|
|
The Dahlgren Papers RevisitedAmerica's Civil War | 4 comments | Print This Post | Email This Post
19 Samuel Cooper to R.E. Lee, March 30, Fitzhugh Lee to Cooper, March 31, R.E. Lee to Meade, April 1, 1864, OR, ser. I, vol. 33, 223-4, 178; Richmond Examiner, April 1, 1864. Subscribe Today
20 Meade, Life and Letters, vol. 2, 190-1; Pleasonton to Kilpatrick, March 14, Kilpatrick to Pleasonton, March 16, 1864, OR, ser. I, vol. 33, 175-6.
21 Philadelphia Inquirer, March 11, 1864, New York Times, March 15, 1864; Meade to R.E. Lee, April 17, 1864, OR, ser. I, vol. 33, 180.
22 Meade, Life and Letters, vol. 2, 191.
23 Marsena R. Patrick, Inside Lincoln’s Army: The Diary of Marsena Rudolph Patrick, Provost Marshal General, Army of the Potomac, ed. David S. Sparks (New York: Thomas Yoseloff, 1964), 347-8; Babcock statement, John C. Babcock Papers, Library of Congress.
24 New York Times, July 28, 1864; John A. Dahlgren, Memoir of Ulric Dahlgren (Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott, 1872), 233.
25 Jubal A. Early to J. William Jones, Feb. 14, 1879, Southern Historical Society Papers, vol. 13, 559; Hall, ‘The Dahlgren Papers,’ 37-8; broadsheet: collection of James O. Hall. See also David F. Riggs, ‘The Dahlgren Papers Reconsidered,’ The Lincoln Herald (summer 1981), 658-67.
26 Fitzhugh Lee to Samuel Cooper, March 31, 1864, OR, ser. I, vol. 33, 224.
27 Schultz, The Dahlgren Affair, 247-8.
28 Schultz, The Dahlgren Affair, 250-2.
29 Schultz, The Dahlgren Affair, 252-3; Pleasonton to Kilpatrick, Feb. 26, 1864, OR, ser. I, vol. 33, 183; ‘Memoranda of the War,’ Virginia Historical Society, cited in Ernest B. Furgurson, Ashes of Glory: Richmond at War (New York: Knopf, 1996), 255n.
30 Reports of Edward C. Fox, James Pollard, R.L.T. Beale, OR, ser. I, vol. 33, 206-10; Pollard statement, Western Reserve Historical Society.
31 Schultz, The Dahlgren Affair, 252.
32 Richmond Sentinel, March 7, 1864.
33 James Harrison Wilson, Under the Old Flag (New York: Appleton, 1912), vol. 1, 372.
34 Hall, ‘The Dahlgren Papers,’ 39.
35 Richmond Sentinel, March 6, 1864. Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14Help HistoryNet by bookmarking to
            Tags: 19th Century, America's Civil War, American Civil War, Historical Conflicts, Politics
 |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||
What is HistoryNet?The HistoryNet.com is brought to you by the Weider History Group, the world's largest publisher of history magazines. HistoryNet.com contains daily features, photo galleries and over 5,000 articles originally published in our various magazines. If you are interested in a specific history subject, try searching our archives, you are bound to find something to pique your interest. |
From Our Magazines
|
Weider History Group |
Weider History Network: HistoryNet | Armchair General | Great History | Achtung Panzer! Terms of Use | Copyright © 2009 Weider History Group. All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited. |
||
Loading ...
4 Comments to “The Dahlgren Papers Revisited”
I like your analysis and mannner of speaking, thank you for this interesting ticcket, it s always nice to visit this beautiful blog :)
By douce51 on Mar 14, 2009 at 8:06 pm
Very interesting article. However, part of your premise is based on COL Dahlgren being an outsider and able to carry out Kilpatrick’s plan.
Dahlgren was every bit the opportunist that Custer and the other Cavalry officers were. Three young men promoted very quickly as the Union formed its Cavalry Corps organization for the Army of the Potomac.
Dahlgren was a Captain at Gettysburg and attemtping the daring missions that secured Custer, Merritt and Farnsworth not to mention Kilpatrick’s rise.
Dahlgren had his father’s coat tails to ride as well. Having a senior admiral as a father also helped in his rise to Colonel from Captain in less than one year.
Dahlgren, had he not been killed, was going to be a Brigade, if not Division Commander in Sheridan’s forces by the end of the war.
Dahlgren was an insider.
Added to that, this raid and the killing of Davis was out of charactor for most everything else the Union did with its covert operations.
Now the Confederate covert operations was a different story. The burning of major cities with Greek Fire. The capture of US merchant ships on the high seas. The capture of civilian and military ships on the great lakes and rivers in Union cities. The cladestine operations across the boarder in Canada to attack or subvert the FederalGovernment. The Confederacy had a long pattern of such acts that we would call today terrorist.
The Union, maybe because they never developed covert organizations like the Confederacy did, had no great coordinated effort. Judah Benjamin was the cabinet level Confederate organizer of covert operations – to include the capture of President Lincoln and everything listed above.
If the Dahlgren letter is true, it was developed by Kilpatrick and Dahlgren alone and outside the bounds and generally against the wishes of President Lincoln.
By Don Herko in kansas on Apr 24, 2009 at 9:44 am
This article is well=written and makes a strong case for the involvement of Stanton. However, the author says, “It certainly cannot be imagined that the president countenanced political assassination and black flag warfare against civilians. Lincoln approved the capture of Davis, perhaps as a hostage for the release of Union prisoners, but nothing we know about the man suggests he would have gone beyond that.”
The author seems to forget Athens, Alabama, where US Col. Turchin told his men, “I shut my eyes for three hours,” thereby granting his soldiers permission to rape, rob, and pillage. Turchin’s conviction by courtmartial was overturned by Lincoln’s promoting Turchin to Brigadier General.
I see no reason to leave Lincoln out of speculation about the source of Dahlgren’s orders.
By Charles Hayes on May 24, 2009 at 10:05 pm