of the i n s p e c t o r was q u i t e d i f f e r e n t , and i t was t h i s d i f f e r e n c e t h a t l e d some c r i t i c s t o argue that the adjutant and i n s p e c t o r general's department should be d i v i d e d i n t o two s p e c i a l i z e d departments, each wi t h I t s own s t a f f . The i n s p e c t o r ' s d u t i e s r e q u i r e d him t o be a c t i v e i n the f i e l d at a l l times, i n constant s u p e r v i s i o n of a l l aspects of army l i f e . Without such s u p e r v i s i o n i t could not be assumed that orders would be c a r r i e d out, r e g u l a t i o n s observed, or e f f i c i e n c y maintained. As the report of a Congressional Committee of I n q u i r y asserted i n 1862, these d u t i e s were a l l the more important as so much of the Confederate Army co n s i s t e d of "raw r e c r u i t s and u n i n s t r u c t e d o f f i c e r s . " The Committee was concerned t h a t i n s p e c t o r s not only report d e f i c i e n c i e s , but a l s o see that they be c o r r e c t e d . The wide powers of the i n s p e c t o r were not confined t o the lower ranks, 4 but could a l s o be a p p l i e d t o a l l o f f i c e r s . Confederate Regulations r e q u i r e d d e t a i l e d i n s p e c t i o n s and r e p o r t s : I n s p e c t i o n r e p o r t s w i l l show t h e : d i s c i p l i n e of the troops; t h e i r I n s t r u c t i o n i n a l l m i l i t a r y e x e r c i s e s and d u t i e s ; the s t a t e of t h e i r arms, c l o t h i n g , equipments, and accoutrements of a l l k i n d s ; of t h e i r k i t c h e n s and messes; of the barracks and quarters at the post; of the guard-house, p r i s o n s , h o s p i t a l , bakehouse, magazine, storehouses, and stores of every d e s c r i p t i o n ; of the s t a b l e s and horses; the c o n d i t i o n of the p o s t - s c h o o l ; the management and a p p l i c a t i o n of the post and company books, papers, and f i l e s ; the z e a l and a b i l i t y of the o f f i c e r s i n command of troops; the c a p a c i t y of the o f f i c e r s 125 conducting the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e and s t a f f s e r v i c e s , the f i d e l i t y and economy of t h e i r disbursements, the c o n d i t i o n of a l l p u b l i c property, and the amount of money i n the hands of each d i s b u r s i n g o f f i c e r ; the r e g u l a r i t y of Issues and payments; the mode of e n f o r c i n g d i s c i p l i n e by courts m a r t i a l , and by the a u t h o r i t y of the o f f i c e r s ; the p r o p r i e t y and l e g a l i t y of a l l punishments I n f l i c t e d ; and any i n f o r m a t i o n whatsoever concerning the s e r v i c e i n any matter or p a r t i c u l a r that may merit n o t i c e or a i d t o c o r r e c t d e f e c t s or introduce improvements. Inspectors are r e q u i r e d p a r t i c u l a r l y t o report i f any o f f i c e r i s of intemperate h a b i t s , or u n f i t f o r a c t i v e s e r v i c e by i n f i r m i t y or any other cause. 5 The range of supervisory duty i m p l i e d by these r e p o r t s was very great. The i n s p e c t o r t h e r e f o r e had more need of previous m i l i t a r y experience, i n a wide v a r i e t y of r o l e s , than d i d the a d j u t a n t . This was e s p e c i a l l y true of the i n s p e c t o r ' s r e s p o n s i b i l i t y t o judge the c a p a b i l i t y and the performance of h i s f e l l o w o f f i c e r s . Indeed C o l o n e l R. H. C h i l t o n , adjutant and Inspector general of the Army of Northern V i r g i n i a , reported t o the War Department that "the army i n s p e c t o r s [are], where e f f i c i e n t , the most important „6 o f f i c e r s we have. The s u p e r i o r demands made of the i n s p e c t o r were the cause of the movement to d i v i d e the adjutant and i n s p e c t o r general's department. Senator W i g f a l l was a heated supporter of t h i s p r o p o s a l , and wrote to General Joseph E. Johnston i n i t s f a v o r : Nothing i s so wanting i n t h i s Army [ Northern V i r g i n i a ] as i n s p e c t i o n . ...an i n s p e c t o r should not only be a man of great i n t e g r i t y and firmness but a most accom-p l i s h e d s o l d i e r . He should have learned the d u t i e s of a s o l d i e r by having performed them. What good can you expect from the i n s p e c t i o n of your A r t i l l e r y by one of the batch of Ad j [utaril t Gen [era] Is appointed at Richmond not one out of ten of whom knows a gun from a howitzer? 126 W i g f a l l was convinced that he could force a b i l l through Congress t o e s t a b l i s h a separate i n s p e c t o r general's depart-ment, but i n t h i s he was mistaken, underestimating the ' 7 o p p o s i t i o n of President Davis. In h i s message to Congress of May 2 8 , 1864, Davis made h i s p o s i t i o n on the s t a f f b i l l q u i t e c l e a r . He asserted c e r t a i n "general p r i n c i p l e s " which should govern s t a f f l e g i s -l a t i o n , and among these was the need to maintain a united adjutant and i n s p e c t o r general's department. The President was emphatic on t h i s p o i n t , and supported h i s argument at some length. He d i d not b e l i e v e that European armies provided examples of a d i v i d e d department, f o r the d u t i e s of i n s p e c t i o n were so c l o s e l y connected w i t h other general s t a f f d u t i e s t h a t they could not be separated from them. Davis opposed an independent department of i n s p e c t i o n f o r three r e a s o n s -there was not s u f f i c i e n t employment f o r a s p e c i a l i z e d corps of i n s p e c t o r s ; i n s p e c t o r s understood t h e i r d u t i e s b e t t e r i f they a l s o served as a d j u t a n t s ; and in s p e c t o r s could not maintain good r e l a t i o n s with the r e s t of the army i f they only g served as d e t e c t i v e and Informing o f f i c e r s . The Confederate President was here e l a b o r a t i n g the same views that he had e a r l i e r held as United States Secretary of War. His argument proved s u c c e s s f u l , and the s t a f f b i l l of June 14, 1864, made no reference t o any d i v i s i o n of the adjutant and i n s p e c t o r 9 general's department. For General Samuel Cooper, adjutant and i n s p e c t o r general of the Confederate States Army throughout the war, the united 127 department imposed no hardship. He set up s p e c i a l o f f i c e s w i t h i n the department, and apportioned the d u t i e s among them. S i x o f f i c e s were assigned the adjutant's work, one the i n s p e c t o r ' s , and one the judge advocate's. This d i v i s i o n of l a b o r , f o r m a l l y announced i n February 1864, perhaps helped to r e l i e v e the pressure reported by Cooper to Secretary of War James A. Seddon two months e a r l i e r - . Cooper had then described a d i s t r e s s i n g s i t u a t i o n . "The c l e r i c a l f orce i n t h i s o f f i c e i s b a r e l y s u f f i c i e n t f o r i t s current business," he wrote. "Within the past two years one o f f i c e r and s i x c l e r k s i n t h i s Bureau have die d while on duty. Twelve others II 10 have broken down and been forced to r e s i g n . But i n s p i t e of t h i s s t r a i n on the resources of the adjutant and i n s p e c t o r general's department, Cooper was s t i l l able t o make s p e c i a l assignment of s p e c i f i c d u t i e s , t o organize h i s department on e f f i c i e n t b u r e a u c r a t i c l i n e s . Such an o r g a n i z a t i o n was not f e a s i b l e , however, at the lower l e v e l s of m i l i t a r y a d m i n i s t r a t i o n , where the number of s t a f f o f f i c e r s was n a t u r a l l y l i m i t e d by the a v a i l a b i l i t y of s u i t a b l e candidates, and l e g a l l y r e s t r i c t e d by army r e g u l a -t i o n s . General Orders No. 44, issued at Richmond i n the s p r i n g of 1864, permitted only s i x a d m i n i s t r a t i v e o f f i c e r s on army s t a f f , f o u r on corps, and two on d i v i s i o n . These o f f i c e r s were uniformly described as a s s i s t a n t adjutant and i n s p e c t o r generals, and the rank to which they were e n t i t l e d ranged from major to c o l o n e l . 1 1 Commanders i n the f i e l d d i d not n e c e s s a r i l y observe these r e g u l a t i o n r e s t r i c t i o n s , but 128 made appointments as they were r e q u i r e d . Even so, the d i v i s i o n of d u t i e s p o s s i b l e at Richmond could not be repeated i n a f i e l d army. There, as General Orders No. 44 s p e c i f i c a l l y i n s t r u c t e d , o f f i c e r s of the adjutant and i n s p e c t o r general's department had to be ready t o act both as adjutant and as in s p e c t o r . The degree t o which o f f i c i a l r e g u l a t i o n s were c a r r i e d out i n the f i e l d depended i n an immediate sense on the o f f i c e r heading the adjutant and i n s p e c t o r general's department. In the Army of Tennessee that o f f i c e r was v a r i o u s l y known, some-times as c h i e f of s t a f f , sometimes as adjutant general, some-times as a combination of the two. But, whatever the t i t l e , as head of the department he was re s p o n s i b l e f o r the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of the army. The f i r s t a d m i n i s t r a t i v e d i r e c t o r of the Army of Tennessee was C o l o n e l , l a t e r B r i g a d i e r General, Thomas Jordan. He had served i n V i r g i n i a as the lea d i n g adjutant general on the s t a f f of General Beauregard, and had won high p r a i s e from h i s commander f o r " h i s able a s s i s t a n c e i n the o r g a n i z a t i o n under my [Beauregard's] command, and f o r the i n t e l l i g e n c e and promptness" w i t h which he had c a r r i e d out h i s d u t i e s . Jordan went w i t h Beauregard t o the West, and there served from March to August, 1862, as adjutant general of the Army of Tennessee, under the successive commands of A l b e r t Sidney Johnston, Beauregard, and Braxton Bragg. Jordan t h e r e f o r e played an important r o l e In s e t t i n g up the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e system of the Western army."^ 129 Jordan had served as an army o f f i c e r from h i s West Point graduation i n 1840 t o the outbreak of the C i v i l War, at which p o i n t he j o i n e d the Confederate States Army. As a p r o f e s -s i o n a l s o l d i e r he had c l e a r and p o s i t i v e views on the f u n c t i o n s of the adjutant and i n s p e c t o r general's department. He b e l i e v e d that a l l orders should be concise and s p e c i f i c , and maintained t h a t under Beauregard he had always sought "to make orders e x p l i c i t and such as w i l l meet the ends, i n view--orders that w i l l not be mere verbiage." This concern over orders, however, was not merely i n the i n t e r e s t s of a spartan e f f i c i e n c y and s i m p l i c i t y . Jordan had a c e r t a i n amount of l i t e r a r y c o n c e i t , and l i k e d to p o l i s h h i s w r i t i n g , on one occasion to make i t s u i t a b l e f o r p u b l i c a t i o n i n England, on another t o f i t i t to a Napoleonic model. Jordan's conceit was a weakness which made him a d i f f i c u l t subordinate, except where h i s personal l o y a l t y was engaged, as i t was towards Beauregard. But I t was not a weakness which n e c e s s a r i l y i n t e r f e r e d w i t h h i s e f f i c i e n t o r g a n i z a t i o n of the adjutant 13 general's department. The department was d i r e c t e d by a small group of o f f i c e r s headed by the adjutant general. Under these men the work of the department, v i r t u a l l y a l l paperwork, was c a r r i e d out by clerks—non-commissioned s o l d i e r s assigned t o s t a f f duty. Among Jordan's c l e r k s were two able young men from Front Royal, V i r g i n i a , I r v i n g Ashby Buck and Thomas Benton Roy, who l a t e r r e c e i v e d s t a f f commissions; Buck became a s s i s t a n t adjutant general t o Major General P a t r i c k R. Cleburne, and 130 Roy c h i e f of s t a f f t o Lieutenant General W i l l i a m J . Hardee. The s u c c e s s f u l record of these men suggests that Jordan had a good eye i n s e l e c t i n g h i s subordinates. They, i n t h e i r t u r n , 14 were impressed by the adjutant general. While s e r v i n g w i t h Jordan i n V i r g i n i a , e a r l y i n 1862, Buck described h i s d u t i e s as c l e r k i n a l e t t e r t o h i s s i s t e r , and revealed i n c i d e n t a l l y the way i n which Jordan organized the work of the adjutant general's department. One c l e r k , known f o r h i s f i n e w r i t i n g , was r e s p o n s i b l e f o r r e c o r d i n g a l l the l e t t e r s , general and s p e c i a l orders, and c i r c u l a r s , which l e f t the department; a group of three c l e r k s made copies of a l l orders and correspondence; Buck himself d e a l t w i t h a l l incoming l e t t e r s , on matters of leaves, r e s i g n a t i o n s , t r a n s -f e r s , d ischarges, and a p p l i c a t i o n s of a l l k i n d s ; and Roy had the most re s p o n s i b l e and demanding duty of a l l , t hat of the general endorsement and handling of a l l papers e n t e r i n g or l e a v i n g the department. "Every paper that passes through t h i s o f f i c e has t o be recorded, and accounted f o r , " Buck noted without enthusiasm, l a t e r adding " . . . I console myself w i t h the knowledge th a t there i s but twenty f o u r hours i n a day and 15 night...and the law allows a man t o sleep s i x of them." Obviously Jordan's c l e r k s were hard worked, and, i f found t e m p o r a r i l y i n a c t i v e , as Buck once was, were l i a b l e t o be given the task of making a d d i t i o n a l copies of one of 16 Beauregard's b a t t l e r e p o r t s , presumably f o r d i s t r i b u t i o n among the general's p o l i t i c a l f r i e n d s . But i t i s apparent that 131 Jordan had methodically defined the d u t i e s of the adjutant general's department, arranged them i n c l a s s i f i e d groups, and then assigned them to designated members of the department. Such a c a r e f u l d i v i s i o n of labor gave hope of an e f f i c i e n t a d m i n i s t r a t i o n ; i t i s t o Jordan's c r e d i t that the most re s p o n s i b l e d u t i e s were given to the two men, Buck and Roy, whose l a t e r records I n d i c a t e that they were the best f i t t e d to c a r r y them out. -When Jordan was ordered to the Western t h e a t e r o f operations, he saw t o I t that the c l e r k s of h i s 17 department went w i t h him. Thus Beauregard was able t o j o i n General A. S. Johnston w i t h the nucleus of an a d m i n i s t r a t i v e s t a f f . He brought from V i r g i n i a C o l o n e l Jordan as adjutant general, f i v e o f f i c e r s commissioned on s t a f f , and the departmental c l e r k s . The f i v e o f f i c e r s were Captain F r a n c i s H. Jordan, lawyer brother of the adjutant general; Major George W. Brent, a l s o a lawyer; Lieutenant John M. Otey, recent graduate of the V i r g i n i a M i l i t a r y I n s t i t u t e ; Captain C l i f t o n H. Smith; and Lieutenant C o l o n e l Camille Armand J u l e s Marie, Prince de P o l i g n a c , p r o f e s s i o n a l o f f i c e r of the French Army, known l e s s Impres-l 8 s i v e l y i n the Confederate f o r c e s as "Polecat." These men served i n the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e department of the western army from e a r l y s p r i n g t o l a t e summer, 1862. The two most i n f l u e n t i a l were Jordan and Brent. Beauregard a r r i v e d i n the Western Department i n February, 1862. Bragg followed a month l a t e r , w i t h reinforcements from h i s troops at Pensacola and Mobile. Both generals had been 1 3 2 sent t o the a i d of Johnston, who was being d r i v e n from Kentucky and Tennessee by F e d e r a l armies. But i t was not t i l l l a t e March that the three generals united t h e i r commands at C o r i n t h , M i s s i s s i p p i , and worked t o b u i l d the fo r c e known i n the s p r i n g of 1 8 6 2 as the Army of the M i s s i s s i p p i , and l a t e r as the Army of Tennessee. Johnston was commander-in-chief, Beauregard second-in-command, and Bragg c h i e f of s t a f f . A s o l d i e r wrote home d e s c r i b i n g t h i s g athering of high-ranking o f f i c e r s — " W e have here now a magnificent power of M i l i t a r y C h i e f t a i n s . . . . A B r i g [ a d i e r ] has become q u i t e a commonplace I n d i v i d u a l , a 1 9 C o l o n e l i s a pigmy, a Lieutenant a n o n - e n t i t y . " Much debate has taken place over the d i v i s i o n of command 2 0 r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s between Johnston and Beauregard; i t i s c l e a r , however, that the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of the united army was to f o l l o w the p a t t e r n set by Beauregard and Jordan e a r l i e r i n the year, at Beauregard's headquarters i n Jackson, Tennessee. Johnston confirmed f o r the whole army the general orders which Beauregard had issued at Jackson "touching matters of o r g a n i z a t i o n , d i s c i p l i n e and conduct of the troops," and 2 1 Jordan became adjutant general of the army. W r i t i n g a f t e r the war, a s t a f f o f f i c e r r e c o l l e c t e d that "General Johnston... had i n s i s t e d that General .Beauregard must undertake the work of o r g a n i z a t i o n ; also...he should Issue a l l orders without the formula of being submitted and approved by General Johnston, except, of course, such an order as that of d i r e c t i n g the „ 2 2 o f f e n s i v e . 1 1 133 The a d m i n i s t r a t i v e work, begun under Beauregard and l a t e r continued by Bragg, r e f l e c t e d the inexperience and the d i s o r d e r l y c o n d i t i o n of the Confederate f o r c e s . Only Bragg's men from Mobile and Pensacola were considered w e l l - d i s c i p l i n e d and adequately t r a i n e d . Among the others there was enthusias-t i c n o i s e , frequent d r i n k i n g , i n d i s c r i m i n a t e f i r i n g of guns, and a f i n e d i s r e g a r d f o r m i l i t a r y r e g u l a t i o n s and c i v i l i a n property r i g h t s . The army was clo s e to being "an armed Mob, u n r e l i a b l e i n a c t i o n and i n e f f i c i e n t . " To convert the p o t e n t i a l mob i n t o "a p e r f e c t yet simple machine, calm and steady amid the greatest dangers and e a s i l y wielded by i t s commanders," Beauregard had t o enforce d i s c i p l i n e , i n s i s t on i m p l i c i t 23 obedience t o orders, and provide I n s t r u c t i o n f o r h i s men. These needs a p p l i e d at a l l m i l i t a r y l e v e l s , from general o f f i c e r t o p r i v a t e , and the agency through which Beauregard t r i e d t o supply them was Jordan's adjutant general's department. But the a s s i s t a n t adjutant generals themselves r e q u i r e d o r g a n i z a t i o n and i n s t r u c t i o n . A l l o f f i c e r s not attached t o s p e c i f i c commands were ordered t o report to Beauregard's head-qu a r t e r s , t o c l a r i f y t h e i r assignments; r e g u l a t i o n form was pr e s c r i b e d f o r orders, endorsements, and a l l o f f i c i a l c o r r e s -pondence; and a l l communication w i t h the War Department, the Adjutant and Inspector General, and the general commanding was r e q u i r e d t o move i n the ascending l i n e of command. Once the b a s i c form of m i l i t a r y a d m i n i s t r a t i o n had been e s t a b l i s h e d the a s s i s t a n t s were i n s t r u c t e d i n t h e i r d u t i e s . Under Jordan's d i r e c t i o n they issued a l l orders from headquarters t o the army, made i n s p e c t i o n s and reconnaissances, and acted on 134 occasion as messengers f o r the commander. Thus i n the s p r i n g of 1862 the o f f i c e r s of the adjutant general's department had many tasks t o l e a r n , and i n s p i t e of Jordan's c a r e f u l o r g a n i z a t i o n the department was simply not ready f o r the s t r a i n s put upon i t by the B a t t l e of S h i l o h . The orders f o r the b a t t l e have been much c r i t i c i z e d , and Beauregard complained t h a t the t o p o g r a p h i c a l sketches of the b a t t l e f i e l d were "very i m p e r f e c t " - - f a i l u r e s due, i n both cases, to the adjutant general's department. At t h i s e a r l y stage i n the war the range of d u t i e s r e q u i r e d of inexperienced s t a f f o f f i c e r s was 24 too great f o r t h e i r e f f i c i e n t performance. I n e f f i c i e n c y due t o inexperience was: compounded by u n c e r t a i n t y over the r e l a t i o n of s t a f f t o l i n e . E s p e c i a l l y i n the f i r s t year of the war l i n e commanders s e l e c t e d t h e i r own s t a f f o f f i c e r s , and then a p p l i e d t o the War Department f o r c o n f i r m a t i o n of the appointment. Under t h i s ad hoc system, the r e l a t i o n s of any s t a f f group were w i t h the commander and the m i l i t a r y u n i t i t served. The group was not an i n t e g r a l part of any u n i f i e d s t a f f system, subject i n the f i e l d t o the headquarters s t a f f of the army, and i n the Confederacy as a whole to the Bureaus of the War Department at Richmond. There was no such u n i f i e d s t a f f system, and i n the Army of Tennessee i t was h i g h l y u n c e r t a i n how much a u t h o r i t y Jordan, as adjutant general of the army, could e x e r c i s e over the a s s i s t a n t a d j u t a n t s general of corps, d i v i s i o n , and brigade. Any exten-s i o n of h i s a u t h o r i t y over the s t a f f of subordinate commands was l i a b l e t o be resented by the generals of the l i n e , as 135 i n t e r f e r e n c e w i t h t h e i r c o n t r o l of t h e i r own o f f i c e r s . Thus what might he gained i n e f f i c i e n c y by a c l o s e l y i n t e g r a t e d s t a f f s t r u c t u r e would be l o s t i n d i s s e n s i o n among o f f i c e r s j e a l o u s f o r t h e i r independent a u t h o r i t y . Throughout the h i s t o r y of the Western army i t s commanders had to t r y t o r e c o n c i l e the competing claims of a d m i n i s t r a t i v e e f f i c i e n c y and harmonious r e l a t i o n s w i t h t h e i r subordinates. Unfortun-a t e l y t h e i r e f f o r t s t o balance the i n t e r e s t s of s t a f f and l i n e met w i t h only l i m i t e d success. Although Jordan was an o f f i c i o u s man, ready on occasion t o exaggerate the importance of h i s p o s i t i o n , there i s no evidence that he t r i e d to e s t a b l i s h any form of t i g h t c o n t r o l over the subordinate o f f i c e r s of the adjutant general's department. Nevertheless he d i d i n s i s t t h a t a l l correspondence w i t h the commanding general should pass through h i s o f f i c e . Bragg, however, t r i e d to e s t a b l i s h a g r e a t e r degree of c o n t r o l over s t a f f a c t i v i t i e s . As corps commander, he ordered on March 21 that d i v i s i o n and brigade s t a f f s report d i r e c t l y to the c h i e f s of t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e departments at h i s corps head-qu a r t e r s ; as c h i e f of s t a f f , he r e q u i r e d that the heads of 25 s t a f f departments rep o r t to him d a i l y . The general thus showed an e a r l y i n t e r e s t i n the d i r e c t i o n and c o n t r o l of the s t a f f departments, an i n t e r e s t he would pursue l a t e r as army commander. But i n the s p r i n g of 1862 Bragg and Jordan, i n t h e i r d i f f e r e n t c a p a c i t i e s , were l e s s concerned w i t h s t a f f matters than w i t h the necessary o r g a n i z a t i o n of the army. 136 Under Jordan the adjutant general's department d e a l t w i t h a wide range of activities--command and s t a f f assignments, c o n s c r i p t i o n d e t a i l s , camp d i s c i p l i n e , passes and leave, r a t i o n s , musters, and s u p p l i e s of a l l kinds. These matters were a l l p a r t of the r o u t i n e of m i l i t a r y a d m i n i s t r a t i o n . Two areas received markedly heavy a t t e n t i o n , r e v e a l i n g that the Confederate army at C o r i n t h was f a r from being the "perfect yet simple machine" that Beauregard wanted. Courts m a r t i a l were frequent, e s p e c i a l l y d u r i n g the r e o r g a n i z a t i o n of the army which followed the B a t t l e of S h i l o h ; and lengthy general orders had t o be i s s u e d , g i v i n g d e t a i l e d i n s t r u c t i o n s on the elementary d u t i e s of a s o l d i e r . Regulations were published f o r the men i n camp, on p i c k e t duty, i n contact w i t h the enemy; o f f i c e r s were i n s t r u c t e d i n the l e a d e r s h i p of men, i n simple b a t t l e t a c t i c s , i n the c o m p l e x i t i e s of o r g a n i z a t i o n and supply; and the d u t i e s of s t a f f departments were m e t i c u l o u s l y l i s t e d , e s p e c i a l l y those of the medical depart-ment which must provide f o r c a s u a l t i e s on the f i e l d and 26 behind the l i n e s . i t i s impossible t o say w i t h whom these orders o r i g i n a t e d , but as they were issued between March and August, 1862, r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r them must be shared by Beauregard and Bragg. Whatever t h e i r source, the orders passed through Jordan's department, and owed something of t h e i r f o r m u l a t i o n t o him. The B a t t l e of S h i l o h was t o r e v e a l the degree to which the e a r l y o r g a n i z a t i o n of the army had been e f f e c t i v e . 