How far could Kearny have risen?

True, but my point was only that Sickles had the "political connections" to overcome scandal that Kearney did not have. The OP said he had "political connections". That's news to me, but I'm certainly open to evidence that I may be unaware of. Not getting a commission from your home state suggests that there weren't a whole lot of folks willing to make a call.
Kearney's grandfather, John Watts, was one of the richest men in New York. Kearney's father was a Harvard grad who owned a brokerage firm in New York. His parents died and he was raised by that grandfather. Watts died in 1836, making Kearney a millionaire in 1836 dollars. Trained as a lawyer at Columbia, Kearney joined the 1st Dragoons (with his uncle as Colonel and Jeff Davis as the adjutant).

In the 1850s, Kearney was living in NJ (he built a mansion in what is now Kearney, NJ not far from the old family place in Newark).
 
Last edited:
And he was vehemently anti-McClellan in the corps that was the poster child for anti- McClellanites!
He also disliked Hooker, so what role that would have played out in him taking over III Corps is something to think about.

At the time, Hooker was returning from his foot wound suffered at Antietam where he was in command of I Corps. If Kearney gets III Corps when Heintzelman goes at the end of October, it might be part of sweeping McClellan out of the AoP at the beginning of November. Hooker ends up a wing commander at Fredericksburg, with III Corps part of his wing IIRR. It certainly would have been lively.
 
Richardson was II Corps; if both had survived, I couldn't see them bringing someone from the outside into the III Corps over Kearney
 
It seems to me that there was another general that was aggressive and took risks, sometimes unnecessary, that was a Corps Commander. Stonewall Jackson. Kearny's aggressive leadership and risky behavior should not preclude him from being a Corps Commander. Second Manassas was still relatively early in the war and I think Kearny would have learned and grown from additional battlefield experience. Kearny would have been a better choice than Stoneman and probably a better commander than Sickles. Sickles certainly took risks and that cost many in his Corps their lives at Gettysburg.
 
Phil Kearny is the Union equivalent of John Bell Hood.

It's an interesting comparison made on the similarities of Kearny and Hood.

Think both were bold, reckless and aggressive combat commanders. Neither was suited to the role and responsibilities of Corps or higher command (in my opinion).

Thought the individually adventurous Kearny might have displayed more of a cavalier attitude than Hood. Kearny seemed to be a greater personal risk-taker who enjoyed the thrill of dangerous experiences – a daredevil according to one soldier's description of him.

Don't think that same personal description could be ascribed to Hood. Hood's may have shown a keener dedication towards duty, even though his leadership ability was limited.
 
He did have political connections and was an unabashed self promoter, not to mention rich as all get out!

That's the proper distinction to make (and keep in mind) here.

The question is how far could Kearny have risen in command (all factors considered), not whether he was capable of effective higher command.
 
That wasn't my point. Whether Sickles merited his connections or not, he had them. Kearny didn't have enough to get the commission from his home state. You said he had "political connections" - not me - and I was trying to find out what those were.

Think Kearny may have had 'political connections' through his networking with fellow officers, especially from the Mexican War.

It might also be reasonable to infer that Kearny had some degree of influence (or exposure to politicians) because he descended from a wealthy New York family.
 
If Kearny had lived, Pope would have had him before a court, like Porter and McDowell ended up in front of. The difference being, unlike Porter or McDowell, Kearny was definitely guilty. His career was over, either way.

That said, Kearny had political connections to Lincoln directly. When Kearny bought himself a captaincy by hiring 120 mercenaries, Lincoln was the lawyer he engaged.

It's wrong to characterise Kearny as anti-McClellan; he was anti-everybody else. He was a classic narcissist. This is a man who arrested and tried one of his brigadiers for obeying a lawful order from the corps commander.
 
Kearney's grandfather, John Watts, was one of the richest men in New York. Kearney's father was a Harvard grad who owned a brokerage firm in New York. His parents died and he was raised by that grandfather. Watts died in 1836, making Kearney a millionaire in 1836 dollars. Trained as a lawyer at Columbia, Kearney joined the 1st Dragoons (with his uncle as Colonel and Jeff Davis as the adjutant).

In the 1850s, Kearney was living in NJ (he built a mansion in what is now Kearney, NJ not far from the old family place in Newark).
All true - which doesn't explain why he was denied a commission by NY. It appears that his NJ connection was a lawyer in Newark named Oliver S. Halsted, Jr.
 
If Kearny had lived, Pope would have had him before a court, like Porter and McDowell ended up in front of. The difference being, unlike Porter or McDowell, Kearny was definitely guilty. His career was over, either way.

That said, Kearny had political connections to Lincoln directly. When Kearny bought himself a captaincy by hiring 120 mercenaries, Lincoln was the lawyer he engaged.

