Officer resignations; a research question

[wuzreb]

Good morning, all,

With your patience and tolerance, I would like to pose a couple of hypothetical questions.

Background;
I'm writing with regards to a 20-year-old historical novel manuscript I've unearthed from the cellars of my laptop. No big ambitions here, just tinkering with an ancient writing exercise.

Please help yourself to the coffee. As ever, I cannot write with brevity.


The scenario;
Post-war Kentucky, two brothers end up losing the family farm and after a collision with a longtime personal foe, they head out west. Adventures are had, blah blah, and eventually the story circles around to futher collisions with that old foe from back home.

The Civil War is background to the story. It does not appear "on camera." But I want that background to be solid.

The scenario I am contemplating is whether or not the main character, who enlists in late 1861 as a 1st lieutenant in a newly formed cavalry company, could end up resigning his commission in Jan 1863, due to conflict with, and mistreatment from, a superior officer. He would subsequently reenlist somewhere else.

My sole examination of officer resignations is a 1st lieutenant who resigned due to serious health issues. His request bounced through two or three sets of hands before approval. His case makes it clear there is a process. It doesn't apppear that an officer could just wake up one morning and say "scr€w this." To my reading, he has to show cause.

The questions;

. Would it be a likely or plausible scenario, that disagreements between a 1st lieutenant and a senior officer are bad enough, or the lieutenant's view of the officer's competency is such, that the Lt would decide to resign?

. Would his resignation be accepted, if he framed it in terms of being hindered in his ability to do his duty, or unable to fulfill his military obligations, or some equally oblique reference thereof?
(I don't know what language might suffice to diplomatically say that.)

. Or would the military be disposed to decline the resignation as insufficiently based?
In other words, how strict is the criteria for officer resignation? Would my fictional 1st Lt be required to express convincing sufficient cause, before the Army would accept his resignation?

EDIT: this would be @ Jan 1863.

. If this a plausible scenario, what sort of things might a senior officer do that could drive a 1st Lt to the point of quitting in frustration?

If I employ this plot device, it could help set up later conflicts in the story. I.e. my guy enlists full of earnest fervor for the Union cause, but he is preceded by Captain MucketyMuck, who already has personal antipathy towards him in civilian life and uses him poorly. Maybe Captain MM was a political appointee from a well-to-do family and yada yada.

Again, this is just story background. I can scrap this particular idea and be out nothing. But I wanted to explore the possibility.

Does anyone have input on this scenario?

Respectfully &c

.
PS
I've found the attached, explaining that an officer has options for redress if he feels truly wronged buy a superior. I don't know if this would mean my imaginary guy would be disallowed from resignation, without pursuing other avenues first?
PS #2
Yes, I am over thinking.

 

[huskerblitz]

Yes, and can be shown in my research of an actual regiment. This regiment had officers resign due to disability or disease but would later join up with a different regiment. What would be needed would be a recommendation of the regimental surgeon that would then go to the colonel, so up the chain of command.

My research indicates that this was more likely earlier in the war (through late 1862) rather than later when regiments began to shrink in numbers due to discharges, deaths or resignations. One Kentuckian tried to resign in early 1863 due to disagreement with the Emancipation Proclamation, but was denied.

Hope this helps somewhat.

 

[wuzreb]

Yes, and can be shown in my research of an actual regiment. This regiment had officers resign due to disability or disease but would later join up with a different regiment. What would be needed would be a recommendation of the regimental surgeon that would then go to the colonel, so up the chain of command.

My research indicates that this was more likely earlier in the war (through late 1862) rather than later when regiments began to shrink in numbers due to discharges, deaths or resignations. One Kentuckian tried to resign in early 1863 due to disagreement with the Emancipation Proclamation, but was denied.

Hope this helps somewhat.

Good day, and thank you for the quick response!

The one case I looked at with the officer resigning for illness was in 1864, but the poor guy really was deathly ill, tuberculosis. The surgeon's certificate accompanies his letter.

But for my fictional scenario, I wasn't intending to employ illness, as I envisioned the character back in the field in a new regiment in a fairly short time.

So I'm trying to explore the possibility and ramifications of a 1st lieutenant resigning due to conflicts with a superior officer, possibly a captain. Hence my other questions in my post above.

