Henry Halleck
Henry Halleck | |
---|---|
General in Chief of the Armies of the United States | |
In office July 23, 1862 – March 9, 1864 | |
President | Abraham Lincoln |
Preceded by | George B. McClellan |
Succeeded by | Ulysses S. Grant |
Personal details | |
Born | Henry Wager Halleck January 16, 1815 Westernville, New York, U.S. |
Died | January 9, 1872 Louisville, Kentucky, U.S. | (aged 56)
Resting place | Green-Wood Cemetery |
Signature | |
Nickname | "Old Brains" |
Military service | |
Allegiance | United States |
Branch/service | United States Army |
Years of service | 1839–1854, 1861–1872 |
Rank | Major-General |
Commands |
|
Battles/wars | Mexican–American War American Civil War |
Henry Wager Halleck (January 16, 1815 – January 9, 1872) was a senior United States Army officer, scholar, and lawyer. A noted expert in military studies, he was known by a nickname that became derogatory: "Old Brains". He was an important participant in the admission of California as a state and became a successful lawyer and land developer. Halleck served as the General-in-Chief of the Armies of the United States from 1862 to 1864, and then became Chief of Staff for the remainder of the war when Ulysses S. Grant was appointed to that position.
Early in the
Halleck was a cautious general who believed strongly in thorough preparations for battle and in the value of defensive fortifications over quick, aggressive action. He was a master of administration, logistics, and the politics necessary at the top of the military hierarchy, but exerted little effective control over field operations from his post in Washington, D.C. As general-in-chief he refused to give orders to his subordinate commanders, instead offering advice, but leaving the final decisions up to the generals in the field. As a result, his subordinates frequently criticized him and often ignored his instructions. Still, Halleck's earlier contributions to military theory are credited with encouraging a new spirit of professionalism in the army.[1]
In March 1864, Grant was promoted to general-in-chief, locating his headquarters with the Army of the Potomac in the field, while Halleck was relegated to serving as chief of staff in Washington, providing the necessary administrative support to fulfill Grant's orders to the various armies. Without the pressure of having to control the movements of the armies, Halleck performed capably in this task, ensuring that the Union armies were as well-equipped and supplied as possible.
Early life
Halleck was born on a farm in
During the
Halleck became a wealthy man as a lawyer and land speculator, and a noted collector of "Californiana". He obtained thousands of pages of official documents on the Spanish missions and colonization of California, which were copied and are now maintained by the
Civil War
Western Theater
As the Civil War began, Halleck was nominally a
Halleck established an uncomfortable relationship with the man who would become his most successful subordinate and future commander, Brig. Gen. Ulysses S. Grant. The pugnacious Grant had just been repulsed at the minor, but bloody, Battle of Belmont but had ambitious plans for amphibious operations on the Tennessee and Cumberland Rivers. Halleck, by nature a cautious general, but also judging that Grant's reputation for alcoholism in the prewar period made him unreliable, twice rejected Grant's plans. However, under pressure from President Lincoln to take offensive action, Halleck reconsidered and Grant conducted operations with naval and land forces against Forts Henry and Donelson in February 1862, capturing both, along with 14,000 Confederates.[9]
Grant had delivered the first major Union victory of the war. Halleck obtained a promotion for him to major general of volunteers, along with some other generals in his department, and used the victory as an opportunity to request overall command in the Western Theater, which he currently shared with Maj. Gen. Don Carlos Buell, but which was not granted. He briefly relieved Grant of field command of a newly ordered expedition up the Tennessee River after Grant left his district to meet Buell in Nashville, failed to provide returns of his force, and did not immediately stop looting at the two captured forts. Halleck also cited rumors of renewed alcoholism, but then restored Grant to field command – pressure by Lincoln and the War Department may have been a factor in this about-face. Explaining the reinstatement to Grant, Halleck portrayed it as his effort to correct an injustice, not revealing to Grant that the possible injustice had originated with him.[10] When Grant wrote to Halleck suggesting "I must have enemies between you and myself," Halleck replied, "You are mistaken. There is no enemy between you and me."[11]
Halleck's department performed well in early 1862, driving the Confederates from the state of
On March 11, 1862, Halleck's command was enlarged to include
General-in-Chief
In the aftermath of the failed
In Washington, Halleck continued to excel at administrative issues and facilitated the training, equipping, and deployment of thousands of Union soldiers over vast areas. He was unsuccessful, however, as a commander of the field armies or as a grand strategist. His cold, abrasive personality alienated his subordinates; one observer described him as a "cold, calculating owl." Historian Steven E. Woodworth wrote, "Beneath the ponderous dome of his high forehead, the General would gaze goggle-eyed at those who spoke to him, reflecting long before answering and simultaneously rubbing both elbows all the while, leading one observer to quip that "the great intelligence he was reputed to possess must be located in his elbows." This disposition also made him unpopular with the Union press corps, who criticized him frequently.[18]
Halleck, more a bureaucrat than a combat soldier, was able to impose little discipline or direction on his field commanders. Strong personalities such as George B. McClellan, John Pope, and
