"We Need A General!": The appointment of George B. McClellan


© Michael J. Swogger

By some strange operation of magic I seem to have become the power of the land. I see already the main causes of our recent failure; I am sure that I can remedy these, and am that I can lead these armies of men to victory once more. -George B. McClellan

It had been five days since the Union rout at First Manassas. The Federal forces that had been flowing steadily into Washington showed the terrible signs of fatigue, disheartenment, and low morale. Drunken soldiers roamed the streets of the city, many weary officers filled saloons and high class hotels, and the terrified civilians were preparing for the absolute worst: a Confederate invasion of the capital. At that point, the Rebel army was encamped a mere 25 miles southwest of Washington at Centreville, Virginia (Bailey, 1983). Washington itself was in serious danger of attack. "Some fortifications were in place on the far side of the Potomac, where Federals still controlled a narrow strip of Virginia, but the approaches to Washington on the Maryland side were inadequately guarded" (Bailey, 1983, p. 8).

George B. McClellan arrived in Washington on July 26, 1861, with the knowledge that the President had an important assignment for him. Lincoln turned over to the 34 year-old general full command of all Federal troops in and about Washington. He was charged with fully protecting the capital from a Southern invasion and rebuilding the army in preparation for a march on Richmond, the new Confederate capital.

McClellan had a difficult task ahead of him. Though the Union army consisted of around 51,000 troops, roughly 2/3 of those men were available for duty, but were poorly trained and ill-equipped. "I found no army to command," McClellan reflected later. And he noted that "the city was almost in condition to have been taken by a dash of a regiment of cavalry" (Bailey, 1983, p. 8). Though the capital was not quite as vulnerable as Mac thought (the Confederates lacked the organization and resources to attack at this point, and McClellan over-estimated the size of the enemy force by a factor of seven), he still had a legitimate task ahead of him.

George McClellan wasted no time to show that he was up to the assignment in which he was charged. He quickly appointed a provost marshal to head 1,000 army regulars that would act as military police. He sent all troops threatening mutiny to prison. He put together a large staff of no fewer than 19 officers to assist in overseeing training and organization. McClellan appointed a chief of artillery to expand the poorly equipped batteries that had just 30 guns, a medical director to organize hospitals and proper sanitation management, and a quartermaster general to oversee the requisition of supplies. And to coordinate the duties of his large staff, McClellan appointed a chief of staff, a position new to the United States Army (Bailey, 1983).

Go To Page: 1 2 3


The copyright of the article "We Need A General!": The appointment of George B. McClellan in American Civil War is owned by . Permission to republish "We Need A General!": The appointment of George B. McClellan in print or online must be granted by the author in writing.

Post this Article to facebook Add this Article to del.icio.us! Digg this Article furl this Article Add this Article to Reddit Add this Article to Technorati Add this Article to Newsvine Add this Article to Windows Live Add this Article to Yahoo Add this Article to StumbleUpon Add this Article to BlinkLists Add this Article to Spurl Add this Article to Google Add this Article to Ask Add this Article to Squidoo


Here's the follow-up discussion on this article: View all related messages

67.   Dec 2, 1999 2:47 AM
Hi, folks, good to be back online again, especially on Mike's great site.

I too was at Antietam, and I am obliged to say- I must retract some of my former criticisms of Mac's generalship in that ca ...


-- posted by not_him_again


66.   Nov 23, 1999 11:36 AM
I haven't felt qualified to contribute to this interesting and instructive discussion so far, not having studied McClellan to this level before. But I was recently at the Antietam battle site and had ...

-- posted by John_Barr


65.   Nov 10, 1999 10:22 PM
Mugwump:
What would you say if these points were reversed:
"having his entire army stopped by 16,000 or 18,000 men under a talented actor at Yorktown."
What if it could be shown to you that (a) McC ...

-- posted by drotov


64.   Sep 21, 1999 10:32 AM
I think temperment has a lot to do with a general's performance. If Lee were not so aggressive, the war would have been very different.

As you said, the measure of a general is keeping his army in ...


-- posted by Mugwump53


63.   Sep 21, 1999 12:55 AM
I don't know if by "temperment" is a good way to judge a general, John. Infact, I would say preserving your army and winning battles is a better determinent. IN that regard, maybe history has given ol ...

-- posted by Ulysses





For a complete listing of article comments, questions, and other discussions related to Michael J. Swogger's American Civil War topic, please visit the Discussions page.