Member Review Hooker's Angry Letters (1864)

[Stryker65]

(Highly recommend reading both letters -- they're quite funny)

On December 8, 1864, Major General Joseph Hooker, commander of the Union Army's "Northern Department" (covering Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, and Ohio) sent a letter to Senator Henry Wilson of Massachusetts, then serving in the United States Senate. In his letter, Hooker poured forth his grievances of how junior officers have been promoted over his head. Thought I should share the letter in full here:

That same day, Hooker wrote a SECOND letter, this time to the powerful Senator Benjamin F. Wade of Ohio, chairman of the Congressional Committee on the Conduct of the War, with much the same feeling and points:

... Nuff said.

 

[rbasin]

The last thing he wrote before his massive stroke was a positive letter about George Thomas.

 

[Pat Answer]

Very interesting reminder that generals in this war are fighting each other almost as much as they are the enemy…

Of course, "from a certain point of view" he's not wrong. His combat record overall is a solid as they come. But it is also no surprise that the Administration views him as a troublemaker at this point - going back to the famous AotP command appointment letter.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong; Sherman and Hooker never really liked each other even before the Atlanta campaign?

 

[RedRover]

In his private letters, Gen. Sherman says he knew Hooker very well from their long association in the antebellum army, until Sherman's resignation in the 1850s. He could not see him handling the Army of Potomac well, and so was probably not surprised by the results of the Chancellorsville campaign...

On July 29, 1864, Sherman wrote of his personal opinion of Hooker succinctly...

In his memoir, Gen. Sherman explains that Gen. Thomas, Hooker's immediate commander in the Atlanta campaign, complained that Hooker was becoming too inclined to "switch off" and do his own thing... then inclined to magnify the effect. Gen. Sherman says after Kennesaw he was forced to confront Hooker on this bad habit, but thinks he was too lenient, as Hooker responded with a sulkiness rather than discipline and propriety...

Sherman says that he had known Hooker personally and professionally since 1836, and had served actively with him in the antebellum years. Says he was personally satisfied with his services rendered at Chattanooga, and the Atlanta campaign up to the above confrontation at the Kulp House near Kennesaw, when his new sulkiness combined with more breaches of strict military propriety that Sherman had already reproved him for. After Gen. McPherson's death, when passed over for his army command, Hooker's request of relief from command of the 20th Corps was quickly accepted... Though Sherman seems clear that he did not consider Hooker completely incompetent otherwise, and seems inclined to point out his good service rendered in the Battle of Peach Tree Creek particularly.

After the Atlanta campaign, during the March to the Sea, the 20th Corps and 14th Corps formed a left wing to Sherman's movements, and the commander of the 20th Corps, Gen. Slocum since Hooker's relief, consequently commanded essentially a separate army, designated eventually the "Army of Georgia." Had Hooker shown some contrition to Sherman after the Kennesaw, perhaps he would have had a opportunity he desired to command an army again before the close of the war.

Hooker was eventually promoted to major general in the regular army upon retirement in October, 1868.

 

[Josh The Lighthouse Guy]

The last thing he wrote before his massive stroke was a positive letter about George Thomas.

I wonder if that stroke was related to his concussion at Chancellorsville, or if it was just the result of hard living?

 

[Stryker65]

Oop. Just found a THIRD angry letter, again to Senator Wilson:

"I saved the Army of the Cumberland last fall."
"I won the hearts of the army I was serving with."
"I won the hearts of the West."

Tell us you're mad at Grant without telling us...

 

[Stryker65]

And a fourth, this one to Senator Zachariah Chandler, second ranking member of the Congressional Committee on the Conduct of the War (which Hooker desperately wants to appear before):

"Sherman insulted me professionally while of his army, from envy, as every officer and soldier of that army will tell you."
"Have no promotions made, if this injustice is to be perpetrated." - from an exiled major general, to the Secretary of War.

 

[Pat Answer]

In his private letters, Gen. Sherman says he knew Hooker very well from their long association in the antebellum army, until Sherman's resignation in the 1850s. He could not see him handling the Army of Potomac well, and so was probably not surprised by the results of the Chancellorsville campaign...