In Halleck's defense, his subordinate commanders in the Eastern Theater, whom he did not select, were reluctant to move against General
That Lincoln and Stanton were serious in their willingness to cede control to Halleck – after removing McClellan as general-in-chief, the two has performed that role between themselves – can be seen by their behavior with Grant when he came East to take the same role. Although they offered advice and broad strategic goals, they left Grant alone, and Grant took the challenge in a way that Halleck never did.[21]
Chief of staff
On March 12, 1864, after
Now that there was an aggressive general in the field, Halleck's administrative capabilities complemented Grant's field operations and they worked well together. Throughout the arduous
Richmond
Following the
In April 1865, after Sherman exceeded his authority and offered absurdly generous surrender terms to Joseph E. Johnston – Sherman apparently believed that he was following Lincoln's desires as expressed at a meeting at City Point, Virginia – it was very badly received in official Washington. Newspapers and officials – including Stanton – began to talk about Sherman possibly being a traitor. Probably to ingratiate himself with Stanton, Halleck took up this position, and instructed other generals to ignore orders coming from Sherman. This enraged Sherman, resulting in a vituperative exchange of letters in which Halleck attempted to explain away his behavior. This caused a rift between Halleck and Sherman, who, up until this time, had publicly and privately lauded Halleck, ever since Sherman had a mental breakdown while he was in charge of the Department of Kentucky, and was transferred into Halleck's department, where he was given the chance to work his way back into being of service to the country.[24]
The rift between the two generals was so strong that when Sherman's army marched from North Carolina to Washington to take part in the final grand review of the Union armies and passed through Richmond, where Halleck was in command, Halleck ordered one of Sherman's corps to pass him in review, an order that an insubordinate Sherman countermanded. Sherman ordered his troops to pass through Richmond "with colors flying and drums beating as a matter of right and not by H's leave."[25] No salute of any kind was offered to Halleck as the troops passed by his house, even though Halleck was standing on the porch.[24]
Halleck, realizing that losing Sherman's friendship was more important to him than gaining Stanton's regard, wrote a letter to Sherman in which he completely humbled himself, but Sherman remained incensed, in particular at Halleck's telling Sherman's subordinates not to follow his orders. He rejected Halleck entreaties, and the two men remained estranged.[26] Still, when Sherman wrote his memoirs in the 1880s he praised Halleck to the extent he thought was deserved.[27]
Evaluation by others
General George B. McClellan, who, when he was General-in-Chief, appointed Halleck to replace Frémont in the West, said of Halleck:
Of all the men who I have encountered in high position, Halleck was the most helplessly stupid. It was more difficult to get an idea through his head than can be conceived by anyone who never made the attempt. I do not think he ever had a correct military idea from beginning to end.[28]
McClellan told his wife that although Halleck had some good qualities as a soldier, "he does not understand strategy and should never plan a campaign."[29]
Historian Kendall Gott described Halleck as a department commander:
Although he had impressive credentials, Henry Halleck was not an easy man to work for. The nature of his job and his personality often provoked antagonism, hatred, and contempt. Halleck's strengths were organizing, coordinating, planning, and managing. He could also advise and suggest, and he sometimes ordered subordinates where and when to make a move, but he never was comfortable doing it himself. Halleck seldom worked openly, and as a department commander, he was always at headquarters, separated and aloof from the men. His decisions were the result of neither snap judgments nor friendly discussion, but calculated thinking. He was also prone to violent hatred and never cultivated close relationships. Overall, he generated no love, confidence, or respect.[30]
British general and military historian
However helpful it was to the Union for Grant to be free of Halleck's supervision in the West, in Washington, D.C. Halleck did not perform well in his role as General-in-Chief.
Historian John F. Marszalek, the author of the only complete biography of Halleck – Stephen E. Ambrose's Halleck: Lincoln's Chief of Staff is an expansion of his dissertation – writes:
Halleck saw himself as a subordinate, not a decision maker, a follower, not a leader. This was a deeply felt sentiment, long present in his character, but made conspicuous under the stress of war. ...[21]
Halleck's personality and his performance as a Civil War general were largely the result of deeply ingrained psychological factors and the physical ailments that developed as a result. [His] drive to succeed, his many accomplishments, and his eventual failure to reach his potential all stemmed from deeply embedded conscious and unconscious forces. The powerful man of success was also the tormented child, and, under the stress of war, the torment won out over the power. Indecision became his surrender to, his way of coping with, the turmoil he felt all his life.[39]
Postwar career
After Grant forced Lee's surrender at
Death
Halleck became ill in January 1872 and his condition was diagnosed as edema caused by liver disease. He died at his post in Louisville on January 9, just 7 days short of his 57th birthday.[43] He was buried in the family plot in Green-Wood Cemetery, in Brooklyn, New York, on January 25.