137 The b a t t l e was fought on A p r i l 6 and 7, 1862, two days 27 l a t e r than had o r i g i n a l l y been planned. This delay allowed time f o r reinforcements t o reach the Union army, and so c o n t r i b u t e d t o the f a i l u r e of the Confederate a t t a c k . Cer-t a i n l y the delay has u s u a l l y been considered important i n 28 determining the b a t t l e ' s outcome. In a general sense the delay was caused by the d i f f i c u l -t i e s inherent i n moving a large inexperienced mass of men over roughly twenty m i l e s of country roads i n t o p o s i t i o n f o r b a t t l e . This was Bragg's o p i n i o n , and i n h i s o f f i c i a l r e p o r t he described some of the problems: But few regiments of my command had ever made a day's march. A very large p r o p o r t i o n of the rank and f i l e had never performed a day's lab o r . Our o r g a n i z a t i o n had been most hasty, w i t h great d e f i c i e n c y i n commanders, and was t h e r e f o r e very imperfect. The equipment was lamentably d e f e c t i v e f o r f i e l d s e r v i c e , and our t r a n s p o r t a t i o n , h a s t i l y impressed..., was d e f i c i e n t i n q u a n t i t y and very i n f e r i o r i n q u a l i t y . 29 Recognition of these general d i f f i c u l t i e s d i d not however preclude the i n e v i t a b l e attempt t o a s s i g n s p e c i f i c r e s p o n s i -b i l i t y f o r the army's f a i l u r e t o move according t o schedule. Johnston, Beauregard, Polk, and Hardee have a l l had t h e i r 30 c r i t i c s , and t h e i r champions. Some of the generals* r e s p o n s i b i l i t y must be shared by C o l o n e l Thomas Jordan, adjutant general of the army. Once the d e c i s i o n had been taken on the night of A p r i l 2/3 t o a t t a c k the F e d e r a l f o r c e s at P i t t s b u r g Landing, Jordan became i n e f f e c t the c h i e f s t a f f o f f i c e r of the Army of Tennessee. Bragg, although nominally c h i e f of s t a f f , had to 31 t u r n t o the d u t i e s of h i s corps command. The d i r e c t i o n of 138 the s t a f f work of the army thus f e l l I n c r e a s i n g l y on Jordan, who was not u n w i l l i n g to see t h i s extension of h i s power and i n f l u e n c e ; and as adjutant general Jordan was a l s o r e s p o n s i b l e f o r the f o r m u l a t i o n and issue of the orders to advance against the enemy. Yet i n s p i t e of h i s West Point background and h i s p r o f e s s i o n a l experience, Jordan was c u r i o u s l y remiss i n c a r r y i n g out these d u t i e s . There i s a s t i l l unresolved dispute over whether i t was Johnston or Beauregard who took the i n i t i a t i v e i n or d e r i n g the advance. But a g e n e r a l l y accepted o u t l i n e of events can be given. Late i n the evening of A p r i l 2 Polk sent word t o Beauregard that F e d e r a l troops were at P i t t s b u r g ; Beauregard sent Jordan as h i s spokesman t o Johnston; Johnston took Jordan w i t h him to Bragg's q u a r t e r s , where the three men discussed the news and agreed on an a t t a c k ; p r e l i m i n a r y orders t o be ready t o march at 6 a.m. on the 3rd were sent by Jordan t o the corps commanders; duri n g the nig h t plans f o r the march over the two a v a i l a b l e roads were worked out by Beauregard, and given t o Jordan f o r e l a b o r a t i o n and f o r m u l a t i o n i n t o w r i t t e n orders f o r the army; about 10 a.m. v e r b a l orders were given f o r the advance, w i t h i n s t r u c t i o n s that i t should begin at 12 a.m.; the army d i d not move t i l l l a t e i n the afternoon, however, and i t was dark before the Confederate f o r c e s c l e a r e d C o r i n t h . Confusion over orders c o n t r i b u t e d to the delay which allowed troops under Union General Don Ca r l o s B u e l l t o r e i n f o r c e Ulysses S. Grant at S h i l o h , and p o s s i b l y cost the Confederates the b a t t l e . 139 Jordan's part i n the delay concerned the w r i t t e n orders f o r the march which should have been issued by the adjutant general's department. Known as S p e c i a l Orders No. 8 , and 32 dated at C o r i n t h , M i s s i s s i p p i , on A p r i l 3 , 1862, these i n s t r u c t i o n s had not been sent out by 12 a.m., nor yet by 3 p.m., when the troops f i n a l l y began t o move on a v e r b a l command. The army was s t i l l too inexperienced t o f o l l o w w i t h -out e x p l i c i t w r i t t e n d i r e c t i o n the complicated schedule of march announced at 10 a.m. and only l a t e r published as S p e c i a l 33 Orders No. 8 . Jordan l a t e r admitted t h i s delay i n i s s u i n g the orders, and t r i e d t o excuse h i m s e l f . He had warned, he wrote, that "the pr e p a r a t i o n of the order, w i t h a l l the neces-sary copies f o r the Generals and the proper s t a f f o f f i c e r s would take some hours," and being " c o n s t a n t l y i n t e r r u p t e d by other more urgent o f f i c e d u t i e s " he was unable t o have the order copied and d i s t r i b u t e d ; r e l y i n g on the v e r b a l i n s t r u c t i o n s given t o Bragg, Polk, and Hardee, he b e l i e v e d that the order was "not; at a l l urgent." i t i s d i f f i c u l t to imagine what could be more urgent on the eve of a b a t t l e than the marching orders and troop d i s p o s i t i o n s which were t o b r i n g on the engagement. C e r t a i n l y i t was not Jordan's need t o consult Napoleon's order f o r the b a t t l e of Waterloo (an unfortunate p a r a l l e l , a t b e s t ) , nor was i t the announcement of s t a f f assignments and the general o r g a n i z a t i o n of the commissary 35 d e p a r t m e n t — a c t i v i t i e s which d i d occupy him on A p r i l 3. I f on that day the adjutant general's department was too busy to give p r i o r i t y t o march and b a t t l e orders, then the department 140 was e i t h e r p oorly organized, or i n s u f f i c i e n t l y f l e x i b l e , or inadequately s t a f f e d . Whatever the reason, i t f a i l e d to meet the e x t r a pressures put on i t by the impending b a t t l e . Even when is s u e d , S p e c i a l Orders No. 8 d i d not meet wi t h approval. Bragg l a t e r described the d e t a i l e d plans f o r advance as "simply execrable," and blamed them on e i t h e r Beauregard or Jordan. A recent m i l i t a r y c r i t i c has considered them too elaborate f o r c l a r i t y , and un n e c e s s a r i l y embellished with reminders about the range of r i f l e d a r t i l l e r y and the 36 need to use the bayonet. such general i n f o r m a t i o n and advice had no normal place In a b a t t l e order, but t h e i r presence there r e f l e c t e d both Jordan's d i s p o s i t i o n t o l e c t u r e and the f i e l d o f f i c e r s ' need f o r b a s i c i n s t r u c t i o n . In s p i t e of delays and confusion the Army of Tennessee f i n a l l y moved out of C o r i n t h l a t e on A p r i l 3 , came w i t h i n reach of the F e d e r a l f o r c e s on the 5 t h , and joined b a t t l e on the 6 t h and 7 t h . General Johnston was k i l l e d on the f i r s t day; Beauregard succeeded t o the command, and continued t o d i r e c t the b a t t l e from h i s headquarters, behind the l i n e s ; Bragg was h e a v i l y i n v o l v e d on the f i e l d . I n i t i a l successes on the 6 t h could not be maintained, and a f t e r c o s t l y and i n c o n c l u s i v e f i g h t i n g on the 7 t h the Confederate army withdrew t o i t s C o r i n t h base. F o r t u n a t e l y there was no immediate p u r s u i t . During the b a t t l e the adjutant general's department had to f u l f i l l two f u n c t i o n s . One was t o c a r r y on i t s usual desk d u t i e s , of the r e c e i p t of Information and the issue of orders, 141 a n d t h i s was done by t h e h e a d q u a r t e r s s t a f f u n d e r t h e s u p e r -v i s i o n o f a s s i s t a n t a d j u t a n t g e n e r a l F r a n c i s H. J o r d a n . The o t h e r f u n c t i o n was t o assume w h a t e v e r a c t i v e d u t i e s m i g h t be a s s i g n e d qn t h e f i e l d . C o l o n e l J o r d a n , C a p t a i n C l i f t o n H. S m i t h , L i e u t e n a n t J o h n M. O t e y , and M a j o r George W. B r e n t made r e c o n n a i s s a n c e s , c a r r i e d o r d e r s , a s s i s t e d i n t h e d i r e c t i o n o f t r o o p s , and r e - o r g a n i z e d s t r a g g l e r s . The d e p a r t m e n t , a t h e a d q u a r t e r s and i n t h e f i e l d , was t h e means by w h i c h t h e commander m a i n t a i n e d c o n t a c t w i t h h i s g e n e r a l s - and t r i e d t o c o - o r d i n a t e t h e C o n f e d e r a t e a t t a c k . I n h i s o f f i c i a l r e p o r t on t h e B a t t l e o f S h i l o h B e a u r e g a r d p r a i s e d t h e a d m i n i s t r a t i v e s t a f f , m a k i n g s p e c i a l m e n t i o n o f t h o s e who had s p e n t b o t h 37 d a y s u n d e r enemy f i r e . C o l o n e l J o r d a n gave h i s own a c c o u n t o f h i s p a r t i n t h e two d a y b a t t l e , p r o b a b l y w i t h some e x a g g e r a t i o n , b u t a l s o w i t h a c e r t a i n b a s i c c r e d i b i l i t y . B e a u r e g a r d had g r a n t e d h i s r e q u e s t f o r s e r v i c e i n t h e f i e l d , J o r d a n w r o t e ; t h e r e t h e a d j u t a n t g e n e r a l assumed "the a u t h o r i t y o f h i s p o s i t i o n , " g i v i n g o r d e r s t o a d v a n c e and t o a t t a c k , d i r e c t i n g t h e p l a c i n g o f b a t t e r i e s , and c o m m u n i c a t i n g w i t h t h e p r i n c i p a l f i e l d commanders t h r o u g h t h e i r c h i e f s o f s t a f f ; on b o t h d a y s he h e l p e d d i r e c t t h e b a t t l e , and d u r i n g t h e w i t h d r a w a l on t h e 7 t h was r e s p o n s i b l e f o r o r g a n i z i n g and p o s t i n g t h e r e a r g u a r d ; much o f t h i s work he d i d on h i s own i n i t i a t i v e , a l t h o u g h any 38 o r d e r s were g i v e n i n t h e name o f t h e commanding g e n e r a l . I f t h i s a c c o u n t i s r e a s o n a b l y a c c u r a t e , t h e n J o r d a n had n o t assumed b u t e x c e e d e d h i s a u t h o r i t y a s a d j u t a n t g e n e r a l . 142 According to American m i l i t a r y theory of the day, a d m i n i s t r a -39 t i o n and command were d i s t i n c t , but at S h i l o h Jordan had come close t o combining the two. Acceptance of h i s orders was probably guaranteed l e s s by h i s r o l e as adjutant general than by the knowledge of Beauregard's confidence i n him. S t a f f work at t h i s e a r l y stage i n the C i v i l War was not part of a c l e a r l y defined a d m i n i s t r a t i v e system, but was s t i l l dependent on p e r s o n a l i t y , i n f l u e n c e , and the needs of the moment. The Army of Tennessee, c o n s i s t i n g l a r g e l y of untrained and inexperienced men, had fought a major b a t t l e w i t h i n a week of i t s formal o r g a n i z a t i o n under Sidney Johnston. Not s u r p r i s i n g l y , that b a t t l e had revealed serious weaknesses. Bragg described the s t a t e of the army on the r e t r e a t to C o r i n t h --"Our c o n d i t i o n i s h o r r i b l e . Troops u t t e r l y d i s o r g a n i z e d and demoralized. Road almost impassable. No p r o v i s i o n s and no forage; consequently everything i s f e e b l e . . . . I t i s most lamentable to see the s t a t e of a f f a i r s , but I am powerless „4o and almost exhausted. I f the army was t o recover the work of o r g a n i z a t i o n begun i n March 1862 must be resumed, both f o r the men and f o r the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n . This r e - o r g a n i z a t i o n was c a r r i e d out, f i r s t at C o r i n t h and then at Tupelo, from A p r i l t o mid-July, w i t h such e f f e c t that the army could be t r a n s -f e r r e d v i a Mobile, Alabama, to Chattanooga, Tennessee, i n readiness f o r an i n v a s i o n of Tennessee and Kentucky. The t r a n s f o r m a t i o n was achieved under the general d i r e c t i o n of Beauregard and Bragg, a s s i s t e d by Jordan and Brent. 143 A barrage of orders was issued from the adjutant general's department, concerning b a t t l e r e p o r t s , Inspection r e p o r t s , leaves, courts m a r t i a l , ordnance s u p p l i e s , medical care, 4 i r a t i o n s , e l e c t i o n of o f f i c e r s , censorship of news. Necessary as a l l these r e g u l a t i o n s were from the standpoint of m i l i t a r y a d m i n i s t r a t i o n , they made the department the t a r g e t of i r r e v e r e n t s o l d i e r l y humor. "What i s the f i r s t duty of an Adjutant General?" asked a camp newspaper, and r e p l i e d , "To become so h u f f i s h that everyone w i l l d i s l i k e to do business w i t h him." The second duty was "to f i l l h i s o f f i c e w i t h young s q u i r t s , as c l e r k s and a s s i s t a n t s , t o look f i e r c e l y at v i s i t o r s , " and the t h i r d "to p e r p e t u a l l y i n t r i g u e f o r a higher p o s i t i o n i n the l i n e , provided i t i s not attended n42 w i t h personal danger. These were standard complaints against a d m i n i s t r a t i v e o f f i c e r s , but t h e i r very existence probably i n d i c a t e d the i n c r e a s i n g e f f e c t i v e n e s s of the orders published by the adjutant general's department. The new e f f e c t i v e n e s s was due t o a development l n a d m i n i s t r a t i o n f o r m a l l y i n s t i t u t e d on May 6, 1862, when B r i g a d i e r General James E. Slaughter was announced as c h i e f of the i n s p e c t o r general's department. The appointment of an i n s p e c t o r general was not new. Slaughter had served under Bragg In that c a p a c i t y , i n 1861-1862, and Brent had been made a c t i n g i n s p e c t o r general by Beauregard on A p r i l 3, 1862, although that appointment had never been confirmed by Richmond. What was new was the i n s t i t u t i o n of an Inspector general's department, separate from the adjutant general's, and w i t h 144 i t s own o f f i c e r s t o c a r r y out the r o u t i n e d u t i e s of i n s p e c t i o n 43 p r e v i o u s l y f u l f i l l e d by a s s i s t a n t a d j u t a n t s . Although i t s very existence contravened o f f i c i a l r e g u l a t i o n s , the new department became and remained an important part of the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e system of the Army of Tennessee. Slaughter was one of Bragg's men from Pensacola, and i n the f i r s t year of the war had r i s e n r a p i d l y i n rank, from l i e u t e n a n t t o b r i g a d i e r general. Great-nephew of President Madison, graduate of the V i r g i n i a M i l i t a r y I n s t i t u t e , Mexican War veteran, Slaughter seemed set f o r a d i s t i n g u i s h e d C i v i l War career. Yet he d i d not f u l f i l l t h i s promise, spending the l a s t years of the war In the r e l a t i v e o b s c u r i t y of the T r a n s - M i s s i s s i p p i Department. Jordan, whose judgements were admittedly not always o b j e c t i v e , was not Impressed by Slaughter's performance as i n s p e c t o r general w i t h the Army of Tennessee.. "He means w e l l , " Jordan wrote, "but has n e i t h e r the education nor the n a t u r a l a b i l i t y f o r the important place he holds." P o s s i b l y Slaughter had deserved Bragg's favor l e s s as an able s t a f f o f f i c e r , capable of Independent a c t i o n , than 44 as a good subordinate. The new i n s p e c t o r general's department was much needed. Reports i n A p r i l showed th a t the supply system of the commis-sary and ordnance departments was thoroughly d i s o r g a n i z e d , and there was doubt whether general orders issued from army 45 headquarters were being duly published and enforced. To d e a l w i t h these and s i m i l a r problems r e g u l a t i o n s were drawn up f o r the new department, d e f i n i n g i t s o r g a n i z a t i o n and 145 d u t i e s . These r e g u l a t i o n s appeared on June 5, 1862, i n the name of commanding general Beauregard, and over the signature 46 of a c t i n g c h i e f of s t a f f Brent. That Brent had e a r l i e r been a c t i n g i n s p e c t o r general t o Beauregard suggests that he, r a t h e r than Slaughter, had been instrumental i n drawing up the r e g u l a t i o n s . Inspectors were t o meet d a i l y f o r i n s t r u c t i o n s from the c h i e f s of t h e i r departments; i n s p e c t i o n s were then to be made, checking army l i n e s , p i c k e t s , the f i r i n g of guns, and the observance of m i l i t a r y r u l e s ; and repor t s were to be submitted, i n the f i r s t instance t o the general s t a f f of the army, and then to the headquarters of the Western Department. The orders are not e n t i r e l y c l e a r about the o r g a n i z a t i o n of the i n s p e c t o r general's department—no mention i s made, f o r example, of the r e l a t i o n of an i n s p e c t o r to h i s immediate l i n e commander, nor i s i t c e r t a i n whether an i n s p e c t o r of a r t i l l e r y was to report t o the c h i e f i n s p e c t o r , or to the c h i e f of a r t i l l e r y . But the orders do imply an attempt t o create an i n t e g r a t e d and e f f e c t i v e system of i n s p e c t i o n . The work done at C o r i n t h and Tupelo by the new in s p e c t o r general's department was h i g h l y p r a i s e d by Col o n e l W i l l i a m Preston Johnston, aide t o President Davis and sent by him t o i n v e s t i g a t e the c o n d i t i o n of Beauregard's army. Before reaching the camp at Tupelo, Johnston,received a l e t t e r from h i s uncle, B r i g a d i e r General W i l l i a m Preston, warning him of d i f f i c u l t i e s there. "The army i s not i n good c o n d i t i o n , " Preston wrote. "Bragg i s a s t e r n and imperious s o l d i e r and 146 i s endeavoring by excessive s e v e r i t y t o e s t a b l i s h d i s c i p l i n e , but the men are indignant, and I f e a r t r o u b l e . Both he and General Beauregard are secluded and i n a c c e s s i b l e , and the t r a n s i t i o n from the l a x i t y of the volunteer system i s too sudden." Bragg, he concluded, was "not a s k i l f u l a n g l e r , who 47 throws h i s f i s h w i t h a sudden f l o u r i s h over h i s shoulder." ' But In s p i t e of t h i s warning, Johnston was impressed by what he found. The Army of Tennessee, Johnston reported, was i n an e x c e l l e n t s t a t e of d i s c i p l i n e , w i t h good morale, and a s o l d i e r l y appearance; there was a d a l l y t r a i n i n g schedule; and respect was shown f o r c i v i l i a n property. C r e d i t f o r the great improvement i n these matters was "due i n some measure to the b e t t e r and more r i g i d system of i n s p e c t i o n that has been inaugurated. F u r t h e r improvement i n t h i s d i r e c t i o n might be expected i f the law a u t h o r i z e d the appointment of brigade i n s p e c t o r s and i f more thorough i n s t r u c t i o n i n t h e i r d u t i e s „48 was given t h i s branch of the s t a f f . " Johnston thus commended the work of the i n s p e c t o r general's department, and made suggestions f o r i t s f u t u r e expansion through an extended o r g a n i z a t i o n arid a more s p e c i a l i z e d t r a i n i n g . From h i s obser-v a t i o n i n the f i e l d , he came to the same conc l u s i o n as Davis's opponents i n Richmond, that army a d m i n i s t r a t i o n would be b e t t e r served by a d i v i s i o n of the adjutant and i n s p e c t o r general's department. A f t e r the B a t t l e of S h i l o h , t h e r e f o r e , a concerted e f f o r t was made to complete the o r g a n i z a t i o n of the Confederate f o r c e s 147 In the Western Department. The two commanders most concerned i n the improvements noted by C o l o n e l Johnston were Beauregard and h i s second-in-command, Bragg. The s t a f f agencies involved were the adjutant general's department, under Jordan, and the new i n s p e c t o r general's department, nominally d i r e c t e d by Slaughter, but probably s t r o n g l y i n f l u e n c e d by Brent. These s t a f f departments were themselves a c q u i r i n g a rudimentary o r g a n i z a t i o n . Appointments were s t i l l made l a r g e l y through nomination by the l i n e commanders, but attempts were being made to e s t a b l i s h a h i e r a r c h y of a u t h o r i t y and r e s p o n s i b i l i t y w i t h -i n each s t a f f department, and to develop i n the o f f i c e r s of the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e s t a f f competence i n t h e i r s p e c i a l d u t i e s . The b a s i s of a s t a f f system, as d i s t i n c t from s t a f f improvisa-t i o n , thtis e x i s t e d i n the Army of Tennessee when Bragg f o r m a l l y replaced Beauregard as commander of the Western Department, on J u l y 2, 1862. 1 4 8 Notes % a r of the R e b e l l i o n : A Compilation of the O f f i c i a l  Records of the Union and Confederate Armies (128 v o l s . ; Washington: Government P r i n t i n g O f f i c e , 1 8 8 0 - 1 9 0 1 ) , S e r i e s IV, I , 114, 163, 8 9 0 - 8 9 1 ( h e r e a f t e r c i t e d as OR, w i t h a l l references t o S e r i e s I , unless otherwise i n d i c a t e d ) ; i b i d . , I I I , 3 5 2 ; Louis T. W i g f a l l t o [Joseph E. Johnston], V i r g i n i a [ A p r i l , 1 8 6 4 ], Joseph E. Johnston Papers, Henry E. Huntington L i b r a r y , San Marino, C a l i f o r n i a . 2 Regulations f o r the Army of the Confederate S t a t e s , and  f o r the Quartermaster's and Pay Departments. The Uniform and  Dress of the Army. The A r t i c l e s of War ( r e v i s e d e d i t i o n ; New Orleans: B l o o m f i e l d and S t e e l , l 8 6 l ) , and Revised  Regulations f o r the Army of the United S t a t e s , l 8 6 l ( P h i l a d e l p h i a : J . G. L. Brown, 1 8 6 1 ) — c f . Confederate Regula-t i o n s , pp. 6 3 - 6 4 , 7 1 , and U. S. Regulations, pp. 6 6 , 6 8 , 7 1 ; OR, S e r i e s IV, I I I , 170. -^Confederate Regulations, pp. 6 3 - 6 4 . ^OR, S e r i e s IV, I , 8 9 0 - 8 9 1 . ^ I b i d . , 8 9 0 ; Confederate Regulations, p. 7 1 ; OR, S e r i e s IV, I I I , 4 3 - 4 5 , 2 9 7 , 4 6 6 - 4 7 1 . 6 I b i d . , 4 4 . ^ W i g f a l l t o [ Johnston], V i r g i n i a { A p r i l , 1 8 6 4 ], Johnston Papers. 149 80R, S e r i e s IV, i n , 451-452. See a l s o I I , 944-946. 9lbId., I I I , 497-498. 1 0 I b i d . , 169-172; I I , 1059. 1 ]-Ibld., I l l , 352-353. 12 A l f r e d Roman, M i l i t a r y Operations of General Beauregard (2 v o l s . ; New York: Harper and Broth e r s , 1883), I , 439, 466; L i s t of S t a f f O f f i c e r s of the Confederate States Army, l86l- 1865 (Washington: Government P r i n t i n g O f f i c e , 1891), p. 89. 13 -ECLlsworth E l i o t , J r . , West Point i n the Confederacy (New York: G. A. Baker and Co., Inc., 1 9 4 l ) , p. 369; Thomas Jordan t o P. G. T. Beauregard, [ near C e n t r e v i l l e , V i r g i n i a , January, 1862] Thomas Jordan Papers, Duke U n i v e r s i t y , Durham, North C a r o l i n a ; I r v i n g Ashby Buck t o Dear L u c i e , [ V i r g i n i a ] January 19, 1862, I r v i n g Ashby Buck Papers, Southern H i s t o r i c a l C o l l e c t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y of North C a r o l i n a , Chapel H i l l ; Thomas Jordan, "Notes of a Confederate S t a f f O f f i c e r at S h i l o h , " B a t t l e s and Leaders of the C i v i l War, Robert U. Johnson and Clarence C. Bu e l , eds. (4 v o l s . ; New York: The Century Company, 1887-1888), I , 595, n. l 4 L i s t of S t a f f O f f i c e r s , pp. 23, 143; I r v i n g Ashby Buck to Dear Ma, C o r i n t h , M i s s i s s i p p i , May 15, 1862, Buck Papers. 15' " I r v i n g Ashby Buck t o Dear L u c i e , [ V i r g i n i a ] January 19, 1862, i b i d . 1 6 l b i d . 150 17 I r v i n g Ashby Buck t o Dear L u c i e , [ V i r g i n i a ] January 25, 1862, i b i d . 18 For information r e l a t i n g to these men, see L i s t of S t a f f  O f f i c e r s ; S. Bassett French B i o g r a p h i c a l Sketches, V i r g i n i a State L i b r a r y , Richmond; Roman, Beauregard, I , 493; Ezra J . Warner, Generals i n Gray (Baton Rouge: Lo u i s i a n a State U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1959), p p . 241-242. 19 OR, X, pt. 2, 370-371; C. J . Johnson t o h i s w i f e , C o r i n t h , M i s s i s s i p p i , March 2 3 , 1862, Charles James Johnson L e t t e r s , L o u i s i a n a State U n i v e r s i t y , Baton Rouge. PO See Charles P. Roland, A l b e r t Sidney Johnston; S o l d i e r  of Three Republics ( A u s t i n , Texas: U n i v e r s i t y of Texas Press, 1964), pp. 311-312; T. Harry W i l l i a m s , P. G. T. Beauregard. Napoleon i n Gray (New York: C o l l i e r Books, 1962), pp. 16O-161. 21 General Orders, C o r i n t h , M i s s i s s i p p i , March 2 9 , 1862, Bragg-Beauregard Headquarters Book, C i v i l War Papers, L o u i s i a n a H i s t o r i c a l A s s o c i a t i o n C o l l e c t i o n , Howard-Tilton Memorial L i b r a r y , Tulane U n i v e r s i t y , New Orleans ( c i t e d h e r e a f t e r as Headquarters Book); OR, X, pt. 2, 371, 373-22 David Urquhart t o Thomas Jordan, Narragansett, Rhode I s l a n d , August 2 5 , 1880, quoted i n Roman, Beauregard, I , 275. 151 JGrady McWhiney, Braxton Bragg and Confederate Defeat: Volume I , F i e l d Command (New York: Columbia U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1969), PP. 202-203; OR, X, pt. 2, 443. The offenses against m i l i t a r y r e g u l a t i o n s can be examined i n d e t a i l i n the court m a r t i a l records, Headquarters Book. 24 For s t a f f o r g a n i z a t i o n , see Headquarters Book; Reports, February 27, March 28, 1862, F r a n c i s H. Jordan, Compiled Service Records of Confederate General and S t a f f O f f i c e r s and Nonregimental E n l i s t e d Men, War Department C o l l e c t i o n of Confederate Records, Record Group 109, N a t i o n a l A r c h i v e s , Washington, D. C. ( c i t e d h e r e a f t e r as CSR); F. H. Jordan r e p o r t , February 28, 1862, Thomas Jordan Papers; Roman, Beauregard, I, 270. 