Did Sickles disobey orders.

[TomDeFranco]

Originally Posted by B7B Southern

Well by the way I see it, and listening to these post it is quite obvious to me Sickles disobeyed an order. He spent too much time trying to talk to others and try to justify what he did. Just because there was a lot of cronyism does not cover the facts of his disobedience.

Absolutely.

[D1J1]

Originally Posted by B7B Southern

Well by the way I see it, and listening to these post it is quite obvious to me Sickles disobeyed an order. He spent too much time trying to talk to others and try to justify what he did. Just because there was a lot of cronyism does not cover the facts of his disobedience.

Yep, basically what I said back on page 1 or 2. Despite multiple attempts to obscure the issue or justify Sickles action I have found nothing that would make me change my mind.

Best regards,
Dennis

[datzdtruth]

Originally Posted by B7B Southern

I thought we were discussing Sickles, not other persons.

Marshall,
It's always a good tactic to resort to being a thread purist when you don't have an satisfactory response.

Have a good one, John

[datzdtruth]

Originally Posted by TomDeFranco

Regarding your last paragraph, there were definite examples where recruiting abilities played a definite role in attaining higher rank. Sickles and McClernand were prime examples. On the other hand there were definite cases where the officer in question also grew to become competent or better in combat aspects of their roles. There are strong cases for folks like John Logan, Wade Hampton, Jo Shelby and N.B. Forrest (at the tactical level).

Tom,
Well said.

Originally Posted by TomDeFranco

I'm sure that Meade's inexperience at army command contributed to the occasional mistake by subordinates (case in point, Pleasonton's not assuring that Buford's people were replaced in the Peach Orchard in the early afternoon of July 2), but as army commander you have the right to expect that your subordinates will perform as ordered. Also, Meade was aware of Sickles' proclivities as early as the Chancellorsville Campaign. He and other division and corps commanders were growing weary of Sickles, Butterfield and Hooker partying while others had duties to perform. Sickles also did not please Meade while on the march north into PA. Meade, though, realized that he had but little time to utilize the leeway granted him by Washington to make changes as there was a battle looming shortly and he could undoubtedly feel it. So, getting rid of Sickles and Butterfield would have to wait until he could establish himself. Unfortunately, Sickles and Butterfield did things to anger him before and during the battle.

I'm not implying that Meade did anything wrong. However, being aware of Sickles' shortcomings, he could have relegated him to left field where he thought would do the least harm. However, as it turned out that was right where Lee sent his best corps. To make matter worse Sickles pulled a Sickles, like he did with his wife's lover, and took matters into his own hands. Will we ever know all the details of what really happened? Except that, Meade handled the situation very well.

Take care, John

[B7B Southern]

Originally Posted by datzdtruth

Marshall,
It's always a good tactic to resort to being a thread purist when you don't have an satisfactory response.

Have a good one, John

Tough! I follow who I want to and I answered your question! You don't have to be so snarky about it!!

[TomDeFranco]

Originally Posted by datzdtruth

Tom,
Well said.



I'm not implying that Meade did anything wrong. However, being aware of Sickles' shortcomings, he could have relegated him to left field where he thought would do the least harm. However, as it turned out that was right where Lee sent his best corps. To make matter worse Sickles pulled a Sickles, like he did with his wife's lover, and took matters into his own hands. Will we ever know all the details of what really happened? Except that, Meade handled the situation very well.

Take care, John

Datz, regarding your last paragraph, I don't think we can ever know precisely the details of what happened - especially considering all the lying that Sickles did to the president, to congress, to the press and the public and given that his story permeated the mindset of those interested before Meade had any opprtunity to set the record straight.

[KICK]

WTF is a thread purist?

is it the opposite of a thread adulterator?

[B7B Southern]

A little read that pretty well covers it.

http://www.emmitsburg.net/archive_li...eral_meade.htm

[datzdtruth]

Originally Posted by KICK

WTF is a thread purist?

is it the opposite of a thread adulterator?

It beats me, Kick. Who ever thought that up? Was it you?

Have a good day, John

[KICK]

Originally Posted by datzdtruth

It beats me, Kick. Who ever thought that up? Was it you?

Have a good day, John

quote: Marshall,
It's always a good tactic to resort to being a thread purist when you don't have an satisfactory response.

Have a good one, John :quote

you get credit for the purist
I will take if for the adultery

[mgronski]

Originally Posted by datzdtruth

Tom,
Well said.



I'm not implying that Meade did anything wrong. However, being aware of Sickles' shortcomings, he could have relegated him to left field where he thought would do the least harm. However, as it turned out that was right where Lee sent his best corps. To make matter worse Sickles pulled a Sickles, like he did with his wife's lover, and took matters into his own hands. Will we ever know all the details of what really happened? Except that, Meade handled the situation very well.

Take care, John

There is enouh evidence, especially in Pfanz's books, that the first worry Meade had was an attack on Culp's Hill exposing his supply line on the Baltimore Pike where 6th Corps was coming.
Slocum put in some nebulous info back to Meade that he couldn't make an attack (which may be right, but done so amateurishly we may never know).
Meade was pushing both 5th and 6th Corps to get to the battlefield (neither Corps had rested or eaten) to at least shore up defenses.
Meade had the plan in place to move 5th Corps behind 3rd Corps when Sickles move and Longstreet's attack made 5th's move a pell mell rush to LRT, instead of the organized move Meade planned.
In fact , if Longstreet had attacked earlier, Meade would have done what he first started to do, move 2nd corps brigades over to Sickles front and move 5th Corps to fill in 2nd Corps.
Two things saved Longstreet, he started later and 6th Corps got there later.
Likewise, if Meade had made the attack on Lee's left with 12th and 5th Corps, Sickles move would have been the ruin of Meade's position unless 12th and 5th would have been successful attacking through & around town. I think Meade might have tried it hadn't 1st Corps been so depleted along with 11th Corps., so he passed on the notion until his largest corps was on the field.
The last bit of information that changed Meade's mind after the 2nd day was after Gen Newton arrived and took over the 1st Corps was the need to keep Lee from flanking him on his left. This was the major discussion of the second night meeting- how to readjust the lines to prevent Lee from making that flanking attack. This worry resulted in Meade attacking and