Halleck is commemorated by a street named for him in San Francisco and a statue in Golden Gate Park. He left no memoirs for posterity and apparently destroyed his private correspondence and memoranda. His estate at his death showed a net value of $474,773.16 ($12,075,064.04 in 2023 dollars). His widow, Elizabeth, married Halleck's best friend, Col. George Washington Cullum in 1875. Cullum had served as Halleck's chief of staff in the Western Theater and then on his staff in Washington.[6]
Dates of rank
Insignia | Rank | Component | Date |
---|---|---|---|
No insignia | Cadet, USMA | Regular Army | 1 July 1835 |
Second Lieutenant | Regular Army | 1 July 1839 | |
First Lieutenant | Regular Army | 1 January 1845 | |
Brevet Captain | Regular Army | 1 May 1847 | |
Captain | Regular Army | 1 July 1853 | |
Major General | Regular Army | 19 August 1861 |
Selected works
- (editor) Bitumen: Its Varieties, Properties, and Uses (1841)
- Report on the Means of National Defence (1843)
- Elements of Military Art and Science (1846)
- (translator) A Collection of Mining Laws of Spain and Mexico (1859)
- International law, or, Rules regulating the intercourse of states in peace and war (1861)
- (translator) Life of Napoleon by Baron Antoine-Henri Jomini (1864) published by Google books
- The Mexican War in Baja California: the memorandum of Captain Henry W. Halleck concerning his expeditions in Lower California, 1846–1848 (posthumous, 1977)
Legacy
- A statue of Halleck by sculptor George W. Cullum.[44]
- Halleck Street in San Francisco near the Presidio.[45]
- Fort Halleck (1862–66): Military outpost in Dakota Territory built to protect travelers on the Overland Trail.
- Halleck, Nevada, an unincorporated community founded in 1869, which took its name from Camp Halleck (1867–1879) – later Fort Halleck (1879–1886) – which was built to protect the California Trail. Both were named after General Halleck.[46] With the closing of the fort and the consolidation of small ranches into larger corporate ones, the town began its decline; it now consists of two buildings, one of which is the post office.
- Halleck Cottage was the name given to one of the homes at the San Francisco Protestant Orphanage (current name: Edgewood Center) in remembrance to a donation made to Mrs. Haight and Mrs. Waller who served as board managers at the time for the San Francisco Orphan Asylum Society (SFOA).
In popular culture
- Halleck is a character in some American Civil War alternate histories, including the novels Stars and Stripes Forever (1998) by Harry Harrison and Gettysburg: A Novel of the Civil War (2003) by Newt Gingrich and William R. Forstchen. In Harrison's novel, while Halleck's role is fairly important, he does not personally appear.
- In the 1941 film They Died With Their Boots On, Sydney Greenstreet plays General Winfield Scott, however the fictionalized Scott is a conflation partly based on Halleck.
See also
References
Notes
- ^ Fredriksen, p. 910.
- ^ Marszalek, pp. 6–8.
- ^ a b c d e Fredriksen, pp. 908–911.
- ^ a b c Eicher, p. 274.
- ^ Ambrose (1999), p. 7
- ^ a b c d California State Military Museum
- ^ a b Warner, pp. 195–197.
- ^ Nevin, p. 59.
- ^ Nevin, pp. 60–95.
- ^ Many authors see presidential pressure behind Grant's reinstatement to field command. See, e.g., Gott, pp. 267–268; Nevin, p. 96. However, Smith, p. 176, states that Halleck's "reinstatement of Grant preceded by one day the bombshell that landed on his desk from the adjutant general [on behalf of the President and Secretary of War] in Washington."
- ^ Woodworth, p. 142.
- ^ Hattaway and Jones, pp. 149–150.
- ^ Warner, p. 196, for example, states that his subordinates allowed Halleck to "shine in reflected glory." Fredriksen, p. 909, credits Halleck (not Grant) with devising the scheme to drive up the Cumberland and Tennessee Rivers and to orchestrate a concerted effort between Grant, Pope, Buell in a large-scale offensive. Hattaway and Jones, p. 149, balances the credit between Halleck and his subordinates. Similarly, Marszalek, p. 117, credits Grant's aggressiveness as well as Halleck's preparations and logistical support, but notes, p. 118, that Halleck accepted public praise for the victories without giving any credit to his subordinates.