2 50R, X, pt. 2, 353; C i r c u l a r , C o r i n t h , M i s s i s s i p p i , March 31, 1862, Headquarters Book. 26 For the orders issued by the adjutant general's department, see Headquarters Book; a l s o OR, X, pt. 2, 297-642, and XVII, pt. 2, 591-683-2 7 R e c e n t secondary accounts of the p r e l i m i n a r y movements and the b a t t l e are W i l l i a m s , Beauregard, pp. 161-189; Roland, Johnston, pp. 316-351; Thomas Lawrence Connelly, Army of the  Heartland: The Army of Tennessee, l 8 6 l - l 8 6 2 (Baton Rouge: Lo u i s i a n a State U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1967), Pp. 151-175; McWhiney, Braxton Bragg, pp. 218-252. 152 28 W i l l i a m s , Beauregard, pp. 166, 188-189, does not agree that the delays were important. He argues that even on the 5th Grant had enough men to hold h i s own. 29 OR, X, pt. 1, 463. See a l s o W i l l i a m Preston Johnston, L i f e of General A l b e r t Sidney Johnston (New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1 8 7 9 ) , p. 554. 30 Johnston's son blamed Beauregard; Beauregard blamed Polk; Polk's son claimed that the bishop-general was w a i t i n g f o r Hardee. More recent w r i t e r s support the subject of t h e i r b i o g r a p h i e s , w i t h the exception of W i l l i a m s , who maintains th a t the e r r o r was probably Beauregard's, but that i t made no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e t o the outcome. W. P. Johnston, Johnston, p. 553; Roman, Beauregard, I , 275; W i l l i a m Mecklenburg Polk, Leonidas Polk, Bishop and General (2 v o l s . ; New York: Longmans, 1893), I I , 85; Roland, Johnston, pp. 316-317; W i l l i a m s , Beauregard, pp. 165-166; Joseph H. Parks, General Leonidas Polk, C. S. A.: The F i g h t i n g Bishop (Baton Rouge: Louis i a n a State U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1962), p. 228; N a t h a n i e l Cheairs Hughes, J r . , General W i l l i a m J . Hardee: Old R e l i a b l e (Baton Rouge: Louis i a n a State U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1965), P. 102, n. 7-31 Bragg's biographer b e l i e v e s that the Confederage army would have been b e t t e r served had Bragg r e t a i n e d h i s s t a f f d u t i e s and freed Beauregard f o r combat command. McWhiney, Braxton Bragg, p. 224. 3 20R, X, pt. 1, 392-395. 153 -^Misunderstanding of the v e r b a l orders has u s u a l l y been a t t r i b u t e d to Polk. Roman, Beauregard, I , 275-3 4Thomas Jordan, " R e c o l l e c t i o n s of General Beauregard's Se r v i c e i n West Tennessee i n the Spring of 1862," Southern  H i s t o r i c a l S o c i e t y Papers, V I I I ( l 8 8 0 ) , 4 l 2 ; a l s o Jordan, "Notes...at S h i l o h , " 596, and Roman, Beauregard, I , 275. Roland, Johnston, p. 3 l 6 , f i n d s Jordan a p a r t i a l r a t h e r than a r e l i a b l e witness, but i n t h i s instance there are no grounds on which to d i s c r e d i t h i s statement. 3 5 J o r d a n , "Notes...at S h i l o h , " 595, n.; General Orders Nos. 6 and 7, C o r i n t h , M i s s i s s i p p i , A p r i l 3 , 1862, Headquarters Book; S p e c i a l Orders No. 7, C o r i n t h , M i s s i s s i p p i , A p r i l 3 , 1862, George W i l l i a m Brent, CSR. -^Braxton Bragg to W. P. Johnston, December 16, 1874, Mrs. Mason Barr e t C o l l e c t i o n of A l b e r t Sidney Johnston and W i l l i a m Preston Johnston Papers, Howard-Tilton Memorial L i b r a r y , quoted i n McWhiney, Braxton Bragg, p. 221; Arthur Crego, "The Organization and Functions of the S t a f f of the Confederate Army of Tennessee," (unpublished M. A. t h e s i s , L o u i s i a n a State U n i v e r s i t y , 1965), PP. 71-72. 3 7Roman, Beauregard, I , 2 8 5 - 3 2 1 , 524-539; OR, X, pt._ 1, 3 9 0 - 3 9 1 . This dual r o l e of the adjutant general's department accords with the d e f i n i t i o n given i n H. L. S c o t t , M i l i t a r y  D i c t i o n a r y (New York: Greenwood Press, 1968, c. 1861), p. 14. 154 3 8 J o r d a n , "Notes at S h i l o h , " 5 9 9 - 6 0 3 . 3 9 S c o t t , M i l i t a r y D i c t i o n a r y , p. 17. 2*°0R, X, pt. 2, 398. 4 l See General Orders Nos. 9-112, A p r i l 9-August 13, 1862, Headquarters Book. 42 A r t i c l e intended f o r the Army Argus, at C o r i n t h , M i s s i s s i p p i , published i n the D a l l y Richmond Whig, August 2 3 , 1862. See a l s o Sam R. Watkins,-"Co. Aytch." A Side Show of  the B i g Show (New York: C o l l i e r Books, 1962), pp. 138-139-43 OR, X, p t . 2, 500j S p e c i a l Orders No. 7, A p r i l 3, 1862, Brent, CSR; Brent t o James Cooper, Richmond [ V i r g i n i a ] , June 30, 1862, i b i d . Jordan had been promoted b r i g a d i e r general on A p r i l 17, and thus was Slaughter's j u n i o r i n rank. General Orders No. 17, Headquarters Book. Presumably Jordan owed h i s appointment as c h i e f of s t a f f t o h i s West Poi n t background and h i s a s s o c i a t i o n w i t h Beauregard. 44 Warner, Generals In Gray, p. 279; OR, XVII, pt. 2, 679. 45 Report, A p r i l 16, 1862, F. H. Jordan, CSR; General Orders No. 27 , A p r i l 2 8 , 1862, Headquarters Book. 155 46 General Orders No. 64, June 5 , 1862, l b i d . Headquarters Book provides r e g u l a t i o n copies of a l l general orders, and these copies were o r i g i n a l l y unsigned; Jordan's signature was l a t e r entered under a l l orders, whether he issued them or not; i n t h i s case an order published on June 5, a u t h o r i z e d by the " a c t i n g Chief of S t a f f , " could only have been issued by Brent. 47 W i l l i a m Preston t o [William Preston Johnston ], Tupelo, M i s s i s s i p p i , June 14, 1862, B a r r e t C o l l e c t i o n . 48 OR, X, p t . 1, 7 8 l . 156 CHAPTER V I E v o l u t i o n J u l y 1862-December 1863 As commander of the Western Department Bragg i n h e r i t e d the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e system b u i l t up under Beauregard. The system was incomplete, and i n some areas i l l - d e f i n e d , but an attempt had been made t o co-ordinate s t a f f work under the d i r e c t i o n of the general s t a f f of the army, and, through i n s p e c t i o n , t o ensure i t s e f f i c i e n t performance. Bragg a l s o i n h e r i t e d , at Beauregard's suggestion, h i s predecessor's 1 a d m i n i s t r a t i v e s t a f f . This should have provided c o n t i n u i t y i n the departments of the adjutant general and the Inspector ge n e r a l , minimizing the upheaval caused by the change i n commanders. Instead, i t created d i s s e n t . 2 Bragg announced h i s s t a f f on J u l y 17, 1862. i n a l l he made ten a d m i n i s t r a t i v e appointments, four i n the adjutant general's department, f i v e i n the i n s p e c t o r general's, and one i n the o f f i c e of the judge advocate. F i v e of the appointments went t o Beauregard's men, and f i v e to Bragg's. Retained were the two Jordan b r o t h e r s , Otey, P o l i g n a c , and a recent a r r i v a l , Captain G i l e s Buckner Cooke; added were Lieutenant Colonel George G. Garner, a s s i s t a n t adjutant g e n e r a l , Lieutenant C o l o n e l W i l l i a m K. Beard and Captain J . P. Jones, a s s i s t a n t i n s p e c t o r s general, and Lieutenant C o l o n e l Harvey W. Walter, 157 judge advocate; Inspector general Slaughter, although appointed by Beauregard, was r e a l l y one of Bragg»s o f f i c e r s . Head of t h i s mixed group was B r i g a d i e r General Thomas Jordan, confirmed 3 i n h i s p o s i t i o n as c h i e f of s t a f f . The d i s s e n t among the s t a f f arose from t h e i r sense of personal attachment t o i n d i v i d u a l commanders. R i v a l r y between Bragg and Beauregard men l e d Jordan t o suspect a p l o t t o denigrate Beauregard, and t o d i s c r i m i n a t e against h i s s t a f f o f f i c e r s . "Toadeaters and sycophants," Jordan charged, c u r r i e d f a v o r by a t t a c k i n g Beauregard, and those of h i s s t a f f who had not been replaced were the objects of "incessant p e t t y j e a l o u s y . " The c h i e f of s t a f f i n v olved h i m s e l f i n these d i s -putes, which were given wide p u b l i c i t y , w i t h r e f e r e n c e s , so he claimed, i n both Montgomery and Richmond newspapers. Obviously personal l o y a l t i e s outweighed e s p r i t de corps among the s t a f f . There were other signs of d i f f i c u l t y . While at Chattanooga, i n August 1862, Jordan t r i e d to enforce a c e n t r a l a u t h o r i t y over a l l the s t a f f departments, by r e q u i r i n g that no s t a f f c h i e f should communicate d i r e c t l y with the commanding 5 general, but only through h i m s e l f . Such a system would have helped create a u n i f i e d s t a f f corps; i t would a l s o have increased Jordan's own power. But whatever the motive behind Jordan's attempt t o develop a system of s t a f f c o n t r o l , i t was f r u s t r a t e d j u s t a week l a t e r by a,counter-order from Bragg. Bragg i n s i s t e d that i n s t r u c t i o n s from army general s t a f f to j u n i o r s t a f f o f f i c e r s i n subordinate commands must proceed, 158 not through the s t a f f h i e r a r c h y d i r e c t e d by Jordan, but through the appropriate l i n e commanders. " D i s c i p l i n e and e f f i c i e n c y , " he a s s e r t e d , "can only be preserved by a r i g i d adherence t o t h i s r u l e . " Bragg was emphasizing the need, not f o r a separate s t a f f corps headed by i t s own c h i e f , but f o r an i n t e r l o c k i n g s t a f f - a n d - l i n e system. This: alone could secure communication and c o - o r d i n a t i o n among the va r i o u s s t a f f departments and l i n e commands of the army. But as c h i e f of s t a f f i n A p r i l 1862, Bragg had h i m s e l f t r i e d t o e x e r c i s e the k i n d of c o n t r o l claimed by Jordan i n August. Bragg's f a i l u r e t o support Jordan, t h e r e -f o r e , was not caused by a d i f f e r i n g i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of the r o l e of c h i e f of s t a f f . Instead, personal f a c t o r s conditioned h i s response--Jordan was a focus of s t a f f d i s s e n s i o n , and Bragg, i n August as i n A p r i l , wished to keep army a d m i n i s t r a t i o n under h i s own close d i r e c t i o n . This c o n f l i c t between Bragg and Jordan over s t a f f o r g a n i z a t i o n occurred j u s t as the army was preparing t o leave on the Kentucky campaign. Jordan was ordered t o remain behind at department headquarters i n Chattanooga, and s h o r t l y a f t e r -7 wards he l e f t the Western army t o r e j o i n Beauregard. With Jordan's departure the Beauregard f a c t i o n on Bragg's s t a f f broke up, and i t s o f f i c e r s g r a d u a l l y moved to other assignments. Bragg could thus leave Chattanooga f o r Kentucky w i t h s t a f f o f f i c e r s of h i s own s e l e c t i o n . As h i s p r i n c i p a l adjutant he took Lieutenant C o l o n e l Garner, former West Poi n t cadet, from 1847-1849, and e x - a r t i l l e r y l i e u t e n a n t i n the U. S. Army. 159 On October 2, 1862, Garner was superseded by Brent, who returned t o the Western army as Bragg's c h i e f of s t a f f and adjutant general. Lieutenant C o l o n e l Beard headed the i n s p e c t o r general's department, r e p l a c i n g Slaughter, on assignment e l s e -where. No record of Beard's antebellum career has been found, but i t i s almost c e r t a i n that he had no p r o f e s s i o n a l m i l i t a r y experience p r i o r t o the C i v i l War. When he joi n e d Bragg at Pensacola i n l 8 6 l he d i d so as a l i e u t e n a n t c o l o n e l of F l o r i d a i n f a n t r y , t r a n s f e r r i n g to s t a f f work i n March 1862. In Brent and Beard Bragg had found the two men who, with the c h i e f of s t a f f , were to be h i s p r i n c i p a l a d m i n i s t r a t i v e o f f i c e r s . They served v i r t u a l l y throughout Bragg's command of the Army of Tennessee, Brent as adjutant general, and Beard as i n s p e c t o r 8 general. With Jordan gone, and Brent and Beard as h i s c h i e f a d m i n i s t r a t o r s , Bragg was f r e e t o develop the embryonic s t a f f system i n h e r i t e d from Beauregard. At t h i s work, of organiza-t i o n and a d m i n i s t r a t i o n , even Bragg's d e t r a c t o r s expected him to e x c e l . In the s p r i n g of 1863, f o r example, General Leonidas Polk recommended that Bragg become i n s p e c t o r general of the Confederacy, because of h i s " p e c u l i a r t a l e n t " f o r the d i f f i c u l t and disagreeable tasks of o r g a n i z a t i o n and d i s c i p l i n e ; and Senator W i g f a l l , who b e l i e v e d Bragg " t o t a l l y incompetent f o r independent command," nevertheless expected that under General J . E. Johnston Bragg would be an able a d m i n i s t r a t o r . These views of Bragg*s unusual a d m i n i s t r a t i v e c a p a c i t y were shared by President Davis, Secretary of War Seddon, and P r e s i d e n t i a l i 6 o 9 aide W i l l i a m Preston Johnston. With such rare consensus of 10 o p i n i o n , based on Bragg's record of success i n small commands, i t i s not s u r p r i s i n g that Bragg chose to act l a r g e l y as h i s own c h i e f of s t a f f , and t o d i r e c t p e r s o n a l l y the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of h i s army. In working w i t h the adjutant general's department Bragg was e s p e c i a l l y f o r t u n a t e i n h i s r e l a t i o n s w i t h Brent. Brent had an unusual a b i l i t y t o r e t a i n the f r i e n d s h i p and confidence of demanding and d i f f i c u l t commanders, s e r v i n g t o the s a t i s -f a c t i o n of both Beauregard and Bragg. A l s o , Brent's r e l a t i o n s 11 w i t h Bragg, a n o t o r i o u s l y s t i f f and r a t h e r f r i g h t e n i n g man, never d e t e r i o r a t e d w i t h length of s e r v i c e , as d i d Jordan's and M a c k a l l ' s . Bragg wrote of h i s adjutant general with un-usual warmth: "tfe has not only won my confidence by h i s moral deportment and f a i t h f u l i n t e l l i g e n t discharge o f . . . r e s p o n s i b l e and l a b o r i o u s d u t i e s . . . , but has endeared himself to me p e r s o n a l l y . Brent f o r h i s part admired h i s commander, and i n December 1863 b e l i e v e d t h a t the Army of Tennessee, i n l o s i n g Bragg, had l o s t a leader who combined an exact mind wi t h the "expansiveness of thought and determination of purpose so necessary to c o n s t i t u t e a g e n e r a l . T o say t h i s was t o over-r a t e Bragg, as Brent should have known from h i s own experience. Perhaps the lawyer adjutant was too much impressed by h i s general's p r o f e s s i o n a l e x p e r t i s e . But Brent's admiration d i d i n d i c a t e a readiness to accept and respect the a u t h o r i t y of h i s m i l i t a r y s u p e r i o r s . The same readiness was not always found among p r o f e s s i o n a l o f f i c e r s l i k e Jordan or M a c k a l l , 161 although I t was e s p e c i a l l y appropriate t o an a d m i n i s t r a t i v e r o l e , and introduced an element of harmony i n t o a p a r t i c u l a r l y contentious army. Throughout h i s s e r v i c e w i t h Bragg, Brent kept a d i a r y which i n d i r e c t l y revealed how h i s commander used the adjutant 14 ' general's department. The department c a r r i e d out the r e g u l a t i o n d u t i e s of i s s u i n g orders, r e c e i v i n g r e p o r t s , and keeping army records, the burden of work being heaviest i n the periods of r e - o r g a n i z a t i o n which followed major campaigns and b a t t l e s . This burden Bragg t r i e d t o d i s t r i b u t e by d i v i d i n g r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r i t . On November 2 0 , 1862, he separated the o f f i c e s of c h i e f of s t a f f and adjutant general, held j o i n t l y by Brent since October 2 , and re-arranged the depart-ment's work so that i t r e f l e c t e d Bragg's own double assignment as commander of geographical Department No. 2 and general of i t s p r i n c i p a l f i e l d army. B r i g a d i e r General J . K. Duncan became c h i e f of s t a f f , while Garner was made adjutant general 15 of the Department and Brent adjutant general of the army. This d i v i s i o n of d u t i e s was an attempt at o r g a n i z a t i o n of s t a f f work, i n the i n t e r e s t s of a d m i n i s t r a t i v e e f f i c i e n c y . Bragg a l s o wished t o see the development of a s t a f f corps, w i t h o f f i c e r s t r a i n e d and experienced i n the d u t i e s of t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e s t a f f departments. T h e o r e t i c a l l y he was opposed t o the common p r a c t i c e of a s t a f f attached to the person of t h e i r commander, and b e l i e v e d that s t a f f o f f i c e r s , other than a i d e s , should be attached to a s p e c i f i c command, not t o the general. Such a system would provide a q u a l i f i e d s t a f f i n each army, 162 w i t h s t a b i l i t y and e f f i c i e n c y coming from c o n t i n u i t y of s e r v i c e . Orders issued by Bragg to the Army of Tennessee i n January 1 8 6 3 t r i e d to implement these ideas, by r e q u i r i n g that when-ever a general was r e l i e v e d of h i s assignment h i s general s t a f f o f f i c e r s had t o report t o h i s successor, and could not 1 6 be t r a n s f e r r e d without s p e c i a l a u t h o r i t y . Given an organized d i v i s i o n of l a b o r among the adminis-t r a t i v e s t a f f and an experienced s t a b l e personnel, Bragg was prepared, again i n theory, t o delegate a u t h o r i t y i n r o u t i n e matters t o h i s c h i e f a d m i n i s t r a t i v e a s s i s t a n t s . He would thus spare h i m s e l f the " l a b o r i o u s a t t e n t i o n t o . . . d e t a i l s " which, so Preston Johnston reported i n A p r i l 1 8 6 3 , occupied so much of Bragg's time. At h i s request Confederate Adjutant and Inspector General Cooper even rel a x e d the r e g u l a t i o n r e q u i r i n g that orders issued by a s t a f f o f f i c e r must be signed by the appropriate commander. 1 7 Ranking o f f i c e r s of the army s t a f f were to be permitted to give r o u t i n e orders on t h e i r own a u t h o r i t y to both s t a f f and l i n e o f f i c e r s i n the subordinate commands. This would make f o r greater cohesion w i t h i n the s t a f f system, reaching from army headquarters through the various command l e v e l s , and would a l s o extend the r o l e of the s t a f f i n army a d m i n i s t r a t i o n . Apparently what Bragg wished to develop i n the Army of Tennessee was an organized s t a f f system i n which t r a i n e d and experienced o f f i c e r s were delegated power to c a r r y out r e g u l a -t i o n d u t i e s . These o f f i c e r s , l e d by the c h i e f of s t a f f , the adjutant general, and the i n s p e c t o r g e n e r a l , would f u n c t i o n impersonally as the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e machinery of the command. 163 For a v a r i e t y of reasons, however, Bragg's t h e o r i e s were never put f u l l y i n t o p r a c t i c e . For one t h i n g , Bragg's assignment of a d m i n i s t r a t i v e d u t i e s d i d not work out as he had planned i n November 1862. Duncan died before he could assume h i s p o s i t i o n as c h i e f of s t a f f , and the d i v i s i o n of the adjutant general's work between Garner and Brent c o l l a p s e d when General J . E. Johnston was 18 ordered on November 24 to assume command of Department No. 2. Johnston brought h i s own s t a f f w i t h him to the West, so that the d u t i e s of Bragg's adjutant general's department were r e -duced to those s p e c i f i c a l l y r e l a t e d to the Army of Tennessee. With Duncan dead, and Garner o f f t o a new assignment e a r l y i n 19 1863, Brent remained the c h i e f a d m i n i s t r a t i v e o f f i c e r of the army u n t i l Mackall's appointment i n A p r i l as c h i e f of s t a f f . The p r o j e c t e d r e - o r g a n i z a t i o n of the department was t h e r e f o r e never put i n t o e f f e c t . F u r t h e r , as has already been seen i n h i s r e l a t i o n s w i t h h i s c h i e f s of s t a f f , Bragg was not r e a l l y w i l l i n g to make any c o n s i s t e n t d e l e g a t i o n of a u t h o r i t y . A l l those who remarked on h i s a d m i n i s t r a t i v e c a p a c i t y were a l s o , by I m p l i c a t i o n , com-menting on h i s f a s c i n a t i o n w i t h the d e t a i l s of routinee This great i n t e r e s t was not one which encouraged d e l e g a t i o n , even of the crushing a d m i n i s t r a t i v e d u t i e s of a large army, and by September 1863, i n Mackall's o p i n i o n , Bragg's concern f o r d e t a i l had become so obsessive as to make him incapable of 20 e x e r c i s i n g the l a r g e r r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s of h i s command. 164 A l s o , i n s p i t e of Bragg"s wish f o r an impersonal s t a f f system, r e l a t e d to the command and not to the commander, he was unable to exclude the personal element from even h i s own s t a f f . Jordan and M a c k a l l were both h i g h l y q u a l i f i e d and experienced o f f i c e r s who f a i l e d as c h i e f s of s t a f f l a r g e l y because of d e t e r i o r a t i n g r e l a t i o n s w i t h Bragg. Brent, on the other hand, w i t h no m i l i t a r y q u a l i f i c a t i o n s and only l i m i t e d experience, r e t a i n e d Bragg's personal confidence and, w i t h i t , h i s own adjutant general-ship. In these important cases, then, p e r s o n a l i t y outweighed a d m i n i s t r a t i v e theory. Brent recorded i n h i s d i a r y how Bragg had d e l i b e r a t e l y brought h i s s t a f f i n t o the d i s p u t e , f o l l o w i n g the B a t t l e of Murfreesboro, over h i s f i t n e s s f o r command. Beginning with h i s usual comment on the weather, Brent wrote: Saturday, Jan. IO/63. The day wet and gloomy. Gen Bragg c a l l e d h i s s t a f f together t h i s morning, and read to them an a r t i c l e from the Chattanooga Rebel, d e c l a r i n g that Gen Bragg had l o s t the confidence of h i s army--that a change was necessary.... The General d e s i r e d h i s s t a f f t o t h i n k about t h i s matter, and s a i d i f he had l o s t the confidence of h i s army that he would r e t i r e . The s t a f f met and compared opin i o n s , and the c o n c l u s i o n was t h a t under e x i s t i n g circumstances the general i n t e r e s t s r e q u i r e d that Gen Bragg should ask t o be r e l i e v e d . Sunday, Jan. I I / 6 3 . A b r i g h t day. Gen Bragg d r a f t e d a l e t t e r t o h i s Corps Commanders, and D i v i s i o n Generals, a s k i n g t h e i r o p i n i o n , i n regard t o the f e e l i n g of the Army, and s t a t i n g that they had advised a retrograde movement [from the b a t t l e f i e l d at Murfreesboro].... I t was c l e a r today, from a communication made by Gen Hardee to C o l Beard, that the Generals would say there was a want of confidence. There was no question, however, on the other p o i n t . . . . The S t a f f advised the General not to send the l e t t e r ; t hat i t was i n j u d i c i o u s . He struck out those p o r t i o n s a s k i n g f o r an expression 165 of opinion as t o the confidence of the Army. The l e t t e r however, was s t i l l broad, and tended t o open up controversy, which ought t o be a v o i d e d . 2 1 By c o n s u l t i n g h i s s t a f f i n t h i s way, Bragg involved them, no matter what t h e i r answer, i n h i s own awkward dispute w i t h h i s 22 subordinate commanders, and thus encouraged p a r t i s a n s h i p among the s t a f f at a l l l e v e l s . P a r t i s a n s h i p was common, and indeed n a t u r a l , and Bragg was not s o l e l y r e s p o n s i b l e f o r i t s e x i s t e n c e . But to the degree that he encouraged i t Bragg made a l l the more d i f f i c u l t of r e a l i z a t i o n h i s theory of the s t a f f as an impersonal a d m i n i s t r a t i v e machine. Meanwhile, and i n s p i t e of the f a i l u r e to implement Bragg's a d m i n i s t r a t i v e t h e o r i e s , the adjutants ran t h e i r department to the general's evident s a t i s f a c t i o n . Brent had as h i s c h i e f a s s i s t a n t s Captains P. H. Thomson and K i n l o c h 23 Falconer. N e i t h e r Thomson, from L o u i s i a n a , nor Falconer, from M i s s i s s i p p i , had had any m i l i t a r y experience p r i o r t o the C i v i l War. Both had, however, been among the men commanded by Bragg i n 1861, and both had earned the favorable n o t i c e of t h e i r s u p e r i o r s . Bragg considered Thomson " a most capable and e f f i c i e n t o f f i c e r , " while Brent, w i t h Mackall's endorse-ment, recommended Falconer f o r promotion i n glowing terms: "In the discharge of h i s m i l i t a r y d u t i e s he has e x h i b i t e d great z e a l and i n t e l l i g e n c e . . . . He has labored hard both day and ni g h t w i t h a f a i t h f u l n e s s and i n d u s t r y not surpassed by others." Thomson l a t e r t r a n s f e r r e d to the i n s p e c t o r general's depart-ment, but he remained w i t h the Army of Tennessee t i l l November 1863. Falconer served as a s s i s t a n t adjutant general under Bragg, Johnston, and Hood, u n t i l he was severely wounded i n 166 October 1864. H i s unusually long and able s e r v i c e In the adjutant general's department provided some c o n t i n u i t y i n an a d m i n i s t r a t i v e agency f r e q u e n t l y upset by the changes of army commander. Work i n Brent's department d i d not always proceed smoothly, however, I l l n e s s exacerbated by the pressure of work was p a r t l y r e s p o n s i b l e f o r Brent's temporary absences from h i s 24 department i n the e a r l y s p r i n g and mid-summer of 1863. H i s d i a r y r e v e a l s a constant procession of orders and r e p o r t s through the adjutant general's o f f i c e , i n circumstances not always favorable t o work--Tullahoma, f o r s e v e r a l months army headquarters, was "a miserable d i r t y v i l l a g e , " and Brent's 25 o f f i c e there "a mere s t y e . " The t a s k of keeping records was presumably made e a s i e r by the existence of " f i e l d note paper," which produced a copy at the same time as the o r i g i n a l 26 note was w r i t t e n . But even w i t h t h i s help the department d i d not always succeed i n keeping i t s work up to date. F o l l o w i n g an Inspection of the Army of Tennessee i n March 1863, C o l o n e l W. P. Johnston sent a c r i t i c a l r e p o r t t o President Davis: In the o f f i c e of C o l o n e l Brent, a s s i s t a n t adjutant general, I found a large number of r e p o r t s of the b a t t l e s of Murfreesborough [ s i c ] , f u r n i s h e d by b r i g a d i e r generals and t h e i r subordinates. On i n q u i r y , C o l o n e l Brent d i d not seem aware that i t was proper and necessary, t o complete the r e c o r d , that these should be sent to t h e i r f i n a l d e p o s i t o r y — t h e Adjutant General's O f f i c e , at Richmond. Johnston reported t h i s i n e f f i c i e n c y t o Bragg, as the appro-p r i a t e l i n e commander, and to Brent's s t a f f s u p e r i o r , w i t h 27 I n s t r u c t i o n s f o r I t s c o r r e c t i o n . 