The Army of the Cumberland [65]
in Kentucky, and his refusal to follow Bragg into the mountains of Eastern Kentucky and Tennessee, was deemed sufficient cause by Halleck to issue the order removing him from his command. If Halleck's order to Buell to repair this railroad had never been issued, Bragg's campaign in Kentucky would never have been made. Halleck's removal of Buell was the direct result of the latter's obedience to orders received from the former. On Rosecrans assuming command, almost the first order he received from Halleck was one directing him to advance into East Tennessee after Bragg. With a full knowledge of the military situation obtained from Buell, Rosecrans proceeded at once to protect the line established by Buell, and await the advance of Bragg in the vicinity of Nashville. The battle of Stone's River was for the time sufficient to prove, even to Halleck, that Buell and Rosecrans were correct, and Rosecrans was allowed for the time to attend to his command without being interfered with. During the encampment at Murfreesboro, the first object of Rosecrans was to properly mount and equip his cavalry. In this he received at first faint encouragement, which soon ceased altogether.
On March 1st Halleck, as Commander-in-Chief of the Armies of the United States, wrote a letter, sending a copy to Rosecrans and Grant, offering the position of the then vacant major-generalship in the regular army, to the general in the field who should first achieve an important and decisive victory. Grant very quietly folded up the letter, put it by for future reference, and proceeded with the plans of his campaign, saying nothing. To Rosecrans's open, impulsive, and honorable nature, engaged with all his powers in furthering the interests of the Government and the general welfare of his command, this letter was an insult, and he treated it accordingly. On March 6th he prepared his reply, and forwarded it to Washington. In this letter he informs the General-in-Chief that, "as an officer and as a citizen," he felt "degraded at such an auctioneering of honors," and then adds: "Have we a general who would fight for his own personal benefit when he would not for honor and for his country? He would come by his commission basely in that case, and deserve to be despised by men of honor. But are all the brave and honorable generals on an equality as to chances? If not, it is unjust to those who probably deserve most."
The effect of this letter was to widen the breach between the authorities at Washington and Rosecrans. Halleck's letter and Rosecrans's reply were both characteristic of the men. Halleck, fresh from the results of a large law practice in California--principally devoted to the establishment of the validity of land grants in favor of his clients, in the success of which large contingent fees were gained--saw nothing improper in such an offer to an officer of sufficient ability and standing to be in command of one of the armies of the United States. With Rosecrans, all the honest, generous impulses of a high-principled, honorable gentleman, who had imperiled his life on many a battlefield, fighting solely from a sense of duty to his country, led to the expression of his contempt for the author of such an offer. The mistake that Halleck made was in thinking that what would prove a tempting offer to a man like himself, would be so to Rosecrans. No one will attempt to maintain the wisdom of Rosecrans's course as a matter of policy, however much they may sympathize with and admire the spirit of his letter. It was an impolitic letter, and one that aided in drawing the ill-will and resentment of Halleck and Stanton upon him in full force later.
From this time forward, all the requests of Rosecrans for the improvement of the efficiency of his army were treated with great coolness, and in many instances it was only after the greatest importunity that he was able to secure the least attention to his recommendations for the increased usefulness of his command. His repeated applications for more cavalry, and that they be armed with revolving
On March 1st Halleck, as Commander-in-Chief of the Armies of the United States, wrote a letter, sending a copy to Rosecrans and Grant, offering the position of the then vacant major-generalship in the regular army, to the general in the field who should first achieve an important and decisive victory. Grant very quietly folded up the letter, put it by for future reference, and proceeded with the plans of his campaign, saying nothing. To Rosecrans's open, impulsive, and honorable nature, engaged with all his powers in furthering the interests of the Government and the general welfare of his command, this letter was an insult, and he treated it accordingly. On March 6th he prepared his reply, and forwarded it to Washington. In this letter he informs the General-in-Chief that, "as an officer and as a citizen," he felt "degraded at such an auctioneering of honors," and then adds: "Have we a general who would fight for his own personal benefit when he would not for honor and for his country? He would come by his commission basely in that case, and deserve to be despised by men of honor. But are all the brave and honorable generals on an equality as to chances? If not, it is unjust to those who probably deserve most."
The effect of this letter was to widen the breach between the authorities at Washington and Rosecrans. Halleck's letter and Rosecrans's reply were both characteristic of the men. Halleck, fresh from the results of a large law practice in California--principally devoted to the establishment of the validity of land grants in favor of his clients, in the success of which large contingent fees were gained--saw nothing improper in such an offer to an officer of sufficient ability and standing to be in command of one of the armies of the United States. With Rosecrans, all the honest, generous impulses of a high-principled, honorable gentleman, who had imperiled his life on many a battlefield, fighting solely from a sense of duty to his country, led to the expression of his contempt for the author of such an offer. The mistake that Halleck made was in thinking that what would prove a tempting offer to a man like himself, would be so to Rosecrans. No one will attempt to maintain the wisdom of Rosecrans's course as a matter of policy, however much they may sympathize with and admire the spirit of his letter. It was an impolitic letter, and one that aided in drawing the ill-will and resentment of Halleck and Stanton upon him in full force later.
From this time forward, all the requests of Rosecrans for the improvement of the efficiency of his army were treated with great coolness, and in many instances it was only after the greatest importunity that he was able to secure the least attention to his recommendations for the increased usefulness of his command. His repeated applications for more cavalry, and that they be armed with revolving