It's wrong to characterise Kearny as anti-McClellan; he was anti-everybody else. He was a classic narcissist. This is a man who arrested and tried one of his brigadiers for obeying a lawful order from the corps commander.
True regarding his narcissism - but he was vehemently anti-McClellan, as his letters to Oliver S. Halsted. Jr make abundantly clear.



It appears that the Lincoln connection ultimately got Kearny his appointment. His CO during the War with Mexico, Winfield Scott, had reached out on Kearny's behalf to Governor Morgan of NY in a letter dated May 1, 1861, but that didn't work.
 
All true - which doesn't explain why he was denied a commission by NY. It appears that his NJ connection was a lawyer in Newark named Oliver S. Halsted, Jr.
As to NY: Kearney moved to NJ in about 1852-53. He was separated from his wife then and she would not grant him a divorce. Kearney was with another woman then (the scandal). In 1854, Kearney was injured when his horse's hoof went through the rotten floor of a bridge; the woman moved in to care for Kearney. In 1858, his wife finally allowed the divorce and Kearney married her.

After that, Kearney went back to France in 1859, serving with the Chasseurs d'Afrique and was with Napoleon III's Imperial Guard at Solferino. He was awarded the Legion d' Honneur for his part in the big cavalry charge there. I think he was living in Paris when the Civil War broke out. Kearney then returned home to New Jersey, was appointed a USV Brigadier, and commanded the 1st New Jersey Brigade.

Kearney's scandal apparently did keep him from a NY commission. Sickles' many scandals were far worse, but Sickles was a a Tammany Hall man (his defense team contained the best NY criminal defense attorneys, many intimately involved with Tammany) and Sickles was a congressman. For that matter, a younger Sickles had been Buchanan's secretary in Europe and the President took a personal interest in the 1859 shooting scandal. Stanton's took the case after a visit to the White House. Sickles political connections were clearly much better, although Democratic.
 
As to NY: Kearney moved to NJ in about 1852-53. He was separated from his wife then and she would not grant him a divorce. Kearney was with another woman then (the scandal). In 1854, Kearney was injured when his horse's hoof went through the rotten floor of a bridge; the woman moved in to care for Kearney. In 1858, his wife finally allowed the divorce and Kearney married her.

After that, Kearney went back to France in 1859, serving with the Chasseurs d'Afrique and was with Napoleon III's Imperial Guard at Solferino. He was awarded the Legion d' Honneur for his part in the big cavalry charge there. I think he was living in Paris when the Civil War broke out. Kearney then returned home to New Jersey, was appointed a USV Brigadier, and commanded the 1st New Jersey Brigade.

Kearney's scandal apparently did keep him from a NY commission. Sickles' many scandals were far worse, but Sickles was a a Tammany Hall man (his defense team contained the best NY criminal defense attorneys, many intimately involved with Tammany) and Sickles was a congressman. For that matter, a younger Sickles had been Buchanan's secretary in Europe and the President took a personal interest in the 1859 shooting scandal. Stanton's took the case after a visit to the White House. Sickles political connections were clearly much better, although Democratic.
If anybody is looking for the "gold standard" of connections and a commission, Sickles is a good place to start. As for Kearny, as I pointed out, even Winfield Scott couldn't help him in NY. The Sickles-Kearny difference is even more notable because they both were involved in a similar category of "scandal".
 
If anybody is looking for the "gold standard" of connections and a commission, Sickles is a good place to start. As for Kearny, as I pointed out, even Winfield Scott couldn't help him in NY. The Sickles-Kearny difference is even more notable because they both were involved in a similar category of "scandal".
I imagine Kearney was not much of a go-along-to-get-along type. Sickles was a definite one-hand-washes-the-other type.
 
After that, Kearney went back to France in 1859, serving with the Chasseurs d'Afrique and was with Napoleon III's Imperial Guard at Solferino. He was awarded the Legion d' Honneur for his part in the big cavalry charge there. I think he was living in Paris when the Civil War broke out. Kearney then returned home to New Jersey, was appointed a USV Brigadier, and commanded the 1st New Jersey Brigade.

This is confusing two separate events, a summary is:

Kearny is a spoilt rich kid who in 1837 buys himself a Commission in his uncle's regiment without any training. Basically useless, being unable to command troops due to the lack of any military training, he's employed as an aide de camp to his uncle and then another general. They then select him as one of three subalterns to go to Saumur in France to do an abridged and condensed one-year course base on that of French cavalry subalterns. Within six weeks of the year-long course he is dropped from training. He carouses around Paris for a bit and then wangles his way in as an honorary ADC to the Duc de Orleans in Algeria for about two months to observe ongoing operations there. He's strictly an observer.