167 In a d d i t i o n t o the r o u t i n e work of the adjutant general's o f f i c e Brent attended at l e a s t some of Bragg's conferences w i t h h i s corps and d i v i s i o n commanders. There i s no evidence that Brent took any part i n the d i s c u s s i o n at these meetings, but i n h i s d i a r y he commented on the making of c e r t a i n command d e c i s i o n s . At the B a t t l e of Murfreesboro, Brent noted, Bragg had withdrawn h i s own proposal f o r a Confederate a t t a c k on the enemy's l e f t i n f a v o r of a proposal from Polk t o launch the 28 a t t a c k from the Confederate l e f t . Again, s h o r t l y before the B a t t l e of Chickamauga, i n September 1863, Bragg " y i e l d e d " t o the views of h i s subordinates, Polk and Lieutenant General D a n i e l Harvey H i l l . By September, Brent considered, Bragg had become " s i c k and f e e b l e , " bowed under h i s heavy r e s p o n s i -b i l i t i e s , showing "u n c e r t a i n t y and v a c i l a t i o n [ s i c ] " i n h i s d e c i s i o n s — a n o p i n i o n which confirmed Mackall's Impression of 29 Bragg at t h i s same time. The adjutant general had observed i n h i s commander a la c k of d e c i s i o n at moments of c r i s i s . A s i m i l a r u n c e r t a i n t y c h a r a c t e r i z e d Bragg's use of the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e machinery of the Army of Tennessee, and Bragg h i m s e l f departed from the " r i g i d adherence" t o r e g u l a t i o n s that he had e a r l i e r proclaimed e s s e n t i a l to e f f i c i e n c y . Regulations d e f i n e d the handling of orders and correspondence as one of the major f u n c t i o n s of the adjutant general's department; Bragg, however, d i d on occasion issue orders d i r e c t l y , or by whatever s t a f f o f f i c e r was a v a i l a b l e , thus by-passing the r e g u l a r channels of communlca-30 t i o n . To do so was part of a commander's necessary 168 p r e r o g a t i v e , but Bragg d i d not always advise Brent of the orders given. Where t h i s happened the adjutant general was as a r e s u l t not f u l l y informed of the army's movements, l e a v i n g him i n a s t a t e of ignorance i n i m i c a l to e f f i c i e n t a d m i n i s t r a t i o n . The dangers of t h i s s i t u a t i o n were t o be amply demonstrated under Hood's command, i n the confusion of the Confederate a t t a c k at S p r i n g H i l l . Perhaps the most e x t r a o r d i n a r y instance under Bragg of by-passing the adjutant general's department occurred on 31 September 19, 1863,. According t o Brent, Bragg Issued a v e r b a l order t o Polk, t o a t t a c k at d a y l i g h t on the 2 0 t h , the second day of the B a t t l e of Chickamauga; t h i s order d i d not pass through the adjutant general's o f f i c e . V e r b a l orders were r i s k y at best, being more l i a b l e to non-delivery or mis-i n t e r p r e t a t i o n than w r i t t e n ones; moreover, Polk had an unenviable record of f a i l u r e t o c a r r y out important i n s t r u c -t i o n s , at C o r i n t h i n A p r i l 1862, on the Kentucky campaign i n the f a l l , and again on the Chickamauga campaign, only s i x days 32 before the b a t t l e . For whatever reason, the a t t a c k was not launched as planned, and Polk was subsequently r e l i e v e d of 33 h i s corps command. P o s s i b l y the delay i n Polk's a t t a c k would have occurred anyway, even had Bragg given the order i n w r i t t e n form, through the r e g u l a t i o n , channel of the adjutant general's department. But Bragg's f a i l u r e , on September 19, to employ the most e f f i c i e n t means of communication, w i t h a d i f f i c u l t subordinate, at an important stage i n the b a t t l e , showed a waning c o n t r o l over the army. I6Q Thus Bragg d i d not n e c e s s a r i l y take advantage i n p r a c t i c e of t h a t s t a f f system which he advocated i n theory. Delegation of a u t h o r i t y was e r r a t i c , p e r s o n a l i t i e s d i d play a r o l e i n s t a f f work, and the o r g a n i z a t i o n and f u n c t i o n s of the adjutant general's department were never systematized, hut always subject t o upset and change. These d i f f i c u l t i e s , so n o t i c e a b l e i n the adjutant general's department, were however s i g n i f i -c a n t l y absent from the department of the i n s p e c t o r general. Lieutenant C o l o n e l Beard l o s t l i t t l e time, once the Kentucky campaign was over, i n implementing W i l l i a m Preston Johnston's recommendations of J u l y 1862, that the i n s p e c t o r general's department needed more extensive o r g a n i z a t i o n and 34 f u l l e r i n s t r u c t i o n i n i t s d u t i e s . In a lengthy d i r e c t i v e , probably issued i n l a t e November, Beard defined p r e c i s e l y the o r g a n i z a t i o n of h i s department: When p r a c t i c a b l e the Inspector of Brigade w i l l report d a l l y t o the Inspector of D i v i s i o n , and the l a t t e r t o the Inspector of the Wing—now Corps--who w i l l r e c e i v e from the Army Inspector, and tra n s m i t [ , ] a l l s p e c i a l orders f o r the day.... D i v i s i o n Inspectors w i l l be held r e s p o n s i b l e that the d u t i e s of the Brigade Inspectors are f a i t h f u l l y performed, and w i l l r eport t o the next higher Inspector a l l who may be neg l i g e n t or i n e f f i c i e n t . 35 The s t r u c t u r e of the i n s p e c t o r general's department was thus more c l e a r l y d e f i n e d than i t had been i n Brent's order of June 1862. The department appeared as a d i s t i n c t a d m i n i s t r a t i v e u n i t , w i t h i t s own h i e r a r c h y , i t s own assignment of d u t i e s , and i t s own supervisory system. The in s p e c t o r s were part of a s t a f f corps, and Beard made no mention whatever of t h e i r 170 r e l a t i o n s h i p or r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s towards the commander of the l i n e u n i t to which they were attached. This was a p o t e n t i a l l y s e r i o u s omission. The more independent the i n s p e c t o r general's department became, the more I t assumed, i n the eyes of the subordinate l i n e commanders, the c h a r a c t e r of a presumptuous agency of informers, and the more d i f f i c u l t became the f u l -f i l l m e n t of i t s r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s . Beard's d i r e c t i v e not only o u t l i n e d the s t r u c t u r e of h i s 3 6 department, but a l s o d e t a i l e d i t s f u n c t i o n s . When the army was i n motion the Inspector general's department maintained the p r e s c r i b e d order of march, supervised the quartermaster, commissary, ordnance, and medical s e r v i c e s , returned s t r a g g l e r s to t h e i r u n i t s , checked and where necessary punished depreda-t i o n s against c i v i l i a n s , and d i r e c t e d the encampment of the army. S i m i l a r d u t i e s of s u p e r v i s i o n were c a r r i e d out on the b a t t l e f i e l d , where the a s s i s t a n t i n s p e c t o r s general of each command were r e s p o n s i b l e f o r keeping the order of b a t t l e i n that command, checking the ammunition supply, e n f o r c i n g orders, p r o v i d i n g f o r the care of the wounded, and r e c e i v i n g p r i s o n e r s . Beard thus placed great emphasis on the campaign d u t i e s of h i s department, but he a l s o i n s t r u c t e d h i s i n s p e c t o r s i n such r o u t i n e matters as bi-monthly r e p o r t s . Inspections were to be made at the brigade l e v e l , of a l l matters p e r t a i n i n g to the brigade's e f f i c i e n c y - - i t s o f f i c e r s and men, camp l o c a t i o n , s a n i t a r y c o n d i t i o n , d i s c i p l i n e , m i l i t a r y i n s t r u c t i o n , arms and ammunition, c l o t h i n g and other equipment, t r a n s p o r t a t i o n , food supply, and s t a f f work; and the f i n d i n g s were to be reported 171 f i r s t t o the d i v i s i o n i n s p e c t o r , and then through the corps t o the i n s p e c t o r general of the army. Inspectors were f u r t h e r a u t h o r i z e d t o conduct i n q u i r i e s i n t o the l o s s or s p o i l i n g of s t o r e s , i n t o f i n a n c i a l accounts, or other matters where i n e f f i c i e n c y was suspected, and t o a f f i x blame on the o f f i c e r s r e s p o n s i b l e . In these c a r e f u l I n s t r u c t i o n s Beard was d e s c r i b i n g the r e g u l a t i o n f u n c t i o n s of the i n s p e c t o r general's department f o r the b e n e f i t of h i s subordinates. In no way d i d he exceed what the r e g u l a t i o n s permitted and r e q u i r e d . What was new was the r i g i d departmental s t r u c t u r e w i t h i t s h i e r a r c h y of i n s p e c t o r s and r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s . Beard had created i n a f i e l d army the k i n d of i n s p e c t i o n corps which Davis would not permit i n the Richmond War Department. The army i n s p e c t o r s included only two of the f i v e o r i g i n a l l y appointed by Bragg i n J u l y 1862: Beard h i m s e l f , and Captain, l a t e r Lieutenant C o l o n e l , J . P. Jones. I f the department was t o operate as Beard o u t l i n e d i n November, then new appointments had t o be made. Lieutenant Colonel Andrew J . Hays, Major W i l l i a m C l a r e , and Captain James Cooper j o i n e d Beard i n the winter of ' 6 2 - ' 6 3 , and a d d i t i o n a l o f f i c e r s assigned i n the summer and f a l l of '63 were Major P o l l o c k B. Lee, Captain P. H. Thomson, Major Gustavus Adolphus Henry, J r . , and Captain W. A. Reid. There i s no evidence that any of these men had had m i l i t a r y experience before the C i v i l War, although 37 Henry had spent one year at West P o i n t . But together they c o n s t i t u t e d a s i z a b l e department, g i v i n g Beard i n h i s d i r e c t i o n 172 of the corps, d i v i s i o n , and brigade i n s p e c t o r s considerably more than the two a s s i s t a n t s l a t e r recommended by Bragg as 38 I d e a l . Five of t h e i r number, C l a r e , Cooper, Lee, Henry, and Reid, served as i n s p e c t o r s i n the Army of Tennessee through the successive commands of Bragg, Johnston, and Hood, and were f i n a l l y paroled w i t h Johnston at B e n t o n v i l l e , North C a r o l i n a , 39 i n A p r i l 1865. Under Beard's i n s p e c t o r g e n e r a l s h i p , there-f o r e , the o f f i c e r s were appointed who became the core of the department throughout i t s e x i s t e n c e . With these a s s i s t a n t s Beard put i n t o p r a c t i c e the theory of departmental o r g a n i z a t i o n by which he hoped t o ensure the e f f i c i e n t performance of h i s d u t i e s as i n s p e c t o r general. The records kept by h i s department, of correspondence, r e p o r t s , and endorsements, i n d i c a t e the extent t o which he was success-40 f u l . According t o the records f o r the period May 3-September 5 , 1863, Beard as i n s p e c t o r general read and endorsed v i r t u a l l y a l l m a t e r i a l coming i n t o h i s department. Routine matters f o r h i s c o n s i d e r a t i o n included i n s p e c t i o n r e p o r t s , p r i m a r i l y of the quartermaster and commissary departments; c i v i l i a n claims of depredations aga i n s t t h e i r property; problems of i n e f f i c i e n c y i n c e r t a i n commands; and the p r o v i s i o n of necessary route r e p o r t s . From h i s work Beard could show that the s t a f f departments l e a s t competent i n t h e i r d u t i e s were those of the quartermaster and the commissary, that the c a v a l r y was most f r e q u e n t l y blamed f o r the s e i z u r e or d e s t r u c t i o n of c i v i l i a n p roperty, and that the command found most l a c k i n g i n 173 4 l o r g a n i z a t i o n and d i s c i p l i n e was Polk's corps. The i n s p e c t o r general could t h e r e f o r e detect weaknesses i n the o r g a n i z a t i o n , a d m i n i s t r a t i o n , and d i s c i p l i n e of the Army of Tennessee. In d e a l i n g w i t h these weaknesses Beard acted on h i s own a u t h o r i t y . In the f o u r months from May to September, 1863, there were only three cases of r e f e r r a l t o a higher a u t h o r i t y , twice to Bragg, concerning c i v i l i a n complaints, and once to M a c k a l l . On a l l other occasions Beard was apparently competent t o handle matters h i m s e l f , and there i s no s i g n of i n t e r v e n t i o n by Bragg. Beard worked d i r e c t l y with h i s department at a l l command l e v e l s , g i v i n g orders through a descending h i e r a r c h y of army, corps, d i v i s i o n , and brigade i n s p e c t o r s , and r e c e i v i n g r e p o r t s i n the ascending l i n e ; he a l s o communicated w i t h other s t a f f departments and w i t h subordinate l i n e commanders, r e q u i r i n g c o r r e c t i o n of the d e f i c i e n c i e s reported by the i n s p e c t o r s . In a l l t h i s Beard assumed and e x e r c i s e d c o n s i d e r -able a u t h o r i t y . He was the d i r e c t o r of an i n s p e c t i o n system extending throughout the army, and i n r e l a t i o n t o the l i n e commanders he was, i n the simple but graphic phrase of Captain 42 Buck, "a sort of overseer of the army." While f u l f i l l i n g t h i s r e s p o n s i b l e r o l e , Beard had a l s o t o maintain constant s u p e r v i s i o n over h i s own department. In s p i t e of h i s c a r e f u l i n s t r u c t i o n s , r e p o r t s turned i n by j u n i o r i n s p e c t o r s were not always s u f f i c i e n t l y d e t a i l e d , and had to be returned f o r f u r t h e r i n v e s t i g a t i o n and s a t i s f a c t o r y com-p l e t i o n . Captain Samuel L. B l a c k , of Hardee's corps, was only 43 one offender i n t h i s way. s U C h inadequate r e p o r t s delayed 174 the work of the department, and postponed attempts to c o r r e c t i n e f f i c i e n c y . Beard a l s o found i t necessary t o a s s e r t h i s a u t h o r i t y w i t h i n the department. When Captain John Vaux, of Cheatham's d i v i s i o n , questioned orders issued t o him by Beard through Polk's corps i n s p e c t o r , Lieutenant Colonel T. F. S e v i e r , Beard ordered S e v i e r t o reprimand Vaux, who was obviously "under a misapprehension of h i s d u t i e s . " The a u t h o r i t y of the army i n s p e c t o r general over h i s subordinates was made qui t e e x p l i c i t i n Beard's order: The l e t t e r s dated from t h i s o f f i c e the 7 t h and 11th [August, 1863] contained no 1 suggestions', they were orders from the Chief t o the subordinates of the Dep [artmenlt and as such must be obeyed. You [ S e v i e r ] w i l l see that the i n s t r u c t i o n s contained i n these l e t t e r s are c a r r i e d out and that copies of them are f u r n i s h e d to Brigade I n s p e c t o r s — o r report the delinquent o f f i c e r t o t h i s o f f i c e . . . . You w i l l r eport your a c t i o n to t h i s o f f i c e as e a r l y as p r a c t i c a b l e . 44 Beard's respect f o r m i l i t a r y h i e r a r c h y , h i s i n s i s t e n c e on primacy w i t h i n h i s own department, and h i s concern f o r the p r e c i s e f u l f i l l m e n t of i t s d u t i e s may have earned him Bragg's confidence to an unusual degree. C e r t a i n l y the evidence i n d i c a t e s t h a t Beard ran the i n s p e c t o r general's department w i t h an independence rare In the s t a f f work of Bragg's Army of Tennessee. Beard's temporary absence i n Richmond, to make 45 formal p r e s e n t a t i o n of the v i c t o r i o u s news of Chickamauga, demonstrated the s o l i d i t y of h i s work. Under Lieutenant C o l o n e l Jones the department continued to operate according t o 46 the system set up by Beard, and s u b s t a n t i a l l y the same system was i n h e r i t e d by Johnston's i n s p e c t o r general i n December 1863. In terms of s t r u c t u r e , o p e r a t i o n , and personnel, there-f o r e , the i n s p e c t o r general's department of the Army of 175 47 Tennessee was l a r g e l y Beard's c r e a t i o n . Thus Brent as adjutant general and Beard as i n s p e c t o r general d i r e c t e d the r o u t i n e a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of Bragg's army, although w i t h v a r y i n g degrees of independence and v a r y i n g c o n t r o l over t h e i r subordinates. In that army they were res p o n s i b l e only t o Bragg, as t h e i r l i n e commander, and, on occasion, t o M a c k a l l as c h i e f of s t a f f . But Brent and Beard were a l s o part of the wider s t a f f system of Department No. 2, and as such were subject t o the s t a f f of the Department's commander, General Johnston. Therefore, i n s t a f f theory at l e a s t , Johnston's adjutant general and h i s i n s p e c t o r general might intervene i n the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of the Army of Tennessee, superseding the a u t h o r i t y of Brent and Beard. Johnston had assumed command of Department No. 2 on 48 December 4 , 1862. His p o s i t i o n gave him supervisory powers over the geographical Departments of Tennessee, East Tenessee, and M i s s i s s i p p i , but not, i n Johnston's o p i n i o n , the command of any of the three armies of Bragg, E. K i r b y Smith, and John C. Pemberton. Johnston was never happy with t h i s s i t u a t i o n . I t c o n t r a d i c t e d the advice he had given Davis i n l 8 6 l , that the o r g a n i z a t i o n of the Confederate armies should be t a c t i c a l r a t h e r than geographical, so that the commander would be f r e e of the r o u t i n e "drudgery" of a d m i n i s t e r i n g a department, and 49 able t o concentrate on "grand operations." Command of Department No. 2 imposed on Johnston p r e c i s e l y those adminis-t r a t i v e d u t i e s which he b e l i e v e d detracted from h i s s t r a t e g i c r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s . Two months a f t e r t a k i n g up h i s assignment 176 he described h i s p o s i t i o n t o h i s f r i e n d W i g f a l l : I have been very busy f o r some time l o o k i n g f o r some-t h i n g to d o — t o l i t t l e purpose, but w i t h much t r a v e l l i n g . Each of the three departments assigned to me has i t s general--and as there i s no room f o r two, and I can't remove him appointed by the P r e s t i d e n H f o r the p r e c i s e p l a c e , nothing but the part of i n s p e c t o r general i s l e f t t o me. I wrote t o the President on the s u b j e c t — t r y i n g t o e x p l a i n t h a t I am v i r t u a l l y l a i d upon the s h e l f w i t h the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of command—but he has not r e p l i e d . . . . I should much p r e f e r the command of f i f t y men. 50 The i n s p e c t o r general's work to which Johnston r e f e r r e d included r e p o r t i n g t o Richmond on the c o n d i t i o n of the Western Department, d i s t r i b u t i n g i n t e l l i g e n c e i n f o r m a t i o n among the generals of i t s armies, i n v e s t i g a t i n g the a f f a i r s of each command—especially the Army of Tennessee—and trying-.to 51 provide a more e f f i c i e n t commissary s e r v i c e i n the West. This l i m i t e d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , on Johnston's p a r t , of h i s r o l e as commander of Department No. 2, had i t s e f f e c t on the work done by h i s s t a f f . Johnston's s t a f f i n 1 8 6 3 included the three men who, w i t h M a c k a l l , became i n 1 8 6 4 the c h i e f a d m i n i s t r a t o r s of Johnston's Army of Tennessee. C o l o n e l Benjamin Stoddert E w e l l was adjutant g e n e r a l , a s s i s t e d by Major A r t h u r Pendleton Mason, 52 and Lieutenant C o l o n e l Edwin James Harvie i n s p e c t o r general. A l l three were V i r g i n i a n s , of d i s t i n g u i s h e d s o c i a l background. E w e l l , f i f t y - t h r e e years o l d , a West Point graduate, had resigned as president of the College of W i l l i a m and Mary to j o i n the Confederate States Army; Mason, twenty-eight, had attended the U n i v e r s i t y of V i r g i n i a , read law, and then become 177 a p l a n t e r ; Harvie, a l s o twenty-eight, graduate of the V i r g i n i a M i l i t a r y I n s t i t u t e , had been a p r o f e s s i o n a l s o l d i e r i n the U. S. Army. The impression made by these o f f i c e r s on the army i n 1863 would c o n d i t i o n t h e i r e f f e c t i v e n e s s the f o l l o w i n g year. The O f f i c i a l Records gives l i t t l e s i g n of i n t e r v e n t i o n by Johnston's s t a f f i n the work of Brent or Beard. From Western Department headquarters, f i r s t at Chattanooga, Tennessee, and then at Jackson, M i s s i s s i p p i , E w e l l functioned l a r g e l y as a communications o f f i c e r f o r the Department commanders. There i s no evidence that he t r i e d i n any way t o d i r e c t Brent's adjutant general's department, although Colonel W. P. Johnston d i d i n s t r u c t E w e l l to c o r r e c t Brent's f a i l u r e to send r e p o r t s on t o Richmond, and Bragg fulminated over the "profound 53 ignorance" of one of Ewell's a s s i s t a n t s . Harvie's work concerned food s u p p l i e s and t r a n s p o r t a t i o n , f o r which the Department operated as a u n i t , so that i n s p e c t i o n powers wider 54 than those of Beard's army department were v a l u a b l e . Thus Johnston's reluctance t o i n t e r f e r e w i t h Bragg's army command was echoed by the l i m i t e d use of t h e i r s t a f f powers made by E w e l l and Harvie. I f Johnston complained that he had l i t t l e to do, the j u n i o r o f f i c e r s at h i s headquarters had even l e s s . At l e a s t one of them was d i s s a t i s f i e d : Our l i f e . . . w a s not at a l l i n d u s t r i o u s — t h e r e being nothing t o do. Genl. J Johnston] managed h i s Important business f o r h i m s e l f , o c c a s i o n a l l y c a l l i n g on Mason t o w r i t e a l e t t e r or [Lieutenant J . B a r r o l l ] Washington to decipher a telegram. [Lieutenant C o l o n e l T. B.] Lamar attended to the r o u t i n e papers, which were.but few as most of them were stopped at the Dept. Hd. Qrs. (Bragg's 178 or Pemberton 1s). For the r e s t of us, there was nothing t o do... I had...begun to get h e a r t i l y t i r e d of the absolute i d l e n e s s . . . r e a d a good d e a l of Moliere 5 5 E w e l l had already w r i t t e n from Chattanooga that he d i d not know what Johnston could do w i t h a l l h i s a s s i s t a n t a d j u t a n t s , 56 as he had at l e a s t s i x - - a n excessive number. The adjutant general h i m s e l f d i d not seem o v e r l y pressed with business. When h i s o f f i c e was moved from Chattanooga to Jackson, i t t r a v e l l e d , c l e r k s and a l l , i n a box car of which h a l f was taken up by Ew e l l ' s m i l i t a r y impedimenta—enough t o j u s t i f y a r e l a t i v e ' s o p i n i o n that E w e l l was "quite c a r e f u l enough of 5 7 h i s own comf o r t — a n d r a t h e r slow than prompt." The general impression i s one of a s t a f f overloaded w i t h o f f i c e r s , but not overburdened w i t h work, c e r t a i n l y e x e r c i s i n g no close s u p e r v i s i o n over the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of Bragg*s army. Perhaps i t was t h i s r e l a t i v e i n a c t i v i t y which caused Hardee to confide to the sympathetic Polk: "Johnston i s wanting i n a l l those p a r t i c u l a r s i n which you feared he was d e f i c i e n t , and i n a d d i t i o n has a very i n e f f i c i e n t s t a f f . " - ' 8 But whether the reason was un w i l l i n g n e s s to i n t e r f e r e w i t h Bragg's s t a f f system, or the i n e f f i c i e n c y charged by Hardee, Johnston's a d m i n i s t r a t i v e o f f i c e r s accepted