View attachment 544861

Thank you. This was the quote I wasn't quite remembering.

Yeah, a lot of self-promotion and backbiting... Hooker certainly wasn't alone in this as I said, but... wow.

 

[rbasin]

I wonder if that stroke was related to his concussion at Chancellorsville, or if it was just the result of hard living?

I don't know. The stories I hear are how bitter some generals were towards some.

Oop. Just found a THIRD angry letter, again to Senator Wilson:
View attachment 544870
View attachment 544871
View attachment 544872
View attachment 544873
"I saved the Army of the Cumberland last fall."
"I won the hearts of the army I was serving with."
"I won the hearts of the West."

Tell us you're mad at Grant without telling us...

He and others grew disenchanted with Sherman. I suppose that trickled over to Grant

 

[Belfoured]

Thank you. This was the quote I wasn't quite remembering.

Yeah, a lot of self-promotion and backbiting... Hooker certainly wasn't alone in this as I said, but... wow.

The interesting thing about the attached quote and Sherman's statement regarding about Lee's view is that even when Hooker was fully entrenched by May 4, 1863, Lee still had to be talked out of assaulting him.

 

[rbasin]

The interesting thing about the attached quote and Sherman's statement regarding about Lee's view is that even when Hooker was fully entrenched by May 4, 1863, Lee still had to be talked out of assaulting him.

Funny thing is I don't see Sherman doing much better

 

[Belfoured]

Funny thing is I don't see Sherman doing much better

That could well be. Two things can be true at the same time: (1) Sherman was right about Hooker; and (2) Sherman may have fared no better against Lee. My comment was limited to the first, in case I need to clarify. We know about (1). We'll never know about (2).

 

[TallTallMan]

Good grief. Somebody (can't remember) on this forum once said that Hooker's biggest problem was not his abilities, but his mouth. As the kids say nowadays, "based".

 

[wausaubob]

Hooker encountered some very bad luck. He was wounded at Chancellorsville and did not have a strong enough medical officer to get General Hooker to relinquish command. When he got out west, he didn't get along with Thomas, who was almost Sherman's exec, with the young and upcoming McPherson and Schofield, both of whom were preferred by Grant and Sherman. We read Hooker's letters to the radical Senators, but it seems like it was O.O. Howard who was better connected to the abolitionists and better able to understand the former slaves.

 

[Stryker65]

I don't know if I'm just biased against Hooker, but, true or not as his statements may be, his letters just come off as whiny.

 

[Kearny The Magnificent]

I can't get over the fact he referred to himself as "Fighting Joe" in the first letter. Neither his defeats nor his circumstances could humble him.

 

[rbasin]

Hooker encountered some very bad luck. He was wounded at Chancellorsville and did not have a strong enough medical officer to get General Hooker to relinquish command. When he got out west, he didn't get along with Thomas, who was almost Sherman's exec, with the young and upcoming McPherson and Schofield, both of whom were preferred by Grant and Sherman. We read Hooker's letters to the radical Senators, but it seems like it was O.O. Howard who was better connected to the abolitionists and better able to understand the former slaves.

Really? From all accounts I've seen, Hooker was quite fond of Thomas. I haven't seen Hooker even blame Thomas for not getting the army of the Tennessee top spot. He was even a pallbearer at Thomas's funeral.

 

[wausaubob]

Really? From all accounts I've seen, Hooker was quite fond of Thomas. I haven't seen Hooker even blame Thomas for not getting the army of the Tennessee top spot. He was even a pallbearer at Thomas's fune

Maybe it was the volunteer officer Jack Logan that Thomas had objections about.

 

[rbasin]

Maybe it was the volunteer officer Jack Logan that Thomas had objections about.

It's funny. Buell, Rosecrans, Hooker. Three guys who could have held some bitterness towards Thomas literally loved him

 

[LibertyAndUnion]

I wonder if that stroke was related to his concussion at Chancellorsville, or if it was just the result of hard living?

Both the retirement board in 1868 and a modern article about Hooker's injury from the falling Chancellor House pillar (in a cool neurological magazine) suggest Hooker's wound on May 3, 1863 caused his strokes in 1865 and '67.