were not fitted, either by their number or their aptitudes, for
offensive action upon the water; but so long as their food and
ammunition lasted, though an occasional vessel might run by them, no
steady stream of supplies, such as every armed organization needs, could
pass up the Mississippi. Finally, though the garrison could not move,
there lay behind or under the forts a number of armed vessels, whose
precise powers were unknown, but concerning which most exaggerated
rumors were current.
The question, therefore, looming before Farragut was precisely that
which had been debated before the President in Washington; precisely
that on which Fox had differed from Porter and Barnard. It was, again,
closely analogous to that which divided Sherman and Grant when the
latter, a year after Farragut ran by the forts, made his famous decision
to cut adrift from his communications by the upper Mississippi, to march
past Vicksburg by the west bank of the river, to cross below the works,
and so cut off the great stronghold of the Mississippi from the country
upon which it depended for food and re-enforcements.[I] But as Grant's
decision rested upon a balance of arguments applicable to the problem
before him, so did Farragut's upon a calculation of the risks and
advantages attendant, respectively, upon the policy of waiting for the
forts to fall, or of speeding by them to destroy the resources upon
which they depended.
[Footnote I: The following is Grant's account of a matter which,
but for Sherman's own zeal in proclaiming the merits of his
commander-in-chief, would probably have always remained unknown.
It would be difficult to find a closer parallel to the difference
of judgment existing between Farragut and Porter at New Orleans:
"When General Sherman first learned of the move I proposed to
make, he called to see me about it. I was seated on the piazza,
engaged in conversation with my staff, when he came up. After a
few moments' conversation, he said he would like to see me alone.
We passed into the house together and shut the door after us.
Sherman then expressed his alarm at the move I had ordered, saying
that I was putting myself voluntarily in a position which an enemy
would be glad to manoeuvre a year--or a long time--to get me in. I
was going into the enemy's country, with a large river behind me,
and the enemy holding points strongly fortified above and below.
He said that it was an axiom in war that when any great body of
troops moved against an enemy they should do so from a base of
supplies which they would guard as the apple of the eye, etc. He
pointed out all the difficulties that might be encountered in the
campaign proposed, and stated in turn what would be the true
campaign to make. This was, in substance, to go back until high
ground could be reached on the east bank of the river, fortify
there and establish a depot of supplies, and move from there,
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account