the a u t h o r i t y of Brent and Beard over t h e i r own departments. The marked development i n the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e system of the Army of Tennessee t h e r e f o r e occurred under Bragg's command, as f r i e n d s and foes had a l i k e expected. E f f o r t s were made t o organize the work of the adjutant general and the 179 i n s p e c t o r general, t o appoint competent o f f i c e r s who would serve t h e i r s t a f f departments r a t h e r than t h e i r commanders, and to create a sense of s t a f f h i e r a r c h y and d i s c i p l i n e reaching from the highest command l e v e l t o the lowest. The r e s u l t i n g s t a f f s t r u c t u r e had as i t s f u n c t i o n the e f f i c i e n t performance of the r o u t i n e a d m i n i s t r a t i v e d u t i e s r e q u i r e d by r e g u l a t i o n s or assigned through delegated powers. In a l l these areas of s t a f f development, i t i s s i g n i f i c a n t that the i n s p e c t o r general's department was more s u c c e s s f u l than the adjutant g e n e r a l 1 s>' V a r i o u s f a c t o r s c o n t r i b u t e d to t h i s d i f f e r e n t r e s u l t . According t o the evidence a v a i l a b l e , Beard, w i t h an unusually p r e c i s e and o r d e r l y mind, was more a u t h o r i t a t i v e than Brent; the work of i n s p e c t i o n was probably more s u s c e p t i b l e t o o r g a n i z a t i o n than that of the department of orders; and the i n s p e c t o r general's department was c e r t a i n l y l e s s subject t o the pressures of immediacy which a f f e c t e d the adjutant general's department on a c t i v e campaign, or i n the heat of b a t t l e . The d e c i s i v e f a c t o r i n the r e l a t i v e performance of the two a d m i n i s t r a t i v e departments was, however, not an i n t e r n a l one, but l a y i n s t e a d i n t h e i r r e l a t i o n s w i t h the commanding general. Although h i s " p e c u l i a r t a l e n t " f o r a d m i n i s t r a t i o n had manifested i t s e l f i n small commands, where he could be both l i n e o f f i c e r and s t a f f o f f i c e r , Bragg attempted the same dual 59 r o l e i n a major army command of c l o s e on 50,000 men. As the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e machinery of t h i s command, through which the 180 army responded t o the general's w i l l , the adjutant general's department stood i n a c l o s e r r e l a t i o n s h i p t o Bragg than d i d the i n s p e c t o r general's department, and t h e r e f o r e was much more subject t o h i s i n t e r v e n t i o n . Such i n t e r v e n t i o n , whether j u s t i -f i e d by Bragg's rank or by; m i l i t a r y c r i s i s , undermined the o r g a n i z a t i o n of the department and made the f u l f i l l m e n t of i t s d u t i e s l e s s r e l i a b l e . By c o n t r a s t , the i n s p e c t o r general's department went about i t s work In r e l a t i v e independence and w i t h a g r e a t e r degree of e f f i c i e n c y . F o r t u n a t e l y , under Beard's d i r e c t i o n the p o t e n t i a l d i s p u t e s between i n s p e c t o r s and inspected d i d not m a t e r i a l i z e i n any serious form, and t h e r e f o r e d i d not at that time r e s t r i c t the department's independence. I t i s b i t t e r l y i r o n i c , i n view of Bragg's " p e c u l i a r t a l e n t , " t h a t the adjutant general's department i n which he d i d intervene should have been l e s s s u c c e s s f u l than the i n s p e c t o r general's department i n which he d i d not. That t h i s happened was l e s s an a d m i n i s t r a t i v e f a i l u r e on Bragg's p a r t , than an i n a b i l i t y to e s t a b l i s h a proper p r i o r i t y i n h i s command r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s . In s p i t e of a l l d i f f i c u l t i e s and l i m i t a t i o n s , however, i n s o f a r as the Army of Tennessee ever had an e f f e c t i v e a d m i n i s t r a t i v e system i t was the one developed under Bragg's command, and i n h e r i t e d by h i s successors. 181 Notes "'"P. G. T. Beauregard t o Braxton Bragg, Mobile [ Alabama], June 22, 1862, quoted i n A l f r e d Roman, M i l i t a r y Operations of  General Beauregard (2 v o l s . ; New York: Harper and Brot h e r s , 1883), I , 4 0 8 ; G. T. Buenavista [Beauregard] t o Thomas Jordan, Bladon, Alabama, J u l y 12, 1862, P i e r r e Gustave Toutant Beauregard Papers, Duke U n i v e r s i t y , Durham:; North C a r o l i n a . 2 War of the R e b e l l i o n : A Compilation of the O f f i c i a l  Records of the Union and Confederate Armies (128 v o l s . ; Washington: Government P r i n t i n g O f f i c e , 1880-1901) , S e r i e s I , XVII, p t . 2, 648 ( h e r e a f t e r c i t e d as OR, w i t h a l l references to S e r i e s I , unless otherwise i n d i c a t e d ) . ^Brent was t e m p o r a r i l y absent i n Richmond, and so rec e i v e d no appointment. He returned t o the Western Department l a t e i n J u l y , and Bragg assigned him f i r s t to the judge advocate's o f f i c e , and then to the i n s p e c t o r general's depart-ment. OR, X, pt. 2, 602; G. W. Brent t o Samuel Cooper, Richmond [ V i r g i n i a ] , June 3 0 , 1862, George W i l l i a m Brent, Compiled S e r v i c e Records of Confederate General and S t a f f O f f i c e r s and Nonregimental E n l i s t e d Men, War Department C o l l e c t i o n of Confederate Records, Record Group 109, N a t i o n a l A r c h i v e s , Washington, D. C. ( c i t e d h e r e a f t e r as CSR); OR, XVI I , p t . 2, 658; XVI, pt. 2, 758. 4 l b i d . , X VII, p t . 2, 640-641, 6 7 9 - 6 8 0 . 182 5 C i r c u l a r , Chattanooga, Tennessee, August 12, 1862, Bragg-Beauregard Headquarters Book, C i v i l War Papers, L o u i s i a n a H i s t o r i c a l A s s o c i a t i o n C o l l e c t i o n , Howard-Tilton Memorial L i b r a r y , Tulane U n i v e r s i t y , New Orleans ( c i t e d h e r e a f t e r as Headquarters Book). General Orders, No. 119, Chattanooga, Tennessee, August 2 0 , 1862, Headquarters Book. 70R, XVI, p t . 2, 780; XIV, 609. ^George G. Garner, George W i l l i a m Brent, W i l l i a m K. Beard, James E. Slaughter, CSR; OR, XVI, pt. 1, l l 6 0 ; pt. 2, 7 9 0 - 7 9 1 , 8 8 9 . By using F r a n c i s B. Heitman, H i s t o r i c a l  R e g i s t e r and D i c t i o n a r y of the U. S. Army... 1789-1903 (2 v o l s . ; Urbana: U n i v e r s i t y of I l l i n o i s Press, 1965) i t i s p o s s i b l e t o ob t a i n negative evidence, that a c e r t a i n Confederate s t a f f o f f i c e r d i d not serve i n the o l d U. S. Army. 90R, X X I I I , p t . 2, 729; L. T. W i g f a l l t o C. C. Clay, Orange [Virginia] , June 12, 1863, Clement Claiborne Clay Papers, Duke U n i v e r s i t y ; W i g f a l l t o J . E. Johnston, Richmond [ V i r g i n i a ] , February 2 8 , 1863, Joseph Eggleston Johnston Papers, Henry E. Huntington L i b r a r y , San Marino, C a l i f o r n i a ; OR, V I I , 258; X X I I I , p t . 2, 627, 659, 758. "^Grady McWhiney, Braxton Bragg and Confederate Defeat: Volume I , F i e l d Command (New York: Columbia U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1969), pp. 7 5 - 7 6 , 178-184. 183 1 1 F o r an a n a l y s i s of Bragg, see i b i d . , pp. 388-391, and passim. 12 Braxton Bragg t o S. Cooper, [Tullahoma, Tennessee] May 8, 1863, Brent, CSR. 1 3 B r e n t t o Bragg, Dalton, Georgia, December 10, 1863, Braxton Bragg Papers, W i l l i a m P. Palmer C o l l e c t i o n , Western Reserve H i s t o r i c a l S o c i e t y , Cleveland, Ohio. 14 George W i l l i a m Brent D i a r y , October 1, 1862-December 2, 1863, i b i d . 1 5 B r e n t D i a r y , November 20, 1862. See a l s o OR, XX, pt. 2, 411. l 6 I b i d . , S e r i e s IV, I I I , 316; S e r i e s I , XX, pt. 2, 490. 1 T I b i d . , X X I I I , p t . 2, 758, 736-737. 18 I b i d . , XX, p t . 2, 423-424. Brent D i a r y , December 9, 1862, records Johnston's assumption of h i s command. 1 9 G a r n e r , CSR. on W. W. M a c k a l l to Mrs. M a c k a l l , [ M i s s i o n a r y Ridge, Tennessee ] October 3, 1863, W i l l i a m Whann Ma c k a l l Papers, Southern H i s t o r i c a l C o l l e c t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y of North C a r o l i n a , Chapel H i l l . 21 Brent D i a r y , January 10, January 11, 1863. For a d i s c u s s i o n of t h i s d i s p u t e , see McWhiney, Braxton Bragg, pp. 374-389. 184 23 For Information about these o f f i c e r s see P. H. Thomson, CSR, e s p e c i a l l y Bragg to Cooper, Tullahoma [Tennessee], February 6, 1863, and K i n l o c h Falconer, I b i d . , e s p e c i a l l y Brent t o M a c k a l l , Chattanooga [Tennessee ], August 23 , 1863, and Mackall's endorsement thereon. A l s o OR, XXXIX, pt. 1, 807. B r o m f i e l d L. R i d l e y , B a t t l e s and Sketches of the Army  of Tennessee, 1861-1865 (Mexico, M i s s o u r i : M i s s o u r i P r i n t i n g and P u b l i s h i n g Company, 1906), p. 553, records that a f t e r the war Falconer became Secretary of State f o r M i s s i s s i p p i . 24 Bragg to Cooper, [Tullahoma, Tennessee] May 8 , 1863, Brent, CSR. 25 Brent D i a r y , November 14, 1862, and passim. 2 6 Charles M a r s h a l l , An Aide-de-camp of Lee, S i r F r e d e r i c k Maurice, ed. (Boston: L i t t l e , Brown and Company, 1927), p. 270. The terms of surrender at Appomattox were w r i t t e n on f i e l d note paper. 2 70R, X X I I I , pt. 2 , 758. Brent D i a r y , December 30, 1862. The most recent d i s c u s s i o n of the b a t t l e of Murfreesboro i s t o be found i n McWhiney, Braxton Bragg, pp. 348-373-29 Brent D i a r y , September 7, September 15, September 17, 1863. For the Chickamauga campaign see Stanley F. Horn, The Army of Tennessee (Norman, Oklahoma: U n i v e r s i t y of Okla-homa Press, 1953), PP. 239-274. A l s o M a c k a l l t o Mrs. M a c k a l l , M i s s i o n Ridge [Tennessee], September 29 , 1863, Mackall Papers. 185 J Brent D i a r y , September 25, 1863; OR, XXX, pt. 4, 523-757. 31 Brent D i a r y , September 25, 1863. Qp J McWhiney, Braxton Bragg, pp. 301-312; Brent D i a r y , September 12, September 13, 1863. •' 3 3OR, XXX, pt. 2, 55; Brent D i a r y , September 29, October 25, 1863. For a d i s c u s s i o n of Polk's f a i l u r e , see Horn, The Army of Tennessee, pp. 260-261; Joseph H. Parks, General Leonldas Polk, C. S. A.: The F i g h t i n g Bishop (Baton Rouge: L o u i s i a n a State U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1962), pp. 333-337; Hal B r i d g e s , Lee's Maverick General: D a n i e l Harvey H i l l (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1 9 6 l ) , pp. 214-217, 227-230. 3 40R, X, pt. 1, 781. 3^W. K. Beard, "Duties of Inspectors," [Tullahoma, Tennessee, November] 1862, Confederate States Army C o l l e c t i o n , L o u i s i a n a State U n i v e r s i t y , Baton Rouge. 3 6 I b i d . 3 7 W i l l i a m C l a r e , James Cooper, Andrew J . Hays, G. A. Henry, J r . , J . P. Jones, P o l l o c k B. Lee, W. A. Reid, P. H. Thomson, CSR; G. A. Henry, Sr., to J e f f e r s o n Davis, N a s h v i l l e [Tennessee], May 17, l 8 6 l , Gustavus Adolphus Henry Papers, Southern H i s t o r i c a l C o l l e c t i o n . 3 8 OR, S e r i e s IV, I I I , 316. 186 3 9 C l a r e , Cooper, Henry, Lee, Reid, CSR. The o r i g i n a l parole order i s i n the Joseph Eggleston Johnston Papers. 40 Endorsements on L e t t e r s Received, Army of Tennessee, 1 8 6 3 - 1 8 6 4 ; [ L e t t e r s Sent, 1 8 6 4 ; ] and S p e c i a l Orders, 1 8 6 4 , Chapter I I , Volume 1 5 i , War Department C o l l e c t i o n of Confederate Records ( h e r e a f t e r c i t e d as Ch. I I , V o l . 15?)• 4 l I b i d . , 50-80. 42 I r v i n g Ashby Buck t o Dear L u c i e , Tullahoma [Tennessee], February 1 9 , 1 8 6 3 , I r v i n g Ashby Buck Papers, Southern H i s t o r i c a l C o l l e c t i o n . 4 3 Endorsements of May 6 , May 9 , August 1 0 , 1 8 6 3 , Ch. I I , V o l . 1 5 i , 5 3 , 5 6 , 7 1 . 44 Beard t o S e v i e r , Chattanooga, Tennessee, August 2 1 , 1 8 6 3 , i b i d . , 7 9 . 4 5 S p e c i a l Orders, Missionary Ridge [Tennessee], September 2 5 , 1 8 6 3 , Beard, CSR. 4 6 C h . I I , V o l . 1 5 ? , 8 1 - 8 9 . 47 'Beard even stayed on under h i s successor, t i l l the summer of 1 8 6 4 , when he was t r a n s f e r r e d at h i s own request to i n s p e c t i o n d u t i e s i n F l o r i d a . Beard t o S. Cooper, Dalton, Georgia, A p r i l 1 8 , 1 8 6 4 , and endorsements thereon, Beard, CSR. 4 8 0 R , XX, p t . 2 , 4 3 9 . 187 49 Johnston t o Davis, Manassas [ V i r g i n i a ] , September 3, l 8 6 l , J e f f e r s o n Davis Papers, Duke U n i v e r s i t y ; Frank E. Vandiver, Rebel Brass: The Confederate Command System (Baton Rouge: Louis i a n a State U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1956), pp. 5 8 - 5 9 , p o i n t s out tha t Johnston i n s i s t e d on a l i m i t e d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of h i s powers as commander of Department No. 2, even i n the face of assurances from Secretary of War Seddon that the general's a u t h o r i t y was much more extensive. 50 Johnston t o L. T. W i g f a l l , K n o x v i l l e , Tennessee, February 14, 1863, Louis Trezevant W i g f a l l Papers, L i b r a r y of Congress, Washington, D. C. 51 See, f o r example, OR, X X I I I , p t . 2, 613-826; Joseph E. Johnston, N a r r a t i v e of M i l i t a r y Operations (New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1874), pp. 147-173; G i l b e r t E. Govan and James W. Li v i n g o o d , A D i f f e r e n t V a l o r : The Story of  General Joseph E. Johnston ( I n d i a n a p o l i s and New York: The B o b b s - M e r r i l l Company, Inc., 1956), pp. 162-197. 52 For b i o g r a p h i c a l i n f o r m a t i o n on these men, see S. Bassett French B i o g r a p h i c a l Sketches, V i r g i n i a State L i b r a r y , Richmond; a l s o , f o r E w e l l , D i c t i o n a r y of American Biography, A l l e n Johnson and Dumas Malone, eds. (20 v o l s . ; New York: Charles S c r i b n e r ' s Sons, 1928-1936), V I , 2 2 8 - 2 2 9 . 5 30R, X X I I I , p t . 2, 613-826, 758, 706-707. 5 4 I b i d . , 7 6 4 - 7 6 5 , 769-770. 188 SS II George Campbell Brown, M i l i t a r y Reminiscences from 1861-1865," Manuscript D i v i s i o n , Tennessee State L i b r a r y and A r c h i v e s , N a s h v i l l e . 5 6 B . S. E w e l l to Miss L i z z y E w e l l , Chattanooga [Tennessee], January 22, 1863, Richard Stoddert E w e l l Papers, m i c r o f i l m at the V i r g i n i a H i s t o r i c a l S o c i e t y , Richmond. S7 ^'Brown, " M i l i t a r y Reminiscences from 1861-1865." 58 W. J . Hardee t o [Leonidas P o l k ] , Morton, M i s s i s s i p p i , J u l y 27, 1863, Leonidas Polk Papers, m i c r o f i l m copy i n the Southern H i s t o r i c a l C o l l e c t i o n . 59 The s i z e of the army v a r i e d , of course, but i n December 1862 i t approximated 5 0 , 0 0 0 men. McWhiney, Braxton  Bragg, p. 344. 1 8 9 CHAPTER V I I Dec l i n e January-December, 1 8 6 4 In December 1 8 6 3 , General Joseph E. Johnston assumed from Bragg the command of the Army of Tennessee—the army, Johnston s a i d , "which has the r e p u t a t i o n , here i n i t s e l f , of having the only general o f f i c e r s In the Confederacy who p r a c t i c e here against each other, the a r t s to which they were accustomed to r e s o r t i n e l e c t i o n e e r i n g before the war." In the face of t h i s m i l i t a r y p o l i t i c k i n g , "have a l i t t l e c h a r i t y f o r Bragg," Johnston appealed, and then went on t o a s s e r t : " I f I were President I'd d i s t r i b u t e the generals of t h i s army over the Confederacy." W i t h i n one month of the rout at 1 . Missionary Ridge and the r e t r e a t from Tennessee i n t o northern Georgia, General Johnston had acquired the command of an army notorious f o r f a c t i o u s dispute and i n s u b o r d i n a t i o n among i t s generals. He faced the i n e v i t a b l e controversy between the 1 adherents of the o l d commander, and the welcomers of the new. I f i n these d i f f i c u l t circumstances Johnston was t o e s t a b l i s h d i s c i p l i n e , p r e s t i g e and confidence i n the Army, to increase i t s numbers, t o replace a l l l o s t equipment, and t o ensure the 2 necessary f l o w of s u p p l i e s , then he had obvious and immediate need of an e f f i c i e n t s t a f f system. As Bragg had done when he succeeded Beauregard, Johnston i n h e r i t e d h i s predecessor's s t a f f . Even Colonels Brent and 190 Beard, under Bragg heads of t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e departments, remained t o serve the new commander i n subordinate c a p a c i t i e s , Brent t i l l March 1864 and Beard t i l l the summer. But Bragg's s t a f f d i d not stay on, as Beauregard's had, t e m p o r a r i l y , as a gesture of personal favor from one commander t o another. T h e i r continued s e r v i c e In the Army of Tennessee was due r a t h e r to t h e i r assignment t o , and i d e n t i f i c a t i o n w i t h , the Western command; they d i d not f o l l o w the personal fortunes of t h e i r general. In t h i s respect there had been some e v o l u t i o n of s t a f f p r a c t i c e . I n e v i t a b l y , however, there were some changes when Johnston took over. The most obvious of these was the i n t r o -d u c t i o n of Johnston men to head the s t a f f departments. B r i g a d i e r W i l l i a m W. M a c k a l l became c h i e f of s t a f f , C olonel Benjamin S. E w e l l adjutant general, and Lieutenant Colonel James E. Harvie i n s p e c t o r general. In a d d i t i o n , Major James B. E u s t i s , lawyer son of a d i s t i n g u i s h e d L o u i s i a n a f a m i l y , was assigned t o court m a r t i a l duty i n the adjutant general's department, and Major A r t h u r P. Mason was l a t e r appointed a s s i s t a n t adjutant general, r e p l a c i n g Brent. These were Johnston's only a d m i n i s t r a t i v e appointments. They i n d i c a t e d s e v e r a l changes i n the adjutant general's department, but only a s i n g l e change i n the Inspector general's department, of Beard by Harvie. When Lieutenant Colonels H. W. Walter 4 and A. J . Hays were ordered t o Richmond i n the s p r i n g of 1864, no new appointments of judge advocate or a s s i s t a n t i n s p e c t o r 191 were made i n t h e i r p l a c e . Thus t o a large degree Johnston used Bragg 1s a d m i n i s t r a t i v e s t a f f , but at the same time made sure that i t was headed by h i s own o f f i c e r s . Under Colonel E w e l l the adjutant general's department d i d not operate as i t had done under both Jordan and Brent. Then the m a j o r i t y of a l l orders issued by the department had been signed by i t s head, but under E w e l l t h i s was not the case. In January and February of 1864, when army r e o r g a n i z a t i o n was at i t s h e i g h t , E w e l l sent out ten orders, Brent twenty-nine, and Major K i n l o c h Falconer t h i r t e e n . This d i s t r i b u t i o n suggests that the greater part of the department's work con-ti n u e d t o be c a r r i e d out by Bragg's two p r i n c i p a l o f f i c e r s , Brent and Falconer; and a f t e r Brent l e f t e a r l y i n March, by 5 Mason and Falconer. i t was th e r e f o r e t o the a s s i s t a n t s , r a t h e r than to the adjutant general, that Johnston entrusted the r e g u l a r work of the f i e l d department. This d i s t r i b u t i o n of the adjutant's work was presumably not due t o any la c k of confidence i n Ewell.on the part of h i s commander. The two men were close personal f r i e n d s , and Johnston's proposal t o make E w e l l h i s c h i e f of s t a f f had only been f r u s t r a t e d by Davis's r e f u s a l t o confirm the appointment. Johnston had then made E w e l l h i s adjutant general, the highest s t a f f p o s i t i o n i n h i s power to o f f e r t o an o f f i c e r of c o l o n e l ' s rank.^ But i n 1864 E w e l l was f i f t y - t h r e e years o l d , according to h i s nephew slow and c a r e f u l of h i s comfort, and destined to r e s i g n from the s e r v i c e f o r reasons of i l l - h e a l t h . L i t t l e wonder, then, that two weeks a f t e r Johnston took command of . . . . . . 192 the Army of Tennessee E w e l l was w r i t i n g t o B r i g a d i e r General M a c k a l l , p r e s s i n g him t o r e t u r n to the army as c h i e f of s t a f f 7 and head of a d m i n i s t r a t i o n . When Ma c k a l l d i d r e t u r n Johnston was able t o a s s i g n o f f i c e d u t i e s to E w e l l which r e l i e v e d him of the burden and s t r a i n of f i e l d campaigning. In February E w e l l was sent t o organize and take charge of an adjutant general's o f f i c e i n A t l a n t a ; In A p r i l he was sent t o Richmond to d i s c u s s the m i l i t a r y s i t u a t i o n i n Georgia w i t h Davis and Bragg; and i n May, when the army went on a c t i v e campaign, Q Ewell*s d u t i e s kept him behind the f r o n t l i n e s . The adjutant was thus l a r g e l y a figurehead i n h i s own department, and the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e d u t i e s at f i e l d headquarters were c a r r i e d out by experienced j u n i o r o f f i c e r s . This d i s t r i b u t i o n of the r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s of the adjutant general's department was made p o s s i b l e by Mackall's presence a t headquarters. Johnston regarded h i s c h i e f of s t a f f as the 9 a d m i n i s t r a t i v e head of the army, and as such M a c k a l l was i n e v i t a b l y c l o s e l y a s s o c i a t e d w i t h the department of orders, p r o v i d i n g f o r i t the f o c a l s t a f f a u t h o r i t y which E w e l l , i n Richmond or In A t l a n t a , could not. M a c k a l l d i d not, however, i n t e r f e r e w i t h the r o u t i n e work of the department, l e a v i n g the issue of general and s p e c i a l orders e n t i r e l y t o the a d j u t a n t s . While the army was i n camp the c h i e f of s t a f f shared w i t h the adjutants the work of correspondence w i t h the l i n e commanders; only when the period of r e o r g a n i z a t i o n at DaIton was over, and the Confederate f o r c e s were a c t i v e l y engaged i n the A t l a n t a campaign, d i d M a c k a l l assume almost 193 t o t a l charge of the orders d i r e c t i n g the movements of the army. Thus the adjutant general's department functioned i n r o u t i n e matters without the d i r e c t i o n of i t s adjutant general, and was superseded by the c h i e f of s t a f f when campaign pressures 10 replaced r o u t i n e . The adjutant general's department never had achieved any c o n s i s t e n t degree of i n t e r n a l o r g a n i z a t i o n . Jordan d i d a s s e r t h i s own a u t h o r i t y as head of the department, and d i d set up an organized d i v i s i o n of i t s d u t i e s , but these rudiments of e f f i c i e n c y were not maintained under Bragg. Whatever h i s i n t e n t i o n s , and whatever the d i f f i c u l t i e s he faced, Bragg i n e f f e c t undermined the a u t h o r i t y of h i s adjutant general and d i s t u r b e d the assignment of r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s w i t h i n the department. Then In 1864, by h i s use of E w e l l i n a s s i g n -ments away from f i e l d headquarters, Johnston destroyed the department's u n i t y . I t continued to f u n c t i o n , but d i d so as a loose agglomerate of o f f i c e r s under the general d i r e c t i o n of the c h i e f of s t a f f . No evidence has been found of any attempt to maintain, or t o e s t a b l i s h , a s t r u c t u r a l o r g a n i z a t i o n e x i s t i n g i n i t s own r i g h t and strong enough t o survive yet another change of commander and the consequent l o s s of i t s a d m i n i s t r a t i v e d i r e c t o r . The absence of a s t r u c t u r a l o r g a n i z a t i o n l e d , during Hood's tenure of command, to an i n c r e a s i n g r e l i a n c e on the l a r g e l y uncoordinated e f f o r t s of i n d i v i d u a l o f f i c e r s . B r i g a d i e r General F r a n c i s A. Shoup, who as c h i e f of s t a f f might have given d i r e c t i o n to the work of the adjutant general's 194 department, was inexperienced i n a d m i n i s t r a t i o n and resigned h i s p o s i t i o n i n mid-September; E w e l l had never been rep l a c e d ; and Falconer, who had served longest w i t h the department, under Bragg, Johnston, and Hood, was s e r i o u s l y wounded i n O c t o b e r . 