{⋆★⋆} MG McLaws, Lafayette

Lafayette McLaws

:CSA1stNat:

Born:
January 15, 1821
General McLaws.jpg


Birthplace: Augusta, Georgia

Father: James McLaws 1790 – 1850
(Buried: Summerville Cemetery, Augusta, Georgia)​

Mother: Elizabeth Huguenin 1793 – 1848
(Buried: Summerville Cemetery, Augusta, Georgia)​

Wife: Emily Allison Taylor 1824 – 1890
(Buried: North Laurel Grove Cemetery, Savannah, Georgia)​

Children:

William Huguenin McLaws 1852 – 1870​
(Buried: Magnolia Cemetery, Augusta, Georgia)​
John Taylor McLaws 1853 – 1921​
(Buried: Bonaventure Cemetery, Savannah, Georgia)​
Laura Taylor McLaws 1856 – 1877​
(Buried: North Laurel Grove Cemetery, Savannah, Georgia)​
Uldrick Huguenin McLaws Sr. 1862 – 1934​
(Buried: Bonaventure Cemetery, Savannah, Georgia)​
Anna Lee McLaws 1867 – 1890​
(Buried: North Laurel Grove Cemetery, Savannah, Georgia)​
Virginia Randall McLaws 1868 – 1967​
(Buried: North Laurel Grove Cemetery, Savannah, Georgia)​
Elizabeth Violet McLaws King 1870 – 1952​
(Buried: Saint John in Wilderness, Flat Rock, North Carolina)​

Education:

1842: Graduated from West Point Military Academy (48th in class)​

Occupation:

1842 – 1844: Brevet 2nd Lt. United States Army, 6th Infantry Regiment
McLaws after War.jpg
1844 – 1847: 2nd Lt. United States Army, 7th Infantry Regiment​
1847 – 1851: 1st Lt. United States Army, 7th Infantry Regiment​
1849 – 1851: Acting Assistant Adjutant General Dept. of New Mexico​
1851 – 1861: Captain of United States Army, 7th Infantry Regiment​
1861: Resigned from United States Army on April 25th

Civil War Career:

1861: Major in the Confederate Army​
1861: Colonel of 10th Georgia Infantry​
1861 – 1862: Brigadier General in the Confederate Army​
1862: Participated in Seven Days Campaign​
1862 – 1865: Major General in the Confederate Army​
1862: Participated in Maryland Campaign​
1862: Participated in the Battle of Fredericksburg, Virginia​
1863: Participated with Longstreet at Suffolk, Virginia​
1863: Participated in the Battle of Gettysburg​
1863: Served with the First Army Corps in Tennessee​
1863: Participated in the Chattanooga Campaign​
1863: Participated in the Knoxville Campaign​
1863: Relieved by Lt. General James Longstreet​
1864: Court martialed by Lt. General James Longstreet​
1864: Left the First Army Corps and Participated in Savannah​
1865: Participated in the Battle of Rivers Bridge​
1865: Led a division during the Battle of Averasborough, North Carolina​
1865: Commander of Confederate 3rd​ line of defense at Bentonville
IMG_5392.JPG
1865: Commander of the District of Georgia after Bentonville, North Carolina​

Occupation after War:

Agent for Carolina Life Insurance Company​
1875 – 1876: United States Collector for Internal Revenue Savannah, Georgia​
1875 – 1876: United States Postmaster in Savannah Georgia​

Died: July 24, 1897
IMG_5391.JPG


Place of Death: Savannah, Georgia

Age at time of Death: 76 years old

Cause of Death: Heart Disease

Burial Place: North Laurel Grove Cemetery, Savannah, Georgia
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Polloco

Captain
Joined
Sep 15, 2018
Location
South Texas
In the book "Traveller" ( Not sure of the spelling?) about Gen. Lee's horse. One of the generals is referred to as the Fat One. I think it is McLaws who is being referred to. This horse must have been used to seeing some very lean soldiers because McLaws isn't exactly what would be called fat.
 

Polloco

Captain
Joined
Sep 15, 2018
Location
South Texas
The book by Who Was Who in the Civil War by Stewart Sifakis contains this sentence about McLaws..."He did not reach Chickamauga in time to serve with the part of the division which arrived from Virginia but took part in the Knoxville Campaign". Also his court martial by Longstreet stems from his performance at Fort Sanders and at Bean's Station.He was relieved of command on Dec. 17, 1863.
 

Polloco

Captain
Joined
Sep 15, 2018
Location
South Texas
McLaws was a close personal friend of General Grant, and supported the latter's presidential campaign:thus his 1875 appointments as Savannah Collector and Postmaster.
View attachment 342358
[Concord (NC) Daily Standard, 26 July 1897]​
The newspaper article stated that McLaws was the oldest surviving Confederate Major General with one exception. Who was that one exception?
 

