Leadership

[matthew mckeon]

Gary Gallanger wrote how Lee developed a "culture" for the Army of Northern Virginia's officers. They were aggressive, and showed initiative and daring. He contrasts with the Army of the Potomac, whose culture, developed by McClellan, but outlasting him, as cautious, seeking to avoid defeat.

101st Airborne.

The Confederate soldier was an awesome fighting man, no doubt. But the Confederacy resorted to conscription earlier than the Union.

As far as heart goes, the Army of the Potomac had a steady diet of defeat from Seven Days to Chancellorville. Those men lost battles, but they didn't lose heart. As Gen. Pickett wearily commented at the umpteeth rehashing of why Lee lost at Gettysburg(was it Stuart's fault? Was it Ewell's fault? Was it Longstreet's fault?), he supposed that the Union army had something to do with it.

 

[matthew mckeon]

Cash:
"puts your theory in the garbage pail."
How did you lose that job in the State Department again?

Initially, after the firing on Sumter there was a season of "rage militaire"(which I'm pretty sure I'm mispelling). Where young men flocked eagerly to the colors, and the authorities struggled to organize regiments, find uniforms, tents, muskets, cartridge boxes etc. That was the feeling of 1861 and didn't last. But most of the Union forces were volunteers throughout the war.

The Confederacy deliberately instituted a policy of conscription in 1862. But a large percentage of the "conscripts" had already volunteered to join Confederate forces. It was more like a "stoploss" not letting them out again. But these so called conscripts were the veterans who won Lee's great victories and fought the terrible Overland Campaign. Hard to fault their commitment.

The US in the world wars of the 20th century would do the same as the CSA: they tried to use their manpower efficiently and spread the burden of the war. The soldiers certainly believed in the US winning the World War and did well, for all that they were draftees.

 

[101combatvet]

Hear of any draft riots in the south?

Yet the confederates instituted the draft first. Sort of puts your theory into the garbage pail.

Regards,
Cash

 

[101combatvet]

Not sure how often that was possible in the Army.

One other note: Good leaders attract the best followers. You see this in the private sector as well.

 

[The Iron Duke]

Thanks for Slim, as I have never read or heard of him before.

I will definately look him up in the future.

Thanks for letting me know about him.

Your welcome Mr. Blue. My own personal opinion is that he is the finest British general since Wellington. If you are a Grant fan, as I am, then you will like Slim. Montgomery, on the other hand, reminds me of McClellan.

You may find this interesting: http://www.burmastar.org.uk/slim.htm

I believe on average the southerner was a much better soldier then a northern one. Not to say the north did not produce it's share of excellent men.... I just think the southerner had much more heart into it.

Napoleon once said there are no bad soldiers, only bad officers. Man for man, I don't feel either side was superior. I think any of us would be glad to have Hood's Texans or those Iron Brigade westerners on our side.

 

[Baggage Handler #2]

Not sure how often that was possible in the Army.

True, but my motto was "where there's a will, there's a waiver."

Good field graders can attract & keep good company graders. This also allows them to "promote out" some so-so officers during the normal personnel churn.
Good company graders don't get in trouble with their NCO's, and are able to keep/attract good NCO's, and so on.

At least that was my view of things when I saw such things.
Probably you, Pinkney, Cash, and UB have some thoughts on that as well (I'm sure I left someone out).

 

[PvtClewell]

Hear of any draft riots in the south?

Resistance to the draft didn't always have to take the form of riots:

http://homepages.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~ncuv/honey1.htm

An excerpt from the site:

"According to one estimate some ten thousand Unionists belonged to the Heroes of America by the war's end. Many more, however, collaborated with the organization whether they belonged to it or not. Activity supporting draft resisters and deserters became so widespread in North Carolina that the Confederacy found it impossible to suppress. In the mountain counties particularly, many people played a role in the "underground railroad" which guided draft resisters and escaped Confederate prisoners out of the state."

 

[unionblue]

Hear of any draft riots in the south?

101combatvet,

Ever hear of any town the size of New York in the South that could muster up that many folks to even have a draft riot?

Although we could point to the "bread riot" started by starving women in Richmond, addressed by Jefferson Davis, to no effect, and then finally stopped by armed Confederate troops leveling muskets at these women in order to stop their riot.

Never heard of a "bread riot" in the North either.

Thousands of desertions from Confederate armies, men having the opportunity to melt away in the night or on the march was common in '64 & '65. Confederate conscription officers were often shot at by those who did not want to be drafted. I suppose you could call such a "mini" draft riot that was repeated all over the South.

Like I have said, if you look at it only from one angle, you don't get the full story.

IMO, of course.