1 1 Thus by a process of a t t r i t i o n the burden of the adjutant general's work f e l l upon Mason, who, at S p r i n g H i l l i n p a r t i c u l a r , proved unable to handle i t . A d m i n i s t r a t i v e f a i l u r e deprived Hood of the e f f i c i e n t c o n t r o l of the Army of Tennessee and was at l e a s t a c o n t r i b u t o r y f a c t o r i n the d i s a s t e r s of the Tennessee winter campaign. The adjutant general's department thus experienced a progressive d e t e r i o r a t i o n i n e f f i c i e n c y throughout 1864. R e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r the d e c l i n e cannot be a t t r i b u t e d t o any s i n g l e person or event, but one obvious cause of f a i l u r e was Johnston's l i m i t e d i n t e r e s t i n c r e a t i n g a s t a f f o r g a n i z a t i o n or a d m i n i s t r a t i v e system. Johnston's concern was l e s s f o r the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e departments than f o r the i n d i v i d u a l o f f i c e r s w i t h i n them. These men—Ewell, Mason, E u s t i s , and Harvie--met the standards of good education and honorable f a m i l y which Johnston con-sidered important i n an o f f i c e r . H i s preference on t h i s p o i n t was apparently well-known, since W i g f a l l advised him that one of h i s a s s i s t a n t a d j u t a n t s , Major A. D. Banks, was "not regarded as occupying that s o c i a l p o s i t i o n i n V i r g i n i a 12 as t o e n t i t l e him to a p l a c e " on the general's s t a f f . Those who were acceptable c o n s t i t u t e d a personal s t a f f f o r Johnston, s e r v i n g t h e i r commander r a t h e r than any one command, 195 and s t a y i n g w i t h him through most of the war. In some respects Johnston regarded them as s e n i o r aides-de-camp, l i a b l e to "miscellaneous employment" and t o casual use as opportunity o f f e r e d . In an 1 8 6 3 l e t t e r t o President Davis the general i n d i c a t e d the i n f o r m a l i t y of h i s s t a f f arrangements. "Dispatches were read to me by the o f f i c e r who happened to be nearest," Johnston wrote, "and r e p l i e s were u s u a l l y 13 d i c t a t e d by me t o him who happened to be nearest." Such a casual approach to s t a f f work, perhaps appropriate while Johnston held the nebulous p o s i t i o n of commander of Department No. 2, was not s u i t e d t o the heavy a d m i n i s t r a t i v e burdens imposed by the f i e l d command of the Army of Tennessee. But the general refused t o reorganize h i s s t a f f departments, and thus exposed himself to the Richmond c r i t i c s of a personal s t a f f system. On February 1 4 , 1 8 6 4 , the Confederate Senate passed a b i l l p r o v i d i n g f o r a f i e l d army s t a f f appointed p a r t l y by the commanding general and p a r t l y by the P r e s i d e n t . The commander was to a s s i g n three b r i g a d i e r generals to., duty as c h i e f of s t a f f , i n s p e c t o r general, and c h i e f quartermaster, and two o f f i c e r s of l e s s e r rank as heads of the commissary and ordnance departments; the President would appoint a 14 medical d i r e c t o r and f i v e aides-de-camp. The b i l l r e f l e c t e d Senator W i g f a l l ' s b e l i e f that the general of a f i e l d army should be allowed to s e l e c t h i s own p r i n c i p a l s t a f f o f f i c e r s from among experienced l i n e commanders, without i n t e r f e r e n c e 15 from Richmond. Hi s proposals aroused s e r i o u s o p p o s i t i o n , 196 however, from D a v i s , from Bragg, and even from W i g f a l l ' s u s u a l m i l i t a r y a l l y , G e n e r a l J o h n s t o n . D a v i s ' s p r i n c i p a l o b j e c t i o n s , w i t h which Bragg c o n c u r r e d , were t o the a p p o i n t i n g power g i v e n the commander, and t o the use o f l i n e o f f i c e r s f o r s t a f f work, and the b i l l i n i t s f i n a l form bore l i t t l e 16 resemblance t o the o r i g i n a l F e b r u a r y v e r s i o n . But where D a v i s and Bragg i n s i s t e d on a l t e r a t i o n s i n the Senate b i l l on grounds o f c o n s t i t u t i o n a l and m i l i t a r y t h e o r y , J o h n s t o n opposed i t because o f the immediate, p r a c t i c a l e f f e c t i t would have on h i s own command. As soon as he knew the terms of the s t a f f b i l l , J o h n s t o n withdrew h i s e a r l i e r s u p p o r t f o r r e f o r m , b e l i e v i n g t h a t the Senate p r o p o s a l s would not add t o the e f f i c i e n c y o f h i s 1 7 army. P a r t i c u l a r l y s u b j e c t t o c r i t i c i s m , i n the g e n e r a l ' s o p i n i o n , were the use o f l i n e o f f i c e r s f o r s t a f f work, the f a i l u r e t o p r o v i d e a d j u t a n t s a t army h e a d q u a r t e r s , and the appointment by the P r e s i d e n t o f the f i v e a i d e s . I n a l e t t e r t o W i g f a l l , J o h n s t o n d e v e l o p e d h i s views a t some l e n g t h : My o b j e c t i o n t o the b i l l i s t h a t i t w i l l t a k e so many of the b e s t o f f i c e r s from t h e i r p r o p e r p l a c e s w i t h the t r o o p s , f o r o t h e r s i n which t h e y have not been t r i e d . I n t a k i n g a b r i g a d i e r g e n e r a l f o r I n s p e c t o r g e n e r a l o r C h i e f Q u a r t e r m a s t e r , a good one would a l w a y s be chosen--p r o b a b l y the b e s t - - b u t the o f f i c e r who had d i s t i n g u i s h e d h i m s e l f i n the command of a b r i g a d e might u t t e r l y f a i l as a s t a f f o f f i c e r , w h i l e the s e n i o r c o l o n e l , h i s s u c c e s s o r i n command of t h e b r i g a d e , would p r o b a b l y f i l l h i s p l a c e b a d l y . . . . I t h i n k i t an e v i l i n the army t o a p p o i n t men f o r one b r a n c h o f the s e r v i c e and be c o m p e l l e d t o use them f o r o t h e r s . I t h i n k t h a t e v e r y o f f i c e o f importance enough t o be w o r t h c r e a t i n g s h o u l d be f i l l e d by a man a p p o i n t e d f o r i t . Not by men a p p o i n t e d f o r p l a c e s o f a l m o s t e q u a l Importance w h i c h are l e f t v a cant by the t r a n s f e r . I have now a c o l o n e l [E. J . H a r v i e ] i n the P r o v i s i o n a l Army f o r I n s p e c t o r 197 general, who i n my opinion i s f i t t e r f o r the place than any b r i g a d i e r general under my command. Your b i l l would deprive me of him and compell [ s i c ] me t o deprive some brigade of a good commander.... The want of adjutant generals would be a seriou s incon-venience, I t h i n k . . . . Your b i l l would throw out of se r v i c e a large body of valuable o f f i c e r s who have been s e r v i n g since the war began, i n the A t d j u t a n t ] Gteneral's] Dep[artmen]t and put i n t h e i r places young gentlemen as A. D. C.s.... Those who have served long, have claims which i t would be d i f f i c u l t to put a s i d e . 18 Thus Johnston was concerned that the l i n e commands should not be bled of t h e i r best o f f i c e r s to provide s t a f f personnel. To prevent t h i s , o f f i c e r s should be r e c r u i t e d and t r a i n e d i n the s p e c i a l d u t i e s of the s t a f f departments. At no time, however, d i d Johnston consider that s t a f f r e c r u i t -ment and t r a i n i n g would create a s t a f f corps as an indepen-dent branch of the m i l i t a r y s e r v i c e , w i t h a c e n t r a l i z e d o r g a n i z a t i o n and power t o make i t s own appointments. H i s o p p o s i t i o n t o any such idea was seen i n h i s r e f u s a l t o accept aides appointed i n Richmond as adequate replacements f o r h i s ad j u t a n t s . Johnston's r e f u s a l , however, was based only p a r t l y on h i s concern over the a p p o i n t i n g power; he a l s o wished t o p r o t e c t those able and l o y a l s e n i o r o f f i c e r s who had followed h i s personal fortunes throughout the C i v i l War but would be d i s p l a c e d under the Senate b i l l . Nowhere i n h i s l e t t e r d i d the general i n d i c a t e a sense of the importance of the adjutant general's department as part of an adminis-t r a t i v e system. Johnston's o p p o s i t i o n to the Senate's proposals f o r s t a f f reform was based, i n sho r t , on h i s r e f u s a l to accept 198 a n y a u t h o r i t y save h i s own o v e r h i s command. P o r e s s e n t i a l l y p e r s o n a l r e a s o n s he w i t h d r e w h i s s u p p o r t f r o m t h e movement f o r s t a f f r e f o r m . " I have t a k e n l i t t l e i n t e r e s t i n t h i s s u b j e c t , " he w r o t e i n j u s t i f i c a t i o n t o W i g f a l l , " f r o m a b e l i e f t h a t t h e p r e s i d e n t p r e f e r s t h e p r e s e n t s y s t e m t o any 19 y o u may o f f e r a s a s u b s t i t u t e f o r i t . " J o h n s t o n ' s r e j e c t i o m o f a d m i n i s t r a t i v e c h a n g e s i n h i s army was o c c a s i o n e d n o t o n l y b y t h e p r o p o s e d new l e g i s l a t i o n , b u t a l s o by s u g g e s t i o n s o f r e o r g a n i z a t i o n o r i g i n a t i n g i n t h e War D e p a r t m e n t . G e n e r a l O r d e r s No. 44, i s s u e d a t Richmond f r o m t h e A d j u t a n t and I n s p e c t o r G e n e r a l ' s O f f i c e on A p r i l 29, 1864, r e g u l a t e d t h e s i z e o f a commander's s t a f f , and p r o v i d e d f o r t h e r e - a s s i g n m e n t o f a l l o f f i c e r s o v e r t h e a u t h o r i z e d 20 number. I n s t e a d o f t h e s i x a d m i n i s t r a t i v e o f f i c e r s a l l o w e d h i m b y t h e s e r e g u l a t i o n s , J o h n s t o n had a t l e a s t t h i r t e e n , whom he r e f u s e d t o g i v e up. When p r e s s e d t o do so b y G e n e r a l C o o p e r , he r e p l i e d w i t h a l e t t e r w h i c h e f f e c t i v e l y I l l u s -t r a t e d t h e n e a r i m p o s s i b i l i t y o f m a k i n g s u b s t a n t i a l s t a f f c h a n g e s w h i l e f i g h t i n g a m a j o r war: T h i s army h a s b een f o r t h e p a s t month i n t h e immediate p r e s e n c e o f a p o w e r f u l F e d e r a l army--engaged a l m o s t d a i l y . The o f f i c e r s o f t h e a d j t . g e n l ' s d e p t . have had and s t i l l have g r e a t l a b o u r and a r e p e r f o r m i n g i n d i s p e n s a b l e s e r v i c e s . U n d e r t h e s e c i r c u m s t a n c e s I r e s p e c t f u l l y s u b m i t t o t h e War D e p t . t h a t I t would be c r u e l t o t h e s e m e r i t o r i o u s o f f i c e r s t o p u t them a s i d e a t s u c h a t i m e - - a n d c o n t r a r y t o t h e p u b l i c i n t e r e s t t o a t t e m p t now t o r e o r g a n i z e any p a r t o f t h i s army. I t h e r e f o r e r e s p e c t f u l l y a s k t o be p e r m i t -t e d t o p o s t p o n e t h e e x e c u t i o n o f t h e o r d e r . . . u n t i l t h e c o n d i t i o n o f a f f a i r s may make i t e a s i e r . 21 A p p a r e n t l y J o h n s t o n ' s r e s i s t a n c e was s u c c e s s f u l , f o r i n J u l y 1864 B r a g g r e p o r t e d a c i d l y t h a t i n s p i t e o f t h e o r d e r s o f 1 9 9 A p r i l t h e r e was "a l a r g e e x c e s s o f s t a f f o f f i c e r s " i n n e a r l y 2 2 e v e r y command of t h e Army of Tennessee. The War Department a l s o hoped t o r e - o r g a n i z e the work o f i n s p e c t i o n i n the C o n f e d e r a t e a r m i e s . The p r o p o s a l t o c r e a t e a s e p a r a t e i n s p e c t o r g e n e r a l ' s department was d e f e a t e d by the o p p o s i t i o n o f the P r e s i d e n t , but a p p r o v a l was g i v e n t o the s u g g e s t i o n o f a c o r p s o f I n s p e c t o r s o p e r a t i n g as one b r a n c h o f t h e combined a d j u t a n t and i n s p e c t o r g e n e r a l ' s department. A c c o r d i n g t o the approved p l a n an i n s p e c t o r g e n e r a l a t Richmond would a p p o i n t and d i r e c t t e n i n s p e c t o r s , each w i t h t h e rank of c o l o n e l ; t h e s e men would work i n r o t a -t i o n , each i n s p e c t i n g i n t u r n a C o n f e d e r a c y d i v i d e d f o r t h e purpose i n t o t e n d i s t r i c t s ; t o g e t h e r the i n s p e c t o r g e n e r a l and h i s t e n s u b o r d i n a t e s would c o n s t i t u t e a c e n t r a l i z e d system of i n s p e c t i o n , w i t h a u t h o r i t y o v e r a l l t h e C o n f e d e r a t e 2 3 s t a t e s and the C o n f e d e r a t e a r m i e s . A s k e l e t o n o r g a n i z a t i o n 24 f o r t h i s system was c r e a t e d i n F e b r u a r y 1 8 6 4 , but t h e r e i s no e v i d e n c e t h a t any i n s p e c t o r g e n e r a l was a p p o i n t e d t o d i r e c t i t , o r t h a t the o r g a n i z a t i o n was d e v e l o p e d as f u l l y as had been p l a n n e d . N e v e r t h e l e s s the d u t i e s of i n s p e c t i o n were c a r r i e d o u t , by o f f i c e r s w o r k i n g as p a r t of a c e n t r a l 2 5 o r g a n i z a t i o n , under o r d e r s from G e n e r a l Bragg. A c e n t r a l i z e d i n s p e c t i o n system was as l i t t l e welcome t o J o h n s t o n as the attempt t o l i m i t the s i z e o f h i s s t a f f had been. The g e n e r a l f e a r e d t o l o s e not o n l y h i s supernumerary s t a f f t o B r a g g , but a l s o the c o n t r o l o f h i s department of 2 6 i n s p e c t i o n . J o h n s t o n had no i n t e n t i o n o f d o i n g e i t h e r , 200 p a r t l y from a d e s i r e t o m a i n t a i n h i s own a u t h o r i t y over the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n o f h i s army, and p a r t l y from a c o n v i c t i o n o f the s p e c i a l a b i l i t i e s of h i s i n s p e c t o r g e n e r a l , L i e u t e n a n t C o l o n e l Edwin J . H a r v i e . A c c o r d i n g t o h i s commander, H a r v i e was "an o f f i c e r o f r a r e m e r i t - - f u l l o f courage, t r u t h , z e a l , and f i d e l i t y . " 2 7 In a g e n e r a l o r d e r , p r o b a b l y drawn up i n 1863, the i n s p e c t o r g e n e r a l had o u t l i n e d h i s concept o f the f u n c t i o n o f h i s department. " C o r r e c t i o n , " he d e c l a r e d , " [ i s ] d e s i g n e d o n l y f o r the i n t e r e s t o f the s e r v i c e and the e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f system and d i s c i p l i n e , c o n t r i b u t i n g t o the g r e a t e r h e a l t h and comfort o f the whole command...." U l t i m a t e C o n f e d e r a t e v i c t o r y would depend i n p a r t on the " p a t i e n t u n t i r i n g e f f o r t s marked by c o u r t e s y and f o r e b e a r a n c e [ s i c ] " o f the i n s p e c t o r 28 g e n e r a l ' s department. Judged a b l e by h i s commander, and w i t h a s t r o n g sense of the i m p o r t a n t purpose of h i s work, H a r v i e t o o k o v e r from Beard e a r l y i n J a n u a r y 1864 the d u t i e s o f i n s p e c t i o n i n t h e Army of Tennessee. Under h i s immediate a u t h o r i t y the new i n s p e c t o r g e n e r a l had seven a s s i s t a n t s - - B e a r d , C l a r e , Cooper, Hays, Henry, Lee, and R e i d . Assignments f o r t h e s e o f f i c e r s were announced t h r o u g h s p e c i a l o r d e r s , i s s u e d i n r e g u l a t i o n form, but s i g n e d by H a r v i e as i n s p e c t o r g e n e r a l , r a t h e r t h a n by one o f the a d j u t a n t g e n e r a l ' s department of o r d e r s . H a r v i e t h u s assumed d i r e c t c o n t r o l o v e r the i n s p e c t o r s a t army h e a d q u a r t e r s . The i n s p e c t o r g e n e r a l a l s o gave o r d e r s d i r e c t l y t o the p r o v o s t m a r s h a l , whose department a c t e d as the e n f o r c i n g arm 201 f o r the I n s p e c t o r s and as an i n t e l l i g e n c e agency. The two departments worked c l o s e l y i n c h e c k i n g d e r e l i c t i o n s i n guard d u t y and i n c o n t r o l l i n g t he i l l e g a l movement of t r o o p s . A n o t h e r s u b j e c t o f c o n t i n u a l c o n c e r n was the d i s r u p t i v e p resence o f camp f o l l o w e r s . "The i n f l u x i n t o t h i s Army o f women o f bad c h a r a c t e r has become a s e r i o u s e v i l , and s t e p s must be t a k e n a t once t o remedy i t , " H a r v i e i n f o r m e d C o l o n e l B. J . H i l l , p r o v o s t m a r s h a l o f the army a t D a l t o n . "You w i l l t h e r e f o r e i n s t r u c t t he P r o v o s t M a r s h a l s i n t h i s Dept. and p a r t i c u l a r l y a t A t l a n t a , " H a r v i e went on, " t o f u r n i s h no p a s s -p o r t s t o women coming t o the Army, ex c e p t t o such as can g i v e c o n c l u s i v e e v i d e n c e o f t h e i r r e s p e c t a b i l i t y . T h i s o r d e r w i l l be e x e c u t e d i n as g e n t l e m a n l y and as m i l d a manner as p r a c t i c a b l e — t a k i n g c a r e t o g i v e no j u s t cause o f o f f e n s e t o any." Perhaps H i l l ' s o f f i c e r s were t o o g e n t l e m a n l y , f o r the 30 problem c o n t i n u e d unabated. H a r v i e a l s o d i r e c t e d the p r o v o s t m a r s h a l ' s department i n i t s i n t e l l i g e n c e d u t i e s . S c o u t s were i n s t r u c t e d t o o b t a i n r e l i a b l e i n f o r m a t i o n about the enemy f o r c e s i n n o r t h e r n G e o r g i a , c o n c e r n i n g t h e i r o r g a n i z a t i o n , movements, and i n t e n -t i o n s ; i t was, the i n s p e c t o r g e n e r a l remarked, "of the g r e a t e s t importance t o the G e n e r a l t o get a c o r r e c t knowledge o f the 31 Army i m m e d i a t e l y c o n f r o n t i n g h i m . 1 1 J Funds f o r i n t e l l i g e n c e work were d i s b u r s e d by the c h i e f q u a r t e r m a s t e r , L i e u t e n a n t C o l o n e l T. B. McMicken, on H a r v i e ' s i n s t r u c t i o n s . The d i s b u r s e m e n t s i l l u s t r a t e d e f f e c t i v e l y t he c h a o t i c s t a t e o f C o n f e d e r a t e f i n a n c e s ; on one o c c a s i o n H i l l r e c e i v e d $l60 i n 202 F e d e r a l Greenbacks, $125 i n G e o r g i a f u n d s , $20 i n L o u i s i a n a 3 2 f u n d s , $300 i n Kentucky f u n d s , and $200 i n g o l d . A l s o s u b j e c t t o o r d e r s f r om the i n s p e c t o r g e n e r a l was C a p t a i n S l o v e r o f t h e commissary department. From F e b r u a r y t o mid-March f o o d was r e g u l a r l y i s s u e d t o m a r r i e d women, u s u a l l y t o be p r e p a r e d f o r s a l e t o the army, and t o d e s t i t u t e f a m i l i e s . I s s u e s t o t h e d e s t i t u t e were a p p a r e n t l y made under 33 d i r e c t i n s t r u c t i o n s from G e n e r a l J o h n s t o n . H a r v i e t h u s e x e r c i s e d a c o n s i d e r a b l e range o f a u t h o r i t y o u t s i d e h i s own department. F u r t h e r , i n h i s i s s u e of o r d e r s , he assumed some o f the d u t i e s more p r o p e r l y b e l o n g i n g t o the a d j u t a n t g e n e r a l ' s department. B o t h developments i n d i c a t e d a w i l l i n g n e s s on H a r v i e ' s p a r t t o ex t e n d h i s r o l e as i n s p e c t o r g e n e r a l , and t h e s e e x t e n s i o n s were u l t i m a t e l y t o cause h i s department c o n s i d e r a b l e d i f f i c u l t y i n c a r r y i n g out even i t s r e g u l a r d u t i e s . Those r e g u l a r d u t i e s i n v o l v e d m a i n t a i n i n g army r o l l s , c o n d u c t i n g m u s t e r s , and c a r r y i n g out the i n s p e c t i o n s r e q u i r e d by d e p a r t m e n t a l r e g u l a t i o n s i s s u e d from Richmond. But t h e h e a v i e s t work a t D a l t o n concerned r e q u e s t s f o r passes and f u r l o u g h s , t h e i n s p e c t i o n of p i c k e t s , and the s u p e r v i s i o n o f a l l movement a l o n g the r a i l r o a d from A t l a n t a t o D a l t o n and Tu n n e l H i l l . I n a g e n e r a l sense, t h e r e f o r e , i n s p e c t i o n r o u t i n e c o n t r i b u t e d t o the o r g a n i z a t i o n , d i s c i p l i n e , and e f f i c i e n c y 34 o f the l i n e commands. H a r v i e e x e r c i s e d c l o s e s u p e r v i s i o n o v e r h i s department, p e r s o n a l l y e n d o r s i n g a l l i n c o m i n g correspondence and s i g n i n g 203 a l l o u t g o i n g o r d e r s , i n s t r u c t i o n s , and i n q u i r i e s . Of the o u t g o i n g m a t e r i a l , a p p r o x i m a t e l y two t h i r d s was sent i n Jo h n s t o n ' s name, and one t h i r d i n H a r v i e ' s . There was no c l e a r d i s t i n c t i o n between t h e two c a t e g o r i e s , a l t h o u g h H a r v i e u s u a l l y b e l i e v e d h i s own a u t h o r i t y adequate i n a l l c o r r e s p o n -35 dence d e a l i n g w i t h r e g u l a t i o n i n s p e c t i o n d u t i e s . i t i s p r o b a b l e , c o n s i d e r i n g J o h n s t o n ' s g r e a t c o n f i d e n c e i n h i s i n s p e c t o r g e n e r a l , t h a t H a r v i e a c t e d l a r g e l y on h i s own i n i t i a t i v e , even where he used h i s commander's name as a m a t t e r o f r e q u i r e d form. Thus as i n s p e c t o r g e n e r a l H a r v i e had c o n s i d e r a b l e independence i n h i s department, and e x e r c i s e d i n a d d i t i o n some a u t h o r i t y o v e r o t h e r a d m i n i s t r a t i v e a g e n c i e s . U n f o r t u n a t e l y H a r v i e was not as s u c c e s s f u l as Beard had been In a v o i d i n g the army's n a t u r a l antagonism towards the i n s p e c t o r g e n e r a l ' s department. C e r t a i n l y o t h e r s t a f f d epartments were j e a l o u s f o r t h e i r own a u t h o r i t y , as were the p r i n c i p a l l i n e commanders. But much o f the d i f f i c u l t y w hich the i n s p e c t o r g e n e r a l e n c o u n t e r e d was o f h i s own making. At t w e n t y - e i g h t , H a r v i e was young f o r h i s r e s p o n s i b l e p o s i t i o n , and, as a V i r g i n i a n , he was an o u t s i d e r i n the Army of Tennessee. Moreover, he had r e p l a c e d a s u c c e s s f u l o f f i c e r who had s e r v e d i n t h a t army from i t s e a r l i e s t days, but was demoted t o an i n f e r i o r p o s i t i o n i n h i s own department on H a r v i e ' s a r r i v a l . I n t h i s a d m i t t e d l y d i f f i c u l t s i t u a t i o n H a r v i e showed h i m s e l f t o be s t i f f , t a c t l e s s , and o v e r l y con-cerned w i t h h i s own d i g n i t y and im p o r t a n c e . When a minor c l e r k i n the D a l t o n q u a r t e r m a s t e r ' s o f f i c e spoke t o the 204 i n s p e c t o r g e n e r a l i n "an independent, r e p e l l i n g manner," H a r v i e complained t o the man's s u p e r i o r : " I am not accustomed t o such t r e a t m e n t a t t h e hands of anyone, n o r do I b e l i e v e f o r one moment t h a t you a u t h o r i z e i t . I . . . r e q u e s t t h a t I 36 may not be s u b j e c t e d t o the same t r e a t m e n t a second t i m e . " On a n o t h e r o c c a s i o n , H a r v i e q u a r r e l l e d w i t h the c a p t a i n o f J o h n s t o n ' s e s c o r t company over a v e r y minor m a t t e r , and i s s u e d a r e p r i m a n d w h i c h showed a b a s i c i n a b i l i t y t o h a ndle p e o p l e . "You were o f f i c i a l l y o r d e r e d i n t h i s c a s e , " he l e c t u r e d C a p t a i n Guy Dreux, "and had no r i g h t t o t a k e any o t h e r but an o f f i c i a l a c t i o n i n i t . . . . Y o ur f a i l u r e t o do t h i s , i s what I c o m p l a i n o f , and where I t h i n k you were g u i l t y o f an o f f i c i a l e r r o r . I n w r i t i n g t h i s l e t t e r , I am governed s t r i c t l y by my i d e a s o f o f f i c i a l d u t y — p e r s o n a l f e e l i n g s have 37 n o t h i n g t o do w i t h i t . " E v i d e n t l y the i n s p e c t o r g e n e r a l had f o r g o t t e n h i s own recommendation of c o u r t e s y and f o r -bearance i n c a r r y i n g out the d u t i e s o f h i s department. More s e r i o u s t h a n h i s q u a r r e l s w i t h o t h e r s t a f f d e p a r t -ments, o r h i s d i s a g r e e m e n t s w i t h j u n i o r o f f i c e r s , was H a r v i e ' s f a i l u r e t o m a i n t a i n good r e l a t i o n s w i t h J o h n s t o n ' s p r i n c i p a l l i n e commanders. H a r v i e rebuked d i v i s i o n commander Benjamin F. Cheatham f o r i n d i s c i p l i n e among h i s men and wanton d e s t r u c t i o n o f c i v i l i a n p r o p e r t y ; a l t h o u g h t h e l e t t e r was sent i n J o h n s t o n ' s name, i t was s i g n e d by the i n s p e c t o r and i t s 3 w o r d i n g c o u l d o n l y i n c r e a s e h o s t i l i t y towards h i s department. Most f a r - r e a c h i n g i n i t s e f f e c t s , however, was the d i s p u t e 205 between H a r v i e and t h e s e n i o r c o r p s commander, L i e u t e n a n t G e n e r a l W i l l i a m J . Hardee. The d i s p u t e concerned the a u t h o r i t y a s s e r t e d by the 39 i n s p e c t o r g e n e r a l ' s department o v e r o f f i c e r s of t h e l i n e . A s s i s t a n t i n s p e c t o r s were s u p e r s e d i n g f i e l d o f f i c e r s by g i v i n g o r d e r s d i r e c t l y t o Hardee's p i c k e t l i n e ; t h i s Hardee r e g a r d e d as a dangerous and u n j u s t i f i a b l e a s s u m p t i o n o f a u t h o r i t y by a s t a f f department. He a l s o c o n s i d e r e d i t an a f f r o n t t o the d i g n i t y o f h i s r a n k t o r e c e i v e i n s t r u c t i o n s from a j u n i o r i n s p e c t o r r a t h e r t h a n r e q u e s t s from the i n s p e c t o r g e n e r a l . I n the r e s u l t i n g disagreement H a r v i e r e f u s e d t o be c o n c i l i a t o r y , i n s i s t e d on m a i n t a i n i n g h i s ground, and t h u s f o r c e d J o h n s t o n t o i n t e r v e n e . J o h n s t o n had no a l t e r n a t i v e but t o s u p p o r t h i s s e n i o r c o r p s commander. Ot h e r w i s e he would have made nonsense of the army's system of r a n k , and would have weakened the c o n t r o l o f h i s l i n e o f f i c e r s o v e r t h e i r own men. H a r v i e ' s o f f i c e r s were o r d e r e d t o c o n f i n e t h e i r d u t i e s t o i n s p e c t i o n o n l y , and t o l e a v e a c t i o n on t h e i r r e p o r t s t o the a p p r o p r i a t e o f f i c e r commanding. H a r v i e h i m s e l f had t o w r i t e t o G e n e r a l Hardee, " t o remove a l l doubt and c o n f l i c t of a u t h o r i t y , " by c o n f i r m i n g t h a t J o h n s t o n had withdrawn h i s s a n c t i o n from a l l p r e v i o u s 40 o r d e r s g i v e n by i n s p e c t o r s t o Hardee's t r o o p s . Thus the c o n f l i c t between l i n e and s t a f f w hich had a l w a y s been i m p l i c i t i n the d u t i e s o f the i n s p e c t o r g e n e r a l ' s department was d e c i d e d , by J o h n s t o n ' s i n s t r u c t i o n s , i n f a v o r o f the l i n e . 