- ^ Eicher, p. 833. The Department of the Mississippi comprised Kansas, Nebraska Territory, Colorado Territory except for Fort Garland, Dakota Territory, and the Indian Territory from the Department of Kansas; Wisconsin, Missouri, Illinois, Western Kentucky, Western Tennessee, Arkansas, Minnesota, and Iowa from the Department of Missouri; and Western Michigan, Indiana, and Western Ohio from the Department of the Ohio. The relevant portions of Kentucky, Tennessee, Ohio, and Michigan were the areas west of a north-south line drawn through Knoxville, Tennessee.
- ^ On May 11, Grant wrote Halleck privately that he considered his second-in-command position to be "anomylous," to constitute a "sensure," and his position to differ "but little from that of one in arrest." Papers of Ulysses S. Grant, 5:114; see Smith, p. 209; Schenker, "Ulysses in His Tent," passim.
- ^ Woodworth, pp. 141–211; Fredriksen, p. 909; Marszalek, pp. 124–125
- ^ Smith, p. 216.
- ^ Fredriksen, p. 910; Woodworth, p. 62.
- ^ Smith, p. 286.
- ^ Smith, p. 287.
- ^ a b Marszalek, p. 196
- ^ Smith, p. 294.
- ^ Ambrose (1999), p. 199
- ^ a b Marszalek, pp. 222–225
- ^ Ambrose (1999), p. 201
- ^ Ambrose (1999), pp. 201–222
- ^ Ambrose (1999), p. 205
- ^ Fuller (1958), p. 95
- ISBN 978-0306809132
- ^ Gott, p. 45.
- ^ Fuller (1958), p. 79
- ISBN 0-253-13400-5; citing Woodward, W. E. (1928) Meet General Grant. New York: Horace Liveright. p. 212
- ^ Fuller (1958), pp. 117, 122–123
- ^ Marszalek, p. 183
- ^ Marszalek, p. 153
- ^ Marszlek, p. 208
- ^ Marszalek, pp. 163, 208, 210
- ^ Marszalek, p. 186
- ^ Marszalek, pp. 252–253
- ^ a b Fredriksen, pp. 910–11.
- ^ "Alaska's Heritage." Alaska History and Cultural Studies Archived 2016-01-20 at the Wayback Machine. Alaska Humanities Forum. 2011. Retrieved September 20, 2011.
- ^ Borneman, Walter. Alaska: Saga of a Bold Land. Harper Perennial, 2004. Retrieved online from Google Books September 20, 2011.
- ^ Ambrose (1999), p.211
- ^ "Golden Gate Park - General Henry Wager Halleck" Public Art and Architecture from Around the World
- ^ The Chronicle 12 April 1987 p.7
- ^ Federal Writers' Project (1941). Origin of Place Names: Nevada (PDF). W.P.A. p. 24.
Bibliography
- Anders, Curt Henry Halleck's War: A Fresh Look at Lincoln's Controversial General-in-Chief. Guild Press of Indiana,1999. ISBN 1-57860-029-4
- ISBN 0-8071-2071-5
- California State Military Museum description of Halleck in California
- ISBN 0-8047-3641-3
- Fredriksen, John C. "Henry Wager Halleck." In Encyclopedia of the American Civil War: A Political, Social, and Military History, edited by David S. Heidler and Jeanne T. Heidler. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2000. ISBN 0-393-04758-X
- ISBN 0-306-80450-6
- Gott, Kendall D. Where the South Lost the War: An Analysis of the Fort Henry – Fort Donelson Campaign, February 1862. Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania: Stackpole Books, 2003. ISBN 0-8117-0049-6
- Hattaway, Herman, and Archer Jones. How the North Won: A Military History of the Civil War. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1983. ISBN 0-252-00918-5
- ISBN 0-674-01493-6
- Nevin, David and the Editors of Time-Life Books. The Road to Shiloh: Early Battles in the West. Alexandria, VA: Time-Life Books, 1983. ISBN 0-8094-4716-9
- ISBN 0-684-84927-5
- Schenker, Carl R. Jr. "Ulysses in His Tent: Halleck, Grant, Sherman, and 'The Turning Point of the War'." Civil War History (June 2010), vol. 56, no. 2, p. 175
- The Union Army; A History of Military Affairs in the Loyal States, 1861–65 – Records of the Regiments in the Union Army – Cyclopedia of Battles – Memoirs of Commanders and Soldiers. Vol. 8. Wilmington, North Carolina: Broadfoot Publishing, 1997. First published 1908 by Federal Publishing Company
- ISBN 0-8071-0822-7.
- ISBN 0-375-41218-2.
Further reading
- ISBN 0-914427-67-9.
- Simon, John Y. Grant and Halleck: Contrasts in Command. Frank L. Klement Lectures, No. 5. Milwaukee, WI: Marquette University Press, 1996. ISBN 0-87462-329-4.