Luke Freet

First Sergeant
Joined
Nov 8, 2018
I feel Longstreet's court martialling of McLaws and Law was probably one of the worst personell decisions made in the Army of Northern Virgina, maybe in all the CS army. Two excellently experienced and capable officers were sidelined for the rest of the war. Kershaw and Field did a good job replacing them, but I feel they'd have done much better.
That said, having read Rhea's Spotsylvania book, it was a miracle the Confederates managed to reach Spotsylvania before the Federals did, and that was mostly thanks to Richard Anderson taking a quick pace, something doubtful if say, McLaws, the senior division commander and someone who was superior in rank to Anderson and a potential Corps commander, would have achieved the same feat, given his reputation for slow marching.
 

rpkennedy

Lt. Colonel
Member of the Year
Joined
May 18, 2011
Location
Carlisle, PA
I feel Longstreet's court martialling of McLaws and Law was probably one of the worst personell decisions made in the Army of Northern Virgina, maybe in all the CS army. Two excellently experienced and capable officers were sidelined for the rest of the war. Kershaw and Field did a good job replacing them, but I feel they'd have done much better.
That said, having read Rhea's Spotsylvania book, it was a miracle the Confederates managed to reach Spotsylvania before the Federals did, and that was mostly thanks to Richard Anderson taking a quick pace, something doubtful if say, McLaws, the senior division commander and someone who was superior in rank to Anderson and a potential Corps commander, would have achieved the same feat, given his reputation for slow marching.

The relationship between Longstreet and McLaws broke down over the course of 1863 and culminated in what was clearly a thinly justified court-martial. He definitely got the short end of the stick.

Ryan
 

rpkennedy

Lt. Colonel
Member of the Year
Joined
May 18, 2011
Location
Carlisle, PA
Would it have been a better idea to have given McLaws' division to Third Corps instead of Anderson's Division? I get the feeling McLaws would have not gotten as bad a rap from Longstreet serving directly under his command.
Lee wanted a reliable senior subordinate that Hill could lean on and Anderson was clearly more fit for that role than McLaws. Unfortunately, Anderson had probably his worst performance of the war during the Gettysburg Campaign.

Ryan
 

Luke Freet

First Sergeant
Joined
Nov 8, 2018
Lee wanted a reliable senior subordinate that Hill could lean on and Anderson was clearly more fit for that role than McLaws. Unfortunately, Anderson had probably his worst performance of the war during the Gettysburg Campaign.

Ryan
Certainly. He was egregiously hands off with his command, which did some spectacular actions on day 2 (like Wright's Brigade), but in the end, they were beaten back handily.

Of the 3 divisions that got into action that day, I'd say McLaws' division did the best, and probably was the best coordinated of the bunch (though Hood's fell apart with his wounding certainly).
 

danny

Sergeant
Joined
Feb 20, 2005
Location
Hattiesburg
5/18/64 McLaws was assigned by the War Dept to the Defenses of Savannah in the Dept of SC, Ga, & Fla.

At the Battle of Rivers’ Bridge 2/2/65 his command resisted the advance of the Army of the Tenn into SC. McLaws led a Div under Hardee at the Battle of Averasboro [3/16] & the Battle of Bentonville. McLaws’ small Div (about half of whom were reservists) did some pretty stout fighting at Averasboro. When Gen Johnston reorganized his army, McLaws lost his command. He was assigned command of the District of Ga
 

lelliott19

Brigadier General
Moderator
Forum Host
Silver Patron
Joined
Mar 15, 2013
Certainly. He was egregiously hands off with his command, which did some spectacular actions on day 2 (like Wright's Brigade), but in the end, they were beaten back handily.

Of the 3 divisions that got into action that day, I'd say McLaws' division did the best, and probably was the best coordinated of the bunch (though Hood's fell apart with his wounding certainly).
I agree. Perhaps McLaws was not one of the fastest or most aggressive Division commanders in Lee's army, but he certainly was not the worst! From what I can gather, he was meticulous in following orders and military protocol which likely contributed to the impression that he was slow or overly cautious, as well as somewhat pompous. By contrast, Kershaw was charismatic; empathetic with his men; and overall, well-liked by his subordinate, peers, and superiors. Still, by 1864, when so many generals had been killed, wounded, and whatnot in the 1st Corps, I think McLaws' presence could have been extremely useful to Longstreet. Of course, it was too late then.
 

rpkennedy

Lt. Colonel
Member of the Year
Joined
May 18, 2011
Location
Carlisle, PA
Certainly. He was egregiously hands off with his command, which did some spectacular actions on day 2 (like Wright's Brigade), but in the end, they were beaten back handily.

Of the 3 divisions that got into action that day, I'd say McLaws' division did the best, and probably was the best coordinated of the bunch (though Hood's fell apart with his wounding certainly).
At least Hill had the excuse that he was sick when one asks why he was a no-show at Gettysburg. Anderson, on the other hand, doesn't have that excuse and his lackluster performance is a very dark blotch on what is otherwise an excellent record (and Lee seems to have even briefly considered him for a corps commander position in the spring of 1863).

McLaws did perform the best although there were still some rather significant hiccups (Kershaw's Brigade splitting and Semmes' Brigade's so-so performance).

Ryan
 

rpkennedy

Lt. Colonel
Member of the Year
Joined
May 18, 2011
Location
Carlisle, PA
I agree. Perhaps McLaws was not one of the fastest or most aggressive Division commanders in Lee's army, but he certainly was not the worst! From what I can gather, he was meticulous in following orders and military protocol which likely contributed to the impression that he was slow or overly cautious, as well as somewhat pompous. By contrast, Kershaw was charismatic; empathetic with his men; and overall, well-liked by his subordinate, peers, and superiors. Still, by 1864, when so many generals had been killed, wounded, and whatnot in the 1st Corps, I think McLaws' presence could have been extremely useful to Longstreet. Of course, it was too late then.
McLaws committed the unforgivable sin of losing Robert E. Lee's confidence during the Chancellorsville Campaign. That put him on a very short leash which also put him in the crosshairs when something went wrong or blame had to be meted out.

Ryan
 

Similar threads

Top