206 By f o r c i n g an i s s u e which he was hound t o l o s e H a r v i e had brought about the h u m i l i a t i o n o f h i s department and the weakening of the army's a d m i n i s t r a t i o n . Not o n l y d i d the i n s p e c t o r g e n e r a l l o s e h i s assumed power of g i v i n g o r d e r s t o o f f i c e r s and men not i n h i s department, but he a l s o l o s t the d i r e c t c o n t r o l o f h i s a s s i s t a n t i n s p e c t o r s i n the s u b o r d i n a t e commands. F o r example, when H a r v i e wanted a l i s t o f a l l i n s p e c t o r s s e r v i n g i n Hardee's c o r p s , he c o u l d not o b t a i n t h i s t h r o u g h h i s own department, but had i n s t e a d t o a p p l y t o 4 l the l i e u t e n a n t g e n e r a l f o r the n e c e s s a r y i n f o r m a t i o n . The h i e r a r c h i c a l s t r u c t u r e of the i n s p e c t o r g e n e r a l ' s d e p a r t -ment no l o n g e r r e a c h e d from army t o b r i g a d e h e a d q u a r t e r s , but was d i v e r t e d by way o f the l i n e commanders; i n s p e c t o r s were accompanied i n t h e i r d u t i e s by l i n e o f f i c e r s t o g i v e a l l 4 2 n e c e s s a r y o r d e r s , and were i n t e g r a t e d more c l o s e l y i n t o the l i n e u n i t t h e y s e r v e d . Because H a r v i e pushed h i s a u t h o r i t y t o o f a r , the department s e t up by Beard l o s t much of i t s e a r l i e r c o h e s i o n and e f f e c t i v e n e s s . I r o n i c a l l y , the d e t e r i o r a t i o n i n the i n s p e c t o r g e n e r a l ' s department o f the Army o f Tennessee began j u s t when the A d j u t a n t and I n s p e c t o r G e n e r a l ' s O f f i c e i n Richmond was r e c o g -n i z i n g the importance o f i n s p e c t i o n . G e n e r a l Orders No. 42, o f A p r i l 14, 1864, r e q u i r e d r e g u l a r and f r e q u e n t i n s p e c t i o n s o f a l l major army u n i t s by o f f i c e r s o f an i n s p e c t i o n c o r p s , and p r o v i d e d t h a t a l l r e p o r t s s h o u l d pass t h r o u g h an i n s p e c t i o n h i e r a r c h y r e a c h i n g from b r i g a d e l e v e l , t h r o u g h army h e a d q u a r t e r s , t o the War Department. The purpose of t h e s e 207 o r d e r s was c l e a r l y s t a t e d ; I t was t o " g i v e a more c l e a r and f u l l i d e a o f the c o n d i t i o n o f the Army and the r e l a t i v e e f f i c i e n c y o f i t s d i f f e r e n t o r g a n i z a t i o n s and t h e i r comman-d e r s . " 4 3 H a r v i e n e v e r found i t p o s s i b l e t o comply w i t h G e n e r a l Orders No. 42. The d i f f i c u l t i e s caused by h i s d i s p u t e s were o f course compounded by the o p e n i n g o f the A t l a n t a campaign e a r l y i n May, and t h e i n s p e c t o r g e n e r a l used the campaign t o j u s t i f y h i s "apparent n e g l e c t o f d u t y " i n f a i l i n g t o c a r r y 44 out the new i n s p e c t i o n o r d e r s . A l s o a p p a r e n t , however, was a p r o g r e s s i v e d e c l i n e i n the e f f i c i e n c y o f t h e i n s p e c t o r g e n e r a l ' s department which, once begun under J o h n s t o n , proved i r r e v e r s i b l e under Hood. I n November 1864 H a r v i e wrote t o Hood i n a l a s t e f f o r t t o r e s t o r e e f f i c i e n c y t o h i s department. He d e s c r i b e d the l a m e n t a b l e s t a t e o f i n s p e c t i o n , and r e v e a l e d i n c i d e n t a l l y the degree t o which f a i l u r e s i n i n s p e c t i o n were c o s t i n g Hood the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e c o n t r o l o f h i s army: As t h e department now s t a n d s c o r p s , d i v i s i o n , and b r i g a d e i n s p e c t o r s a r e a l m o s t w h o l l y independent o f the i n s p e c t o r g e n e r a l o f the army, each g e n e r a l o f f i c e r h a v i n g a system, o r no system,cof h i s own, w i t h such a u t h o r i t y o v e r t h e s e o f f i c e r s as r e n d e r s them i n c a p a b l e o f p e r f o r m i n g the n e c e s s a r y d u t i e s p e r t a i n i n g t o the department. There i s no head, each i n s p e c t o r l o o k i n g t o h i s immediate commander f o r t h e c l a s s o f d u t i e s he i s t o p e r f o r m . When p r o p e r t y i s c a p t u r e d f rom the enemy i t f i n d s i t s way i n t o p r i v a t e hands, no one seeming t o know o r c a r e what becomes of i t . A p p l i c a t i o n s a r e d a i l y made by o f f i c e r s t o purchase p u b l i c a n i m a l s , and t h e r e i s no o r g a n i z e d system by which i t can be a s c e r t a i n e d whether t h e s e a p p l i c a t i o n s s h o u l d be g r a n t e d . Orders a r e d a i l y i s s u e d by the A d j u t a n t - G e n e r a l o f the Army, and i t i s i m p o s s i b l e t o t e l l whether t h e y f i n d t h e i r 208 way even as f a r as corps headquarters. Abuses of every nature are b e i n g c o n s t a n t l y r e p o r t e d , and under the present system there i s no way by which they can be reached. 4 5 C l e a r l y the ch a l l e n g e t o H a r v i e ' s a u t h o r i t y as i n s p e c t o r g e n e r a l , made by Hardee and s u s t a i n e d by Johnston, had had s e r i o u s consequences f o r the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of the Army of Tennessee. The i n s p e c t o r g e n e r a l ' s department had ceased t o f u n c t i o n as an organized s t a f f u n i t , and d i r e c t i o n of i t s o f f i c e r s had passed t o the l i n e commanders, l e a v i n g Harvie i n c a p a b l e of s u p e r v i s i n g or of c o - o r d i n a t i n g such i n s p e c t i o n d u t i e s as were s t i l l c a r r i e d out. Ha r v i e ' s l e t t e r had no d i s c e r n i b l e e f f e c t on h i s commander. There i s no evidence t h a t Hood took any a c t i o n t o Improve the a l a r m i n g s i t u a t i o n d e s c r i b e d by h i s i n s p e c t o r g e n e r a l . H a r v i e had made suggestions designed t o r e s t o r e o r d e r and e f f i c i e n c y t o h i s department, al t h o u g h these con-s i s t e d i n the main of g i v i n g him " u n l i m i t e d c o n t r o l " over a l l 4 6 i n s p e c t o r s i n the army. Reform on these l i n e s would have re-awakened the c o n f l i c t s over a u t h o r i t y between l i n e and s t a f f which H a r v i e had a l r e a d y l o s t . I t i s d o u b t f u l , however, i n view of Hood's apparent d i s i n t e r e s t i n s t a f f work, whether the g e n e r a l r e a l i z e d the i m p l i c a t i o n s of h i s i n s p e c t o r ' s recommendations; more probably, h i s l a c k of response t o Ha r v i e ' s l e t t e r was due t o the immediate p r e s s u r e s of a c r u c i a l campaign. Thus with an a d m i n i s t r a t i v e system d e c l a r e d by i t s r a n k i n g s t a f f o f f i c e r t o be i n e f f i c i e n t the Army of Tennessee ) 209 marched i n the f a l l of 1864 towards the d i s a s t e r s which d e s t r o y e d i t as a major C o n f e d e r a t e army. R e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e c o l l a p s e o f 1864 must r e s t l a r g e l y w i t h G e n e r a l J o h n s t o n . R e g a r d i n g h i s s t a f f i n p e r s o n a l terms r a t h e r t h a n as members of a s t a f f c o r p s , J o h n s t o n i n s i s t e d on the r i g h t t o s e l e c t h i s own a d m i n i s -t r a t i v e o f f i c e r s . R e p e a t e d l y he r e j e c t e d a t t e m p t s by Congress and the War Department t o i n s t i t u t e s t a f f r e f o r m s , as i n f r i n g e m e n t s on h i s a u t h o r i t y as commander. Thus by con-s i d e r i n g h i s s t a f f a p e r s o n a l m a t t e r J o h n s t o n became p e c u l i a r l y r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h e performance o f h i s nominees, E w e l l and H a r v i e . N e i t h e r o f f i c e r was s u c c e s s f u l as the head of an a d m i n i s t r a t i v e department. As a d j u t a n t g e n e r a l E w e l l f a i l e d t o p r o v i d e l e a d e r s h i p and a u t h o r i t y f o r h i s a s s i s t a n t s , w h i l e H a r v i e t h r o u g h e x c e s s i v e z e a l p r o voked, and l o s t , a major c o n f l i c t between the i n s p e c t o r g e n e r a l ' s department and t h e l i n e commanders. As a r e s u l t t h e departments of b o t h men l o s t t h e i r i n t e r n a l ' c o h e s i o n , and t h e i r o f f i c e r s ceased t o be c o l l e c t i v e members of a s t a f f c o r p s , becoming i n s t e a d i n d i v i d u a l a d j u n c t s o f t h e army u n i t t h e y s e r v e d . The i n f a n t a d m i n i s t r a t i v e system had been unable t o accommodate i t s e l f t o the p e r s o n a l f a c t o r o f r i v a l r y and j e a l o u s y between i n d i v i -d u a l o f f i c e r s and between d i f f e r e n t b r anches o f the m i l i t a r y s e r v i c e ; and i n the Army of Tennessee o f 1864 system g r a d u a l l y , r e v e r t e d t o the haphazard methods w i t h which the war had been begun. 210 Notes 1 J . E. Jo h n s t o n t o L. T. W i g f a l l , D a l t o n [Georgia] , Jan u a r y 5, 1864, L o u i s T r e z e v a n t W i g f a l l P a p e r s , L i b r a r y o f Congress, Washington, D. C.; a l s o [ J o h n s t o n ] t o M a n s f i e l d Love1 1 , D a l t o n [Georgia] , J a n u a r y 6, 1864, M a n s f i e l d L o v e l l P a p e r s , Henry E. H u n t i n g t o n L i b r a r y , San M a r i n o , C a l i f o r n i a . Bragg's s u p p o r t e r s i n c l u d e d C o l o n e l J . P. Jo n e s , M a j o r G e n e r a l Joseph Wheeler, and C o l o n e l G. W. B r e n t ; see t h e i r l e t t e r s t o B r a g g o f December 10, December 15, and December 26, 1863, W i l l i a m P. Palmer C o l l e c t i o n o f B r a x t o n Bragg P a p e r s , Western Reserve H i s t o r i c a l S o c i e t y , C l e v e l a n d , Ohio. 2 J o s e p h E. J o h n s t o n , N a r r a t i v e o f M i l i t a r y O p e r a t i o n s (New Y o r k : D. A p p l e t o n and Company, 1874), p. 263. 3 . Memorandum o f S t a f f O f f i c e r s I n t h e Army o f Tennessee  f o r F e b r u a r y 1864, i m p r i n t i n the Henry E. H u n t i n g t o n L i b r a r y ; "James B i d d l e E u s t i s , " D i c t i o n a r y o f American B i o g r a p h y , A l l e n Johnson and Dumas Malone, eds. ( 2 0 -vols.; New Yor k : C h a r l e s S c r i b n e r ' s Sons, 1928-1936), V I , 193; W. W. M a c k a l l t o Mrs. M a c k a l l , D a l t o n [ G e o r g i a ] , March 4, 1864, W i l l i a m Whann M a c k a l l P a p e r s , S o u t h e r n H i s t o r i c a l C o l l e c t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y o f N o r t h C a r o l i n a , C h a p e l H i l l . 211 4 0 n F e b r u a r y 24, 1864, Bragg was charged w i t h "the conduct o f m i l i t a r y o p e r a t i o n s i n the a r m i e s o f the C o n f e d e r a c y . " H i s r e q u e s t s f o r B r e n t , W a l t e r , and Hays, and h i s assignment of t h e s e o f f i c e r s t o i n s p e c t i o n d u t i e s , suggest t h a t B ragg found h i s s u p e r v i s o r y r o l e s i m i l a r t o t h a t of J . E. J o h n s t o n i n Department No. 2 - - w i t h o u t f i e l d command o f a s p e c i f i c army Bragg's r o l e was t h a t of i n s p e c t o r g e n e r a l o f t h e C o n f e d e r a c y . See War of the R e b e l l i o n : A C o m p i l a t i o n  of the O f f i c i a l Records of t h e Union and C o n f e d e r a t e Armies (128 v o l s . ; Washington: Government P r i n t i n g O f f i c e , 1 8 8 0 -1 9 0 1 ) , S e r i e s I , X X X I I , p t . 2 , 799 ( c i t e d h e r e a f t e r as OR, w i t h a l l r e f e r e n c e s t o S e r i e s I , u n l e s s o t h e r w i s e i n d i c a t e d ) ; G. W. B r e n t , H. W. W a l t e r , A. J . Hays, Compiled S e r v i c e Records o f C o n f e d e r a t e G e n e r a l and S t a f f O f f i c e r s and N o n r e g i m e n t a l E n l i s t e d Men, War Department C o l l e c t i o n o f C o n f e d e r a t e R e c o r d s , Record Group 109, N a t i o n a l A r c h i v e s , Washington, D. C. ( c i t e d h e r e a f t e r as CSR). 5 S e e e s p e c i a l l y OR, X X X I I , p t . 2 , 5 0 5 - 8 3 3 ; a l s o , p t . 3 , 5 7 4 - 8 7 9 . ^ J o h n s t o n , N a r r a t i v e o f M i l i t a r y O p e r a t i o n s , pp. 2 9 9 -3 0 0 ; J . E. J o h n s t o n t o B. S. E w e l l , H a r r i s o n ' s [ . V i r g i n i a ] , May 2 8 , 1862, R i c h a r d S t o d d e r t E w e l l P a p e r s , m i c r o f i l m a t t h e V i r g i n i a H i s t o r i c a l S o c i e t y , Richmond. 212 7 "Benjamin S t o d d e r t E w e l l , " D i c t i o n a r y o f American  B i o g r a p h y , V I , 228-229; George Campbell Brown, " M i l i t a r y R e m i n i s c e n c e s from 1861-1865," M a n u s c r i p t D i v i s i o n , Tennessee S t a t e L i b r a r y and A r c h i v e s , N a s h v i l l e ; E w e l l t o Samuel Cooper, Richmond, V i r g i n i a , March 8 , 1865, B. S. E w e l l , CSR; M a c k a l l t o Mrs. M a c k a l l , . E n t e r p r i s e [ M i s s i s s i p p i ] , Ja n u a r y 13, 1864, M a c k a l l P a p e r s . o S p e c i a l Orders No. 90, D a l t o n , G e o r g i a , A p r i l 1, 1864, E w e l l , CSR; S p e c i a l Orders No. 5 , D a l t o n , G e o r g i a , A p r i l 8 , 1864, i b i d . ; OR, X X X V I I I , p t . 3 , 985. ^ J o h n s t o n , N a r r a t i v e o f M i l i t a r y O p e r a t i o n s , p. 351. 1 00R, X X X I I , p t . 2 , 505-833, P t . 3 , 574-879; X X X V I I I , -p t . . 4 , 654-807, p t . 5, 858-89I; i n su p p o r t o f the statement about B r e n t , see e s p e c i a l l y X X X I I , p t . 2, 792-812. 1 1 I b i d . , XXXLX, p t . 1, 807; John B e l l Hood, Advance and  R e t r e a t (New O r l e a n s : Hood Orphan M e m o r i a l Fund, 1880), p. 262. 213 12 Johnston t o J . R. P o i n s e t t , Augusta [ V i r g i n i a ] , June 2 3 , 1858, Joseph Eggleston Johnston Papers, Duke U n i v e r s i t y , Durham, North C a r o l i n a ; W i g f a l l t o Johnston, North Garden Depot, V i r g i n i a , March 18, 1864, Joseph Eggleston Johnston Papers, Huntington L i b r a r y ; S. Bassett French B i o g r a p h i c a l Sketches, V i r g i n i a State L i b r a r y , Richmond. Johnston's aides followed the same s o c i a l p a t t e r n . Lieutenants Richard I r v i n e Manning and Wade Hampton, J r . , came from prominent South C a r o l i n a f a m i l i e s , both of which provided s t a t e governors; Lieutenant J . B a r r o l l Washington was the "nearest c o l l a t e r a l descendant of Genl. Geo. Washington." D i c t i o n a r y of American Biography, V I I I , 213-214, X I I , 251; S. Bassett French B i o g r a p h i c a l Sketches. 13 OR, XX, p t . 2, 489; Johnston t o Davis, A t l a n t a [Georgia], September 9 , 1863, Johnston Papers, Duke U n i v e r s i t y . "^"Proceedings of the F i r s t Confederate Congress, 4 t h S e s s i o n , 7 December, 1863-18 February, 1864," Southern. H i s t o r i c a l S o c i e t y Papers, L (1953), 420-421. 1 5 W i g f a l l t o [Johnston], , V i r g i n i a [ A p r i l 1 8 6 4 ? ] , Johnston Papers, Huntington L i b r a r y . 214 l 60R, S e r i e s IV, I I I , 4 5 0 - 4 5 5 , 3 l 6 , 497-498. A b r i e f a n a l y s i s of the debate may be found i n W i l f r i d Buck Yearns, The Confederate Congress (Athens, Georgia: U n i v e r s i t y of Georgia Press, i 9 6 0 ) , pp. 108-109. 17 [E. J . Harv i e ] t o Lewis E. Har v i e , Dalton, Georgia, February 10, February 11, 1864, Endorsements on L e t t e r s Received, Army of Tennessee, 1863-1864; [ L e t t e r s Sent, 1864;] and S p e c i a l Orders, 1864, Chapter I I , Volume 15| , 3 0 5 - 3 0 6 , War Department C o l l e c t i o n of Confederate Records ( h e r e a f t e r c i t e d as Ch. I I , V o l . 1 5 | ) . l 8 J o h n s t o n to W i g f a l l , Dalton [Georgia], A p r i l [ 2 3 ] , 1864, W i g f a l l Papers; see a l s o Johnston's l e t t e r of March 6, 1864, i b i d . 19 Johnston t o W i g f a l l , Dalton [Georgia] , A p r i l 30, 1864, i b i d . 2 00R, S e r i e s IV, I I I , 352-353-21 Johnston t o Cooper, Lost Mountain [Georgia] , June 8 , 1864, Johnston Papers, Huntington L i b r a r y . 2 20R, L I I , p t . 2 , 713. 2 3 I b i d . , S e r i e s IV, I I , 944-946; I I I , 4 4 - 4 5 . 24 I b i d . , 170. 215 25 See B r a x t o n B r a g g Correspondence Book, 24 F e b r u a r y , 1864-26 J a n u a r y , 1865, C i v i l War P a p e r s , L o u i s i a n a H i s t o r i c a l A s s o c i a t i o n C o l l e c t i o n , H o w a r d - T i l t o n M e m o r i a l L i b r a r y , Tulane U n i v e r s i t y , New O r l e a n s . 26 J o h n s t o n t o W i g f a l l , [ D a l t o n , G e o r g i a , ] A p r i l 23 [1864], W i g f a l l P a p e r s . 2 7 J o h n s t o n t o Cooper, D a l t o n [ G e o r g i a ] , A p r i l 12, 1864, H a r v i e , CSR. 28 G e n e r a l Order No. -, Chattanooga, Tennessee [ 1863?] , C o n f e d e r a t e S t a t e s Army C o l l e c t i o n , L o u i s i a n a S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y , B a t o n Rouge. 29 Ch. I I , V o l . 15|, 200-208. 30 I b i d . ; L e t t e r s Sent and Endorsements, Army o f Tennessee, 1863-1864, C h a p t e r I I , Volume 158£, 37-71-, War Department C o l l e c t i o n o f C o n f e d e r a t e Records ( h e r e a f t e r c i t e d as Ch. I I , V o l . 1 5 8 i ) , e s p e c i a l l y H a r v i e t o H i l l , D a l t o n , G e o r g i a , F e b r u a r y 19, A p r i l 5, 1864. 31 [ H a r v i e ] t o H i l l , D a l t o n , G e o r g i a , March 6, 1864, Ch. I I , V o l . 158£, 52. • 02 H a r v i e t o McMicken, D a l t o n , G e o r g i a , March 18, 1864, Ch. I I , V o l . 15|,. 207. 3 3 I b l d . , 200-208. 2l6 34 Ch. I I , V o l . 158£, 37-71, 275-308; OR,Series IV, I I I , 297-299. 3 5 C h . I I , V o l . 15^, 200-208; V o l . 158^, 37-71, 275-308. 36 [ H a r v i e ] t o M a j o r A y e r s , D a l t o n , G e o r g i a , January. 30, 1864, i b i d . , 40. 3 7 [ H a r v i e ] t o C a p t a i n Guy Dreux, D a l t o n , G e o r g i a , March 9, 1864, i b i d . , 54. [ H a r v i e ] t o [B. F.]Cheatham, D a l t o n , G e o r g i a , F e b r u a r y 19, 1864, i b i d . , 46. 30 J-^For correspondence r e l a t i n g t o t h i s d i s p u t e , see i b i d . , 62-65. 40 [Harvie] t o [W. J.] Hardee, D a l t o n , G e o r g i a , A p r i l 6, 1864, i b i d . , 65; a copy o f t h i s l e t t e r was a l s o sent t o c o r p s commander J . B. Hood. 4 1 [Harvie] t o W. J . Hardee, D a l t o n , G e o r g i a , A p r i l 28, 1864, i b i d . , 70. 42 [ H a r v i e ] t o M a j o r s W. C l a r e and P. B. Lee, D a l t o n , G e o r g i a , A p r i l 6, 1864, i b i d . , 65. 43 OR, S e r i e s TV, I I I , 297- F o r Richmond's i n t e r e s t i n i n s p e c t i o n see a l s o the c i r c u l a r o f June 4, 1864, i b i d . , 466-471. 217 4 4 I b i d . , S e r i e s I , X X X V I I I , p t . 5, 956-957; a l s o XXXLX, p t . 3, 871. The growing weakness o f the i n s p e c t o r g e n e r a l ' s department i s c o n f i r m e d i n the few l e t t e r s o f November-December 1864, found i n L e t t e r s Sent,, I n s p e c t o r G e n e r a l o f the Army of Tennessee, 1864-1865, C h a p t e r I I , Volume 19£, War Department C o l l e c t i o n of C o n f e d e r a t e Records. 4 50R, XXXLX, p t . 3, 8 8 0 - 8 8 1 . 4 6 I b i d . , 881. 218 CHAPTER V I I I C o n c l u s i o n March 1862-December 1864 E f f e c t i v e m i l i t a r y a d m i n i s t r a t i o n was e s s e n t i a l t o the C o n f e d e r a c y . W i t h o u t i t she would be unable t o o r g a n i z e and t r a i n h e r a r m i e s i n camp, o r t o d i r e c t them i n campaign o r on the b a t t l e f i e l d . M i l i t a r y and p o l i t i c a l l e a d e r s a l i k e r e a l i z e d t h i s , and drew on the m i l i t a r y t h e o r y and p r a c t i c e o f the o l d U n i t e d S t a t e s Army i n r e p e a t e d a t t e m p t s t o e v o l v e an a d m i n i s t r a t i v e system f o r t h e C o n f e d e r a t e a r m i e s . Any s u c c e s s i n f i e l d a d m i n i s t r a t i o n depended on t h e i m p o r t a n t r o l e s o f the c h i e f o f s t a f f , t h e a d j u t a n t g e n e r a l , and the i n s p e c t o r g e n e r a l . W i t h o u t e x c e p t i o n t h e f i e l d commanders of t h e Army of Tennessee chose t o a p p o i n t c h i e f s o f s t a f f , but t h e r e was no agreement on t h e r o l e o f t h a t o f f i c e r . G e n e r a l A. S. J o h n s t o n a s s o c i a t e d the c h i e f of s t a f f w i t h command f u n c t i o n s ; B e a u r e g a r d a l l o w e d J o r d a n c o n s i d e r a b l e a d m i n i s t r a t i v e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y ; B r a g g v a r i e d i n h i s a t t i t u d e s , but was i n -c l i n e d t o r e s t r i c t the c h i e f o f s t a f f ' s d u t i e s t o those o f t h e a d j u t a n t g e n e r a l ' s department; J . E. J o h n s t o n r e l i e d on M a c k a l l as the l i n k between a d m i n i s t r a t i o n and command, and c o n s u l t e d him on t a c t i c a l m a t t e r s ; and Hood made no e f f e c t i v e use a t a l l o f h i s c h i e f s t a f f o f f i c e r s . The wide d i f f e r e n c e 219 i n r o l e r e f l e c t e d the q u a l i f i c a t i o n s o f each c h i e f o f s t a f f , h i s commander's i n t e n t i o n , and the a b i l i t y o f the two men t o work w e l l t o g e t h e r . By c o n t r a s t , t h e r e was no doubt about the d u t i e s o f the a d j u t a n t g e n e r a l ' s department. Army r e g u l a t i o n s d e f i n e d t h e s e a t l e n g t h . They c o n s i s t e d p r i m a r i l y o f paperwork, and most i m p o r t a n t i n an immediate sense was the a d j u t a n t ' s r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r o r d e r s and c o r r e s p o n d e n c e . As j o i n t c h i e f o f s t a f f and a d j u t a n t g e n e r a l , under Beauregard and B r agg, J o r d a n i n t r o d u c e d the elements of e f f i c i e n c y i n t o - h i s department. He c l a s s i f i e d i t s work, a l l o c a t e d i t t o s p e c i f i c a s s i s t a n t s , and i n s i s t e d t h a t a l l communications be d i r e c t e d t h r o u g h him, as head of the department. To a c e r t a i n degree t h i s o r g a n i z a t i o n was m a i n t a i n e d under B r a g g , but i t was undermined by t h e g e n e r a l ' s tendency h i m s e l f t o d i r e c t , and sometimes even t o e x e c u t e , r o u t i n e a d m i n i s t r a t i v e work. As a r e s u l t t h e a d j u t a n t g e n e r a l ' s department g r a d u a l l y l o s t the coherence of i t s e a r l i e r o r g a n i z a t i o n . T h i s p r o c e s s was a c c e l e r a t e d t h r o u g h o u t 1864, when under J o h n s t o n the f i e l d work of the department was c a r r i e d on by a s s i s t a n t a d j u t a n t s , and under Hood became c o m p l e t e l y u n r e l i a b l e , i n the e s s e n t i a l d u t y of I s s u i n g o r d e r s . The i n s p e c t o r g e n e r a l ' s department r e p r e s e n t e d a f i e l d development of the e a r l i e r i n s p e c t i o n s e r v i c e . At one time i n s p e c t o r s had f u n c t i o n e d as i n d i v i d u a l o f f i c e r s , a p p o i n t e d f rom the l i n e f o r a s p e c i f i c assignment on i n s p e c t i o n d u t y . Any n e c e s s a r y a s s i s t a n c e was p r o v i d e d by the a d j u t a n t 220 g e n e r a l ' s department. But i n Beauregard's Army o f Tennessee a d i s t i n c t department o f i n s p e c t i o n was e s t a b l i s h e d , w i t h i t s own o r g a n i z a t i o n and i t s own h i e r a r c h y o f o f f i c e r s , i n a l i n e of a u t h o r i t y f r om army t o b r i g a d e l e v e l . Under Beard and H a r v i e , s u c c e s s i v e i n s p e c t o r s g e n e r a l , the department was d i s t i n g u i s h e d by i t s r e l a t i v e Independence o f t h e commanding g e n e r a l , and by an u n u s u a l c o n t i n u i t y o f s e r v i c e among i t s o f f i c e r s . Commended f o r i t s e f f i c i e n c y , t he department depended f o r i t s s u c c e s s on m a i n t a i n i n g good r e l a t i o n s w i t h the l i n e and s t a f f u n i t s i t i n s p e c t e d . I n t h i s e s s e n t i a l f a c t o r B eard was l a r g e l y s u c c e s s f u l , but H a r v i e t h r o u g h e x c e s s i v e z e a l reawakened the t r a d i t i o n a l c o n f l i c t between h e a d q u a r t e r s s t a f f and s u b o r d i n a t e l i n e commanders. I n t h e e n s u i n g d i s p u t e t h e a u t h o r i t y o f the l i n e o f f i c e r s was u p h e l d , i n s p e c t o r s were made p r i m a r i l y r e s p o n s i b l e t o t h e l i n e u n i t s t h e y s e r v e d , and the i n t e g r a t e d d e p a r t m e n t a l s t r u c t u r e o f i n s p e c t i o n c o l l a p s e d . I n s p i t e o f h i s a p p e a l s f o r s u p p o r t , H a r v i e was ne v e r a b l e t o r e s t o r e i t . The f i e l d p r a c t i c e o f the Army o f Tennessee t h u s demonstrated a number o f a t t e m p t s t o d e v e l o p the s t a f f r o l e . Among the i n n o v a t i o n s were t h e app o i n t m e n t s o f c h i e f s o f s t a f f , t he c o o r d i n a t i o n o f a d m i n i s t r a t i v e work a t a l l command l e v e l s t h r o u g h a d e p a r t m e n t a l s t r u c t u r e , and t h e emergence o f t h e i n s p e c t o r g e n e r a l ' s department. These changes were marked, however, by a s e r i e s o f c o n f l i c t s w hich f i n a l l y n e gated them. 221 The P r e s i d e n t and the War Department wished t o e s t a b l i s h a c e n t r a l i z e d system o f a d m i n i s t r a t i o n . A permanent s t a f f c o r p s , d i r e c t e d from Richmond, would s e l e c t c a n d i d a t e s f o r s t a f f commissions, t r a i n them, and c o n t r o l t h e i r assignment t o the f i e l d a r m i e s o f the C o n f e d e r a c y . T h i s p r o p o s a l , i f c a r r i e d o u t , would i n c r e a s e the War Department's c o n t r o l o v e r the f i e l d commanders, and a t the same time make the s t a f f more independent o f the l i n e . F o r t h e s e two r e a s o n s the l i n e commanders of the Army of Tennessee opposed the p l a n f o r a c e n t r a l i z e d s t a f f system. Even B r a g g , who s u p p o r t e d the scheme when on assignment i n Richmond i n 1864, showed no i n c l i n a t i o n as a f i e l d commander t o r e l a x h i s a u t h o r i t y o v e r h i s own s t a f f . O p p o s i t i o n from t h e g e n e r a l s combined w i t h the immediate problems o f t h e war t o p r e v e n t t h e e s t a b l i s h m e n t of a c e n t r a l i z e d a d m i n i s t r a t i v e system. In t h e s e c i r c u m s t a n c e s the army commanders became p e c u l i a r l y r e s p o n s i b l e f o r the performance of t h e i r s t a f f . A l t h o u g h a p p o i n t m e n t s had t o be f o r m a l l y approved by the P r e s i d e n t , the g e n e r a l s s e l e c t e d t h e i r own o f f i c e r s and l a r g e l y d e t e r m i n e d the r o l e t h e y s h o u l d p l a y . The g e n e r a l s d i s c o v e r e d i n t h e f i e l d what t h e y had a l r e a d y e x p e r i e n c e d , from a d i f f e r e n t s t a n d p o i n t , i n t h e i r d e a l i n g s w i t h Richmond--t h a t where t h e y , as army commanders, had r e s e n t e d t h e c e n t r a l i z a t i o n o f a d m i n i s t r a t i v e a u t h o r i t y i n the War D e p a r t -ment and an independent s t a f f c o r p s , the c o r p s and d i v i s i o n commanders r e s e n t e d i n t h e i r t u r n the c e n t r a l i z a t i o n o f f i e l d a d m i n i s t r a t i o n under army h e a d q u a r t e r s s t a f f . I n each case 222 t h e l i n e o f f i c e r s won t h e d i s p u t e , s e r v i n g the i n t e r e s t s o f t h e i r p e r s o n a l a u t h o r i t y a t the expense o f army a d m i n i s t r a -t i o n as a whole. Perhaps e q u a l l y i n t e r e s t e d i n the ag g r a n d i z e m e n t . o f t h e i r own r o l e , a t the expense of the l i n e , were the h e a d q u a r t e r s s t a f f . Thus t h e r e was a t d i f f e r e n t l e v e l s o f the m i l i t a r y h i e r a r c h y a s i g n i f i c a n t r e j e c t i o n o f the p r i n c i p l e o f s u b o r d i n a t i o n , an i n s i s t e n c e on the p e r s o n a l r a t h e r t h a n t h e s y s t e m a t i c , and a l a c k o f harmony between command and a d m i n i s t r a t i o n . As a r e s u l t the Co n f e d e r a c y f a i l e d t o d e v e l o p an e f f i c i e n t a d m i n i s t r a t i v e system. By r e l y i n g on the p e r s o n a l e q u a t i o n , i t exposed the s t a f f t o the r i v a l r i e s and j e a l o u s i e s w h i c h p l a g u e d the C o n f e d e r a t e a r m i e s , and encouraged many s t a f f o f f i c e r s t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n t h e s e d i s p u t e s . That the o f f i c e r s d i d p a r t i c i p a t e was p r o b a b l y due i n p a r t t o the t r a d i t i o n a l d e m o c r a t i c e g a l i t a r i a n i s m o f the South; but I t a l s o i n d i c a t e d the p e r s i s t e n c e i n the C o n f e d e r a t e a r m i e s o f the l o n g - s t a n d i n g American t r a d i t i o n o f h o s t i l i t y between p o l i t i c a l c o n t r o l and m i l i t a r y command, between c e n t r a l i z a -t i o n and independence i n the f i e l d , between s t a f f and l i n e . Thus D a v i d Donald's s u g g e s t i o n t h a t the Co n f e d e r a c y " d i e d o f democracy" may a p p r o p r i a t e l y be a p p l i e d t o army a d m i n i s -t r a t i o n , i f t o t h a t d i a g n o s i s i s added the c o n t r i b u t o r y f a c t o r of an i n h e r i t e d weakness f o r d i s p u t e o v e r the n a t u r e of m i l i t a r y a u t h o r i t y . 