Attempting resignation over the Emancipation Proclamation, that was a little bit bold!

 

[Josh The Lighthouse Guy]

what sort of things might a senior officer do that could drive a 1st Lt to the point of quitting in frustration?

A serious personality conflict is the simplest. Some people simply cannot get along.

But more likely the Captain refuses to listen to the Lieutenant's advice, doesn't care about his men, is a narcissistic incompetent. Maybe the Lieutenant requested leave to go home to his dying mother or dying wife, but the Captain refused? A transfer to another company or regiment was sought, but denied.

One potential problem I see: how did the a-hole get to be Captain in the first place? Weren't officers elected? Maybe the popular Captain got killed leading the men and somebody's good-for-nothing nephew got the captaincy because his uncle is a senator or some such connection.

 

[huskerblitz]

Attempting resignation over the Emancipation Proclamation, that was a little bit bold!

It was Kentucky, many did not agree with it. Lt. Harrington was outspoken against it and what it meant for why he enlisted in the first place.

I'm sure there are many instances of officers resigning for all sorts of issues, not the least disagreements with superiors. Whether or not it would be granted was a different issue.

I'm not around my computer currently, but I could look. I know in my regiment I research there were all sorts of issues, including problems at home. But like I said, most of those granted were done earlier in the conflict. Later on most were denied.

 

[wuzreb]

A serious personality conflict is the simplest. Some people simply cannot get along.

But more likely the Captain refuses to listen to the Lieutenant's advice, doesn't care about his men, is a narcissistic incompetent. Maybe the Lieutenant requested leave to go home to his dying mother or dying wife, but the Captain refused? A transfer to another company or regiment was sought, but denied.

One potential problem I see: how did the a-hole get to be Captain in the first place? Weren't officers elected? Maybe the popular Captain got killed leading the men and somebody's good-for-nothing nephew got the captaincy because his uncle is a senator or some such connection.

Good afternoon and thank you.

I suspect the Army has seen its share of narcissistic incompetence, like anything! And that descriptor would probably fit my bad guy.

As for how he became a captain in the first place, not all officers were elected. There are any number of stories of officers who were basically political appointees. As you suggest, they knew somebody who knew somebody, or their daddy was BFF with somebody else.

So putting this idiot in the captaincy probably wouldn't take much of a leap of logic.

I'm just stuck as to whether I could get my good guy out of there by means of resignation.

 

[wuzreb]

It was Kentucky, many did not agree with it. Lt. Harrington was outspoken against it and what it meant for why he enlisted in the first place.

I'm sure there are many instances of officers resigning for all sorts of issues, not the least disagreements with superiors. Whether or not it would be granted was a different issue.

I'm not around my computer currently, but I could look. I know in my regiment I research there were all sorts of issues, including problems at home. But like I said, most of those granted were done earlier in the conflict. Later on most were denied.

If you do find the time or inclination to look, I would be very grateful.

The date this occurred would be January or February 1863. Relatively early-ish in the war, but the stakes were rising, particularly with the announcement of the Emancipation Proclamation.

I would be interested to see what you might find, if there's a precedent for junior officers resigning due to incompetent or despotic senior officers. And whether such requests might be granted.

But please don't go out of your way. This is all just me muddling around in my own imagination. It can be a little scary in there.

 

[Mississippian1861]

My own 3x Great Grandfather, Benjamin Holder, was a 1st Lt. in Co. F of the 1st South Carolina Cavalry. He resigned in the fall of 1862 to return to being a Baptist Minister. IIRC it had to be approved up the chain until the Secretary of War.

 

[wuzreb]

My own 3x Great Grandfather, Benjamin Holder, was a 1st Lt. in Co. F of the 1st South Carolina Cavalry. He resigned in the fall of 1862 to return to being a Baptist Minister. IIRC it had to be approved up the chain until the Secretary of War.

Wow, that's interesting! I wonder what the grounds or criteria for accepting it would have been? Maybe religious stuff had its own handling?

One thing I've noticed in various CW research I've done lately is that everything passed through multiple hands. Somebody would write a request or letter, and then five or six other people would add their notations onto the same piece of paper, front and back. Kind of an interesting exercise in deciphering multiple styles of penmanship.