It appears from this account, supported by the general order issued
immediately after it and given a few pages further on, that Farragut had
definitely determined not to await the reduction of the forts, because
the bombardment so far did not indicate any probability of effectual
results. It was his deliberate opinion that the loss of time and the
waste of effort were entailing greater risks than would be caused by
cutting adrift from his base and severing his own communications in
order to strike at those of the enemy. It is commonly true that in the
effort to cut the communications of an opponent one runs the risk of
exposing his own; but in this case the attacking force was one
pre-eminently qualified to control the one great medium of communication
throughout that region--that is, the water. Also, although in
surrendering the river Farragut gave up the great line of travel, he
kept in view that the bayou system offered an alternative, doubtless
greatly inferior, but which, nevertheless, would serve to plant above
the forts, under the protection of the navy, such troops as should be
deemed necessary; and that the combined efforts of army and navy could
then maintain a sufficient flow of supplies until the forts fell from
isolation. Finally, a fleet is not so much an army as a collection of
floating fortresses, garrisoned, provisioned, and mobile. It carries its
communications in its hulls, and is not in such daily dependence upon
external sources as is the sister service.
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