Unionblue

 

[unionblue]

Your welcome Mr. Blue. My own personal opinion is that he is the finest British general since Wellington. If you are a Grant fan, as I am, then you will like Slim. Montgomery, on the other hand, reminds me of McClellan.

You may find this interesting: http://www.burmastar.org.uk/slim.htm



Napoleon once said there are no bad soldiers, only bad officers. Man for man, I don't feel either side was superior. I think any of us would be glad to have Hood's Texans or those Iron Brigade westerners on our side.

The Iron Duke,

Thank you so much for providing this link about the General.

I so very much enjoyed reading about him and his views on being a leader and a soldier.

Very much appreciated.

Sincerely,
Unionblue

 

[101combatvet]

The situation then did not allow as much leeway as it does today. The Army then was not like it has been in the last 30-40 years.

True, but my motto was "where there's a will, there's a waiver."

Good field graders can attract & keep good company graders. This also allows them to "promote out" some so-so officers during the normal personnel churn.
Good company graders don't get in trouble with their NCO's, and are able to keep/attract good NCO's, and so on.

At least that was my view of things when I saw such things.
Probably you, Pinkney, Cash, and UB have some thoughts on that as well (I'm sure I left someone out).

 

[101combatvet]

NC was a bit of an exception in regards to the western end of the state. It wasn't always easy recruiting those mountain men.

Resistance to the draft didn't always have to take the form of riots:

http://homepages.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~ncuv/honey1.htm

An excerpt from the site:

"According to one estimate some ten thousand Unionists belonged to the Heroes of America by the war's end. Many more, however, collaborated with the organization whether they belonged to it or not. Activity supporting draft resisters and deserters became so widespread in North Carolina that the Confederacy found it impossible to suppress. In the mountain counties particularly, many people played a role in the "underground railroad" which guided draft resisters and escaped Confederate prisoners out of the state."

 

[101combatvet]

Weak at best there....

101combatvet,

Ever hear of any town the size of New York in the South that could muster up that many folks to even have a draft riot?

Although we could point to the "bread riot" started by starving women in Richmond, addressed by Jefferson Davis, to no effect, and then finally stopped by armed Confederate troops leveling muskets at these women in order to stop their riot.

Never heard of a "bread riot" in the North either.

Thousands of desertions from Confederate armies, men having the opportunity to melt away in the night or on the march was common in '64 & '65. Confederate conscription officers were often shot at by those who did not want to be drafted. I suppose you could call such a "mini" draft riot that was repeated all over the South.

Like I have said, if you look at it only from one angle, you don't get the full story.

IMO, of course.

Unionblue

 

[unionblue]

Weak at best there....

Nope, just a view of a unique sectional situation.

While I have no problem with the idea that there were riots over the draft not only in New York, but other Northern cities, we need to view such in its time and environment.

There were larger cities in the North, with varied immigration populations. New York, as now, was the largest city with the most numerous population and had a varied population of newly arrived foreigners and mixed population. Crowded, volitle, and difficult to control.

Now, rush down South and find the largest cities there. Not even close in population or makeup to that found in the North.

As I said, conscription officers often took their lives in their hands trying to go out and compel men to be drafted. A riot by thousands all in one place, or the refusal of thousands at one-at-a-time.

As a friend of mine used to say in the Army, "Same difference."

Which is more deplorable? Thousands involved in a draft riot in one spot over the course of several days, or the continued draft dodging of men as individuals and small groups, hiding out in the hills and swamps, shooting at any lone, or group of conscription men sent to force him to serve.

The end result adds up to the same thing. Resistance to the draft by illegal means and no one coming to fill up the empty ranks in your army.

Sincerely,
Unionblue

 

[cash]

But a large percentage of the "conscripts" had already volunteered to join Confederate forces. It was more like a "stoploss" not letting them out again. But these so called conscripts were the veterans who won Lee's great victories and fought the terrible Overland Campaign. Hard to fault their commitment.

The Conscript Act passed in April of 1862, so I don't see how one can say the conscripts were veterans who won Lee's victories, since Lee's victories hadn't occurred yet. Much of it was a kind of "stoploss" in that it extended enlistments to the end of the war. Personally, I don't fault the commitment of either side, but at least one person here showed their ignorance of the history of the time period, and that's what I was reacting to.

Regards,
Cash

 

[cash]

Hear of any draft riots in the south?

There was in fact a significant amount of resistance to the draft. Ever hear of Jones County?

And that was not the only place. Several in the confederacy took advantage of loopholes in the law to avoid service in the ANV and other confederate armies.