223 Note "'"David D o n a l d , "Died o f Democracy," Why the N o r t h  Won the C i v i l War, D a v i d D o n a l d , ed. (New Y o r k : C o l l i e r Books, 1962), pp. 7 9 - 9 0 . 224 SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY Only Items c i t e d i n the p r e v i o u s pages a r e i n c l u d e d i n t h i s b i b l i o g r a p h y . Many o t h e r m a n u s c r i p t s , p e r i o d i c a l s , and books were s e a r c h e d , but r e v e a l e d l i t t l e o r n o t h i n g about the C o n f e d e r a t e s t a f f . M a n u s c r i p t s B e a u r e g a r d , P i e r r e Gustave -Toutant, P a p e r s , Duke U n i v e r s i t y , Durham, N o r t h C a r o l i n a . B r a g g , B r a x t o n , P a p e r s , W i l l i a m P. Palmer C o l l e c t i o n , Western Reserve H i s t o r i c a l S o c i e t y , C l e v e l a n d , Ohio. , Correspondence Book, 24 F e b r u a r y , 1864-26 J a n u a r y , 1865, C i v i l War P a p e r s , L o u i s i a n a H i s t o r i c a l A s s o c i a t i o n C o l l e c t i o n , H o w a r d - T i l t o n M e m o r i a l L i b r a r y , Tulane U n i v e r s i t y , New O r l e a n s . Bragg-Beauregard H e a d q u a r t e r s Book, i b i d . Brown, George C a m p b e l l , " M i l i t a r y R e m i n i s c e n c e s from l 8 6 l -1865," Tennessee S t a t e L i b r a r y and A r c h i v e s , N a s h v i l l e . Buck, I r v i n g Ashby, P a p e r s , S o u t h e r n H i s t o r i c a l C o l l e c t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y of N o r t h C a r o l i n a , C h a p e l H i l l . C i v i l War P a p e r s , L o u i s i a n a H i s t o r i c a l A s s o c i a t i o n C o l l e c t i o n . C l a y , Clement C l a i b o r n e , P a p e r s , Duke U n i v e r s i t y . 225 Compiled S e r v i c e Records o f C o n f e d e r a t e G e n e r a l and S t a f f O f f i c e r s and N o n r e g i m e n t a l E n l i s t e d Men, War Department C o l l e c t i o n o f C o n f e d e r a t e R e c o r d s , Record Group 109, N a t i o n a l A r c h i v e s , Washington, D. C. Co n f e d e r a t e S t a t e s Army C o l l e c t i o n , L o u i s i a n a S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y , B a t o n Rouge. Cumming, Jo s e p h B., "War R e c o l l e c t i o n s , " t y p e s c r i p t i n the Sou t h e r n H i s t o r i c a l C o l l e c t i o n . D a v i s , J e f f e r s o n , P a p e r s , Duke U n i v e r s i t y . Endorsements on L e t t e r s R e c e i v e d , Army o f Tennessee, 1863-1864; [ L e t t e r s S e n t , 1864;] and S p e c i a l O r d e r s , 1864, C h a p t e r I I , Volume 1 5 i , War Department C o l l e c t i o n o f C o n f e d e r a t e R e c o r d s . E w e l l , R i c h a r d S t o d d e r t , P a p e r s , m i c r o f i l m a t the V i r g i n i a H i s t o r i c a l S o c i e t y , Richmond. F r e n c h , S. B a s s e t t , B i o g r a p h i c a l S k e t c h e s , V i r g i n i a S t a t e L i b r a r y , Richmond. Henry, Gustavus A d o l p h u s , P a p e r s , S o u t h e r n H i s t o r i c a l C o l l e c t i o n . Johnson, C h a r l e s James, L e t t e r s , L o u i s i a n a S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y . J o h n s t o n , A l b e r t S i d n e y and W i l l i a m P r e s t o n , P a p e r s , Mrs. Mason B a r r e t C o l l e c t i o n , H o w a r d - T i l t o n M e m o r i a l L i b r a r y . J o h n s t o n , J o s e p h E g g l e s t o n , P a p e r s , Duke U n i v e r s i t y . , P a p e r s , Henry E. H u n t i n g t o n L i b r a r y , San M a r i n o , C a l i f o r n i a . J o r d a n , Thomas, P a p e r s , Duke U n i v e r s i t y . 226 L e t t e r s Sent and Endorsements, Army of Tennessee, 1863-1864, C h a p t e r I I , Volume 158£, War Department C o l l e c t i o n o f C o n f e d e r a t e R e c o r d s . L e t t e r s S e n t , I n s p e c t o r G e n e r a l o f the Army of Tennessee, 1864-1865, C h a p t e r I I , Volume 1 9 £ , i b i d . L o v e l l , M a n s f i e l d , P a p e r s , Henry E. H u n t i n g t o n L i b r a r y . M a c k a l l , W i l l i a m Whann, P a p e r s , S o u t h e r n H i s t o r i c a l C o l l e c t i o n , P o l k , L e o n i d a s , P a p e r s , m i c r o f i l m i n the S o u t h e r n H i s t o r i c a l C o l l e c t i o n . W i g f a l l , L o u i s T r e z e v a n t , P a p e r s , L i b r a r y o f Congress, Washington, D. C. P r i n t e d P r i m a r y S o u r c e s Buck, I r v i n g Ashby. C l e b u r n e and H i s Command. Thomas Robson Hay, ed. J a c k s o n , M i s s . : McCowat-Mercer P r e s s , I n c . , 1959. C a r t e r , W i l l i a m H. C r e a t i o n o f t h e American G e n e r a l S t a f f . Senate Document No. 119, 6 8 t h Congress, 1st S e s s i o n , 1924. Cheatham, Benjamin F r a n k l i n . "The L o s t O p p o r t u n i t y a t S p r i n g H i l l , Tennessee," S o u t h e r n H i s t o r i c a l S o c i e t y P a p e r s , LX ( l 8 8 l ) , 524-541. C o r b i n , Henry C , and T h i a n , Raphael P., c o m p i l e r s , L e g i s l a t i v e H i s t o r y of t h e G e n e r a l S t a f f o f the Army of t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s from 1775 t o 1901. Washington: Government P r i n t i n g O f f i c e , 1901. 227 C r a i g h i l l , W i l l i a m P. The Army O f f i c e r ' s Pocket Companion: p r i n c i p a l l y d e s i g n e d f o r S t a f f O f f i c e r s i n the F i e l d . New Y o r k : D. Van N o s t r a n d , 1863, c o p y r i g h t l 8 6 l . D a v i s , J e f f e r s o n . J e f f e r s o n D a v i s , C o n s t i t u t i o n a l i s t . H i s L e t t e r s , P a p e r s , and Speeches. ,'Dunbar Rowland, ed. 10 v o l s . J a c k s o n , M i s s . : M i s s i s s i p p i Department o f A r c h i v e s and H i s t o r y , 1923. Dodd, W. 0 . "Reminiscences o f Hood's Tennessee Campaign," S o u t h e r n H i s t o r i c a l S o c i e t y P a p e r s , IX (1881), 518-524. Drake, Edwin L., ed. A n n a l s o f the Army o f Tennessee. N a s h v i l l e : A. D. Haynes, 1878. Goode, George Brown. V i r g i n i a C o u s i n s . Richmond: J . W. Randolph and E n g l i s h , 1887. Heitman, F r a n c i s B. H i s t o r i c a l R e g i s t e r and D i c t i o n a r y o f the U n i t e d S t a t e s Army... 1789-1903. 2 v o l s . Urbana: U n i v e r s i t y o f I l l i n o i s P r e s s , 1965. Hood, John B e l l . Advance and R e t r e a t . New O r l e a n s : Hood Orphan M e m o r i a l Fund, 1880. J o h n s t o n , J o s e p h E. N a r r a t i v e o f M i l i t a r y O p e r a t i o n s . New York: D. A p p l e t o n and Company, 1874. J o h n s t o n , W i l l i a m P r e s t o n . The L i f e o f G e n e r a l A l b e r t S i d n e y J o h n s t o n . New York: D. A p p l e t o n and Company, 1879. J o m i n i , A n t o i n e H e n r i . The A r t of War. G. H. M e h d e l l and W. P. C r a i g h i l l , t r a n s l a t o r s . P h i l a d e l p h i a : J . B. L i p p i n c o t t and Company, 1862. J o r d a n , Thomas. "Notes of a C o n f e d e r a t e S t a f f O f f i c e r a t S h i l o h , " B a t t l e s and Leaders of the C i v i l War (Robert U. Johnson and C l a r e n c e C. B u e l , eds.; 4 v o l s . ; New Y o r k : The C e n t u r y Company, 1887-1888), I , 5 9 4 - 6 0 3 . . " R e c o l l e c t i o n s o f G e n e r a l Beauregard's S e r v i c e i n West Tennessee i n the S p r i n g o f 1862," S o u t h e r n H i s t o r i c a l S o c i e t y P a p e r s , V I I I ( 1 8 8 0 ) , 404 - 4 1 7 . L i s t o f S t a f f O f f i c e r s o f t h e C o n f e d e r a t e S t a t e s Army, l 8 6 l -1865. Washington: Government P r i n t i n g O f f i c e , 1891. M a r s h a l l , C h a r l e s . An Aide-de-Camp o f Lee. S i r F r e d e r i c k M a u r i c e , ed. B o s t o n : L i t t l e , Brown, and Company, 1927. Memorandum o f S t a f f O f f i c e r s i n the Army o f Tennessee f o r F e b r u a r y , 1864. C o n f e d e r a t e i m p r i n t , 1864. P o l k , W i l l i a m M e c k l e n b u r g . L e o n i d a s P o l k , B i s h o p and G e n e r a l . 2 v o l s . New Y o r k : Longman's, 1893-P o r t e r , James D. C o n f e d e r a t e M i l i t a r y H i s t o r y : V I I I , Tennessee. Clement A. Evans, ed. New York: Thomas Y o s e l o f f , 1962 ( o r i g i n a l e d i t i o n , 1899). " P r o c e e d i n g s o f t h e F i r s t C o n f e d e r a t e Congress, 4 t h S e s s i o n , 7 December 1863-18 F e b r u a r y 1864," S o u t h e r n H i s t o r i c a l S o c i e t y P a p e r s , L (1953). Remington, J . D. "Cause o f Hood's F a i l u r e a t S p r i n g H i l l , " C o n f e d e r a t e V e t e r a n , X X I (1913), 569-571. 229 R e g u l a t i o n s f o r the Army o f the C o n f e d e r a t e S t a t e s , and f o r the Q u a r t e r m a s t e r ' s and Pay Departments. The U n i f o r m and D r e s s o f the Army. The A r t i c l e s o f War. R e v i s e d e d i t i o n . New O r l e a n s : B l o o m f i e l d and S t e e l , l 8 6 l . R e v i s e d R e g u l a t i o n s f o r t h e Army o f the U n i t e d S t a t e s , 1861. P h i l a d e l p h i a : J . G. L. Brown, 1861. Richmond, V i r g i n i a . D a i l y Richmond Whig. R i d l e y , B r o m f i e l d L. B a t t l e s and S k e t c h e s of the Army o f Tennessee, 1861-1865. M e x i c o , Mo.: M i s s o u r i P r i n t i n g and P u b l i s h i n g Company, 1906. Roman, A l f r e d . M i l i t a r y O p e r a t i o n s of G e n e r a l B e a u r e g a r d . 2 v o l s . New York: Harper and B r o t h e r s , 1883. S c o t t , H. L. M i l i t a r y Dictionary.'.' New Y o r k : Greenwood P r e s s , 1968, o r i g i n a l e d i t i o n 1861. S o r r e l , G. Moxley. R e c o l l e c t i o n s of a C o n f e d e r a t e S t a f f O f f i c e r . New Y o r k : Neale P u b l i s h i n g Company, 1905. S t e w a r t , A. P. " C o n t r o v e r s y upon Hood's Campaign," C o n f e d e r a t e V e t e r a n , XV (1907), 425. S t o n e , Henry. " R e p e l l i n g Hood's I n v a s i o n o f Tennessee," B a t t l e s and Leaders o f the C i v i l War, IV, 440-464. A S u b a l t e r n , "Notes on Our Army," So u t h e r n L i t e r a r y Messenger, X (1844), 86-88, 155-157, 246-251, 283-287, 373-377, 750-753, X I (1845), 39-47, 105-109. T a y l o r , R i c h a r d . D e s t r u c t i o n and R e c o n s t r u c t i o n : P e r s o n a l E x p e r i e n c e s o f t h e L a t e War. New Yo r k : D. A p p l e t o n and Company, 1900. 230 T a y l o r , Z a c h a r y , and S c o t t , W i n f i e l d . Mexican War R e p o r t s . Senate E x e c u t i v e Document No. I , 30th Congress, 1st S e s s i o n , 1847. Upton, Emory. The M i l i t a r y P o l i c y of the U n i t e d S t a t e s . Washington: Government P r i n t i n g O f f i c e , 1917. War o f the R e b e l l i o n : A C o m p i l a t i o n o f the O f f i c i a l Records of t he U n i o n and C o n f e d e r a t e A r m i e s . 128 v o l s . Washington: Government P r i n t i n g O f f i c e , 1880-1901. W a t k i n s , Sam R. "Co. A y t c h . " A S i d e Show o f t h e B i g Show. New Y o r k : C o l l i e r Books, 1962. Young, John P. "Hood's F a i l u r e a t S p r i n g H i l l . " C o n f e d e r a t e V e t e r a n , X V I (1908), 25-41. Secondary Sources A p p l e t o n ' s C y c l o p e d i a o f American B i o g r a p h y . 7 v o l s . New Y o r k : D. A p p l e t o n and Company, 1888-1900. B o a t n e r , Mark M., I I I . C i v i l War D i c t i o n a r y . New Yo r k : D a v i d McKay Company, I n c . , 1959. B r i d g e s , H a l . Lee's M a v e r i c k G e n e r a l : D a n i e l Harvey H i l l . New Y o r k : M c G r a w - H i l l Book Company, I n c . , 1961. C a r t e r , W i l l i a m H. The American Army. I n d i a n a p o l i s : The B o b b s - M e r r l l l Company, I n c . , 1915-C o n n e l l y , Thomas Lawrence. Army o f the H e a r t l a n d : The Army of Tennessee, l 8 6 l - l 8 6 2 . Baton Rouge: L o u i s i a n a S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1967. Crawford, W i l l i a m T r a v i s . "The Mystery of Spring H i l l , " C i v i l War H i s t o r y , I (1955), 101-126. Crego, Arthur. "The Organization and Functions of the Confederate Army of Tennessee." Unpublished M. A. t h e s i s , L o u i s i a n a State U n i v e r s i t y , 1965. Crownover, Sims. "The B a t t l e of F r a n k l i n , " Tennessee H i s t o r i c a l Q u a r t e r l y , XIV (1955), 291-322. D i c t i o n a r y of American Biography. A l l e n Johnson and Dumas Malone, eds. 20 v o l s . New York: Charles S c r i b n e r ' s Sons, 1928-1936. Donald, David. L i n c o l n Reconsidered: Essays on the C i v i l War Era. 2nd e d i t i o n . New York: Vintage Books, 1956. , ed. Why the North Won the C i v i l War. New York: C o l l i e r Books, 1962. Dyer, John P.. The G a l l a n t Hood. I n d i a n a p o l i s : The Bobbs-M e r r i l l Company, Inc., 1950. E a r l e , Edward Meade, ed. Makers of Modern Strategy: M i l i t a r y Thought from M a c h i a v e l l i to H i t l e r . P r i n c e t o n : P r i n c e t o n U n i v e r s i t y Press, 194l. E l i o t , E l l s w o r t h , J r . West Point i n the Confederacy. New York: G. A. Baker and Company, Inc., 1 9 4 l . Freeman, Douglas S o u t h a l l . R. E. Lee. 4 v o l s . New York: Charles S c r i b n e r ' s Sons, 1934-1935-Goff, Richard D. Confederate Supply. Durham, N. C : Duke U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1969. 232 Govan, G i l b e r t E., and L i v i n g o o d , James W. A D i f f e r e n t V a l o r : The S t o r y o f G e n e r a l J o s eph E. J o h n s t o n , C. S. A. I n d i a n a p o l i s : The B o b b s - M e r r i l l Company, I n c . , 1956. Gow, June I . "The J o h n s t o n and B r e n t D i a r i e s : a Problem of A u t h o r s h i p , " C i v i l War H i s t o r y , XIV (1968), 46-50. Hay, Thomas Robson. "The Davis-Hood-Johnston C o n t r o v e r s y o f 1864," M i s s i s s i p p i V a l l e y H i s t o r i c a l Review, X I (1924), 54-84. . Hood's Tennessee Campaign. New Y o r k : W a l t e r N e a l e , 1929. Horn, S t a n l e y P. The Army of Tennessee. Norman, O k l a . : U n i v e r s i t y o f Oklahoma P r e s s , 1953-__. The D e c i s i v e B a t t l e o f N a s h v i l l e . B a t o n Rouge: L o u i s i a n a S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1956. Howard, M i c h a e l , ed. The Theory and P r a c t i c e o f War: E s s a y s P r e s e n t e d t o C a p t a i n B. H. L i d d e l l H a r t . London: C a s s e l l and Company, L t d . , 1965. Hughes, N a t h a n i e l C h e a i r s , J r . G e n e r a l W i l l i a m J . Hardee: Old R e l i a b l e . B a t o n Rouge: L o u i s i a n a S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1965. H u n t i n g t o n , Samuel P. The S o l d i e r and the S t a t e : The Theory and P o l i t i c s o f C i v i l - M i l i t a r y R e l a t i o n s . New Y o r k : V i n t a g e Books, 1957-I n g e r s o l l , L. D. A H i s t o r y o f t h e War Department of the U n i t e d S t a t e s . Washington, D. C : F r a n c i s B. Mohun, 1879. I r v i n e , D a l l a s D. "The O r i g i n o f C a p i t a l S t a f f s , " J o u r n a l of Modern H i s t o r y , X (1938), l 6 l - 1 7 9 -McWhiney, Grady. B r a x t o n Bragg and C o n f e d e r a t e D e f e a t : Volume I , F i e l d Command. New Y o r k : Columbia U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1969. Meneely, A. Howard. The War Department, l 8 6 l : A Study I n M o b i l i z a t i o n and A d m i n i s t r a t i o n . New York: Columbia U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1928. N a t i o n a l C y c l o p e d i a o f American B i o g r a p h y . 51 v o l s . New Yo r k : James T. White and Company, 1898-1969. N i c h o l s , James L. The C o n f e d e r a t e Q u a r t e r m a s t e r i n the T r a n s - M i s s i s s i p p i . A u s t i n : U n i v e r s i t y o f Texas P r e s s , 1964. P a r k s , J oseph H. G e n e r a l L e o n i d a s P o l k , C. S. A.: The F i g h t i n g B i s h o p . B a t o n Rouge: L o u i s i a n a S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1962. R o l a n d , C h a r l e s P. A l b e r t S i d n e y J o h n s t o n : S o l d i e r of Three R e p u b l i c s . A u s t i n : U n i v e r s i t y o f Texas P r e s s , 1964. S h e l l e n b e r g e r , John K. "The F i g h t i n g a t S p r i n g H i l l , Tennessee," C o n f e d e r a t e V e t e r a n , XXXVI (1928), 100-103, 1 4 0 - 1 4 3 , 188. S m i t h , J u s t i n H. The War w i t h M e x i c o . 2 v o l s . G l o u c e s t e r , Mass.: P e t e r S m i t h , 1963. 234 V a n d i v e r , Prank. P l o u g h s h a r e s i n t o Swords: J o s i a h Gorgas and C o n f e d e r a t e Ordnance. A u s t i n : U n i v e r s i t y o f Texas P r e s s , 1952. . R e b e l B r a s s : The C o n f e d e r a t e Command System. B a t o n Rouge: L o u i s i a n a S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1956. Warner, E z r a J . G e n e r a l s i n Gray. B a t o n Rouge: L o u i s i a n a S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1959. W e i g l e y , R u s s e l l F. H i s t o r y o f the U n i t e d S t a t e s Army. New Y o r k : The M a c m i l l a n Company, 1967. W h i t e , Leonard D. The J e f f e r s o n i a n s : A Study i n A d m i n i s t r a t i v e H i s t o r y , 1801-1829. New York: The F r e e P r e s s , 1965. . The J a c k s o n i a n s : A Study i n A d m i n i s t r a t i v e H i s t o r y . 1829-1861. New Y o r k : The F r e e P r e s s , 1965. W i l l i a m s , T. H a r r y . Americans a t War: The Development of the American M i l i t a r y System. New Y o r k : C o l l i e r Books, 1962. . P. G. T. B e a u r e g a r d : Napoleon In Gray. New Y o r k : C o l l i e r Books, 1962. Y e a r n s , W i l f r e d Buck. The C o n f e d e r a t e Congress. Athens: U n i v e r s i t y o f G e o r g i a P r e s s , i 9 6 0 . 235 APPENDIX C h r o n o l o g i c a l o u t l i n e o f the major campaigns and b a t t l e s o f the Army o f Tennessee 1862 March, t h e p r i n c i p a l a r m i e s o f t h e Western Con-f e d e r a c y assembled n e a r C o r i n t h , M i s s i s s i p p i , t o become the Army o f Tennessee; A p r i l 6 - 7 , t h e C o n f e d e r a t e f o r c e s under A l b e r t S i d n e y J o h n s t o n a t t a c k e d the U n i o n army o f U l y s s e s S. Grant a t the B a t t l e of S h i l o h , J o h n s t o n was k i l l e d on the b a t t l e f i e l d , B e a u r e g a r d r e p l a c e d him as commander, and on the second day o f t h e b a t t l e the C o n f e d e r a t e s were f o r c e d t o withdraw from the f i e l d ; A p r i l - J u l y , the C o n f e d e r a t e army remained i n camp, f i r s t a t C o r i n t h and t h e n a t T u p e l o , M i s s i s s i p p i , w h i l e B e auregard was r e l i e v e d o f command and r e p l a c e d by B r a x t o n B r a g g ; J u l y 2 3 - e a r l y A u gust, Bragg moved h i s army from T u p e l o t o Chattanooga, Tennessee; August 2 8 - l a t e O c t o b e r , B r a g g s t r u c k n orthwards i n t o K e n t u c k y , but a f t e r i n i t i a l s u c c e s s e s was o b l i g e d t o withdraw i n t o Tennessee; November-December, the army remained i n camp nea r M u r f r e e s b o r o , Tennessee. 1863 December 31, 1 8 6 2-January 2, 1863, Bragg*s army a s s a u l t e d U n i o n f o r c e s l e d by W i l l i a m S. Rosecrans i n the B a t t l e o f M u r f r e e s b o r o , and a f t e r an I n d e c i s i v e engagement t h e C o n f e d e r a t e s withdrew from the f i e l d ; 236 J a n u a r y - J u n e , t h e C o n f e d e r a t e s remained i n camp a t o r n e a r T u l l a h o m a , Tennessee, and Bragg weathered a demand e a r l y i n the y e a r f o r h i s replacement by a n o t h e r commander; June 2 6 - J u l y 7, t h e army moved from Tullahoma t o Chattanooga; September 8 , under Union p r e s s u r e Bragg withdrew from Chattanooga; September 19-20, Bragg and Rosecrans opposed one a n o t h e r i n the B a t t l e o f Chickamauga, but i n s p i t e o f C o n f e d e r a t e s u c c e s s on the b a t t l e f i e l d Bragg's t r o o p s f a i l e d t o t a k e Chattanooga, and s e t t l e d down i n s t e a d t o b e s i e g e i t ; September-November, th e Army of Tennessee watched Union f o r c e s i n Chattanooga, w h i l e B r a g g s u r v i v e d y e t a n o t h e r demand f o r h i s r e l i e f from command; November 2 3 - 2 5 , U n i o n r e i n f o r c e m e n t s under Grant a s s a u l t e d M i s s i o n a r y R i d g e , and drove the C o n f e d e r a t e s i n i g n o m i n i o u s r e t r e a t i n t o G e o r g i a ; December 2, Bragg was r e l i e v e d o f command, and r e p l a c e d l a t e r i n the month by Joseph E. J o h n s t o n . 1864 January-May, the Army of Tennessee remained i n camp a t D a l t o n , G e o r g i a , under J o h n s t o n ' s command; May- September, W i l l i a m T. Sherman's Union army f o r c e d the C o n f e d e r a t e s t o withdraw towards A t l a n t a ; J u l y 17, w i t h -d r a w a l l e d t o J o h n s t o n ' s replacement by John B. Hood; September 2, Hood s u r r e n d e r e d A t l a n t a t o Sherman; September-November, Hood l e f t G e o r g i a f o r Alabama and Tennessee, h o p i n g t o draw Sherman a f t e r him, but Sherman c o n t i n u e d h i s march t h r o u g h G e o r g i a t o the sea; November 2 9 - 3 0 , Hood t r i e d and f a i l e d t o t r a p the army of 237 John M. S c h o f i e l d a t S p r i n g H i l l , Tennessee; November 30, t h e C o n f e d e r a t e s caught up w i t h S c h o f i e l d ' s men and a t t a c k e d them i n the c o s t l y but u n s u c c e s s f u l B a t t l e o f F r a n k l i n ; December 15, Hood was r o u t e d by George H. Thomas i n the B a t t l e o f N a s h v i l l e , the l a s t major engage-ment f o r t h e Army o f Tennessee. 1865 J a n u a r y - A p r i l , the army withdrew from Tennessee, Hood was r e p l a c e d by J o h n s t o n , and the s h a t t e r e d army f i n a l l y s u r r e n d e r e d t o overwhelming f o r c e s a t B e n t o n v i l l e , N o r t h C a r o l i n a , on A p r i l 2 6 , 1865. The C i v i l War was ov e r . 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0093318/manifest

Comment

Related Items