Returning in 1840 he's an aide to General Macomb and then Scott until late 1844, when he's sent back to his regiment. After not quite two years regimental service (mainly as his uncles aid) he tries to resign his Commission as a Lt in the 1st Dragoons to secure a captaincy in the new Mounted Rifles. With the Mexican War starting he withdraws his resignation but his company (Coy F) is then reduced to zero strength and Kearny sent away to command the recruiting depot. The regiment literally has no use for a Lt who doesn't even know the words of command. At Springfield, Illinois Kearny uses his money basically to buy a new company and takes it to Mexico. They are kept out of harm's way by assignment to be Scott's camp guard.

In Mexico Kearny decides, against orders, to charge the gates of Churubusco. Ignoring the recall call, Kearny along with Dick Ewell and a handful of troopers get to within about 400 yards of the gate where he is felled by a canister shot destroying his arm. Ewell carried him back to the American lines.

Kearny is then assigned to recruiting duty in New York until 1851. In July '51 leave his post (recruiting in NY) and boards ship to San Francisco, arriving in August '51 and having missed the punitive expedition of June '51 (which later biographers claimed he commanded, the confusion is that Coy F participated without Kearny). In October '51 his demands to be made a Lieutentant-Colonel were rebuffed and he resigns his Commission again. He buys his way onto a round the round voyage and leaves the US.


For the next decade Kearny moved between his estate in New Jersey and a rented small palace in Paris. In summer 1859 as war with Austria breaks out he approaches GdD Morris (commanding the Guard Cavalry Division) and is taken on as a volunteer ADC. At Solferino he leaves his post (with permission) and plays private soldier all day. Like almost all officers of the army he is awarded the Legion d'Honneur, in this case the 5th class (which is an admonishment). He returns to America on the rumour of a war.

Initially he decides he's going to be a general of NY troops. However the state of NY didn't offer him one of their assigned generalships. Kearny is offended when they finally offer him the mere colonelcy of the 1st NY cavalry regiment, and refuses the offer (which goes to McReynolds). He cast around and in August '61 was finally successful when New Jersey had a BG slot they couldn't fill. He gained a lot of seniority on the Army Register as when the first register was published with the new volunteers they ordered the new generals by seniority in the regular army despite being one of the last appointed.
 
After that, Kearney went back to France in 1859, serving with the Chasseurs d'Afrique and was with Napoleon III's Imperial Guard at Solferino. He was awarded the Legion d' Honneur for his part in the big cavalry charge there.
This is confusing two separate events, a summary is:

No, not really. You've gone back to 20+ years before what my post was talking about and thrown in a long history which has some interesting points. Most of it has nothing to do with what I said.

Now if what you are objecting to in my post is with "serving with the Chasseurs d'Afrique", I can see what you might mean. In 1859, Kearney wanted to go back to the Chasseurs d'Afrique, but did not get a commission with them. That is how he ends up as an aide to General Louis-Michel Morris, the commander of the Cavalry Division in the Imperial Guard (who Kearney knew from his service in Africa). When he left Paris, Kearney was actually wearing the uniform of the US 1st Dragoons. In 1860, Kearney actually was awarded the Cross of the Legion d' Honneur for his actions at the Battle of Solferino in 1859.
 
In 1860, Kearney actually was awarded the Cross of the Legion d' Honneur for his actions at the Battle of Solferino in 1859.
No. The citation literally reads (in French), reason for award: "Major in the United States Army."

This was, of course, not true. Captain (Bvt Major) Kearny had resigned his Commission many years before, and was not in the US Army.

The Legion d'Honneur is not that exclusive, and is automatically awarded to all foreign volunteer officers. The class is based on their rank, and majors are due the 3rd class. By awarding the 5th class of a lieutenant, the French were subtly admonishing him. Kearny never collected his, which you had to get in person from an office in Paris.

The "cross" Kearny received, mentioned in some biographies, was the Commemorative Medal, which was awarded to every single soldier, sailor or attached to the French Army in the campaign.
 

Learn About Us
About CivilWarTalk
Contact the Webmaster
Meet the Staff
Link to CivilWarTalk
Join Our Community
Register
Browse Forums
View Today's Discussions
Search the Forum
Get Help
FAQ
Student Guide
Forum Rules & Etiquette
Copyright / DMCA

     Contact Us CivilwarTalk on Facebook CivilWarTalk on YouTube CivilWarTalk on Twitter RSS Feed

Bringing the American Civil War and More to Life.
© 1999 - , CIVILWARTALK, LLC - Site Version 10.0

SlaveryTalk.com - SecessionTalk.com - CivilWarTalk.com - ReconstructionTalk.com
Back
Top