"In Georgia and elsewhere, men liable for the draft began enlisting in local and state militia or home guard units in the expectation that Richmond did not have the power to order them out of their states. Knowing that militia officers were certainly exempt, in Crawford County, Georgia, seven innovative men already on the conscript rolls and awaiting orders organized themselves into a militia unit containing only themselves, and then promptly elected each other officers and asked Governor Joseph Brown to give them commissions, which he did." [William C. Davis, _Look Away!: History of the Confederate States of America,_ pp. 226-227]

"After more than a year's experience with conscription and some nine months' experience while the writ of habeas corpus was not suspended anywhere, the War Department had discovered that conscription was so unpopular that the government needed lawyers to fend off the suits of those who wished to escape the Confederate ranks. On 19 November 1863 the secretary of war directed that 'standing counsel' be employed in those areas of each congressional district lacking a Confederate district attorney to represent the Bureau of Conscription 'in cases of habeas corpus sued out for discharge of persons from military service.'" [Mark E. Neely Jr., _Southern Rights: Political Prisoners and the Myth of Confederate Constitutionalism,_ p. 57]

"Naturally the draft law and its enforcement were less than perfect, and naturally many Southerners resented on principle the departure from state rights and individual liberty that conscription represented. Some of this resentment worked to the advantage of the cause. Southern men began volunteering again, if only to avoid the stigma of conscript. Yet, for motives high-minded and mean, many Southerners resisted the draft or assisted evasion by others. The substitute and exemption systems were abused. Professional substitutes took payment from their sponsors, enlisted, deserted, and sought more sponsors. State governors frustrated the exemption process by claiming more state officers than they needed and by obstructing the conscription process. The classic example was Georgia's Governor Joe Brown, who exempted more men than any other governor and fought conscription in the courts." [Emory M. Thomas, _The Confederate Nation, 1861-1865,_ p. 154]

Your theory remains in the garbage pail.

Regards,
Cash

 

[cash]

True, but my motto was "where there's a will, there's a waiver."

Good field graders can attract & keep good company graders. This also allows them to "promote out" some so-so officers during the normal personnel churn.
Good company graders don't get in trouble with their NCO's, and are able to keep/attract good NCO's, and so on.

At least that was my view of things when I saw such things.
Probably you, Pinkney, Cash, and UB have some thoughts on that as well (I'm sure I left someone out).

There were commanders I served with who, if they called and said they wanted me anywhere in the world my bags would be packed and I'd be on my way the next day.

Regards,
Cash

 

[matthew mckeon]

The Conscript Act passed in April of 1862, so I don't see how one can say the conscripts were veterans who won Lee's victories, since Lee's victories hadn't occurred yet. Much of it was a kind of "stoploss" in that it extended enlistments to the end of the war. Personally, I don't fault the commitment of either side, but at least one person here showed their ignorance of the history of the time period, and that's what I was reacting to.

Regards,
Cash

I don't see how one can say the conscripts were veterans either. I meant that these conscripts went on to win Lee's big victories, and fight the Overland Campaign. So whoa there.

 

[cash]

I don't see how one can say the conscripts were veterans either. I meant that these conscripts went on to win Lee's big victories, and fight the Overland Campaign. So whoa there.

Ah, I understand now. I thought with the "veterans" term you were talking about those who had their enlistments extended.

Regards,
Cash

 

[unionblue]

There were commanders I served with who, if they called and said they wanted me anywhere in the world my bags would be packed and I'd be on my way the next day.

Regards,
Cash

Cash,

Having a good CO in charge of your platoon, company, battalion, was everything.

As an NCO almost my entire career, whenever I got one, I looked after him and would go to any length to protect and serve him.

The most important thing that officer did was set a tone for the rest of the men in the unit, and the NCOs would honor it, enforce, build on it, if it was the one needed for the unit to accomplish its mission.

Being fair was good. Concern for the men was good. But consistantcy was everything, at least from my point-of-view. In punishments, rewards, assignments, details and mission, if the CO was consistant, things ran so smoothly.

And sticking up for your men to unit outsiders was an absolute golden rule for me and the other enlisted in your company/unit. Yeah, a soldier may have screwed up and done something wrong and deserved punishment, but you took care of your own, you didn't let strangers do it.

It's been a long time since I have served, the last being a First Sergeant in a Light Infantry division in an MI Battalion. But if certain officers ever asked, no questions, I'd be there for them.

I understand.

Sincerely,
Unionblue

 

[Baggage Handler #2]

101,your premise seems to be that since there were riots and resistance to the draft in the north the quality of the troops was low. There was also resistance to the draft in WW2 and in the 60's. I do not conclude by this that the quality of those troops was low. It is not necessarily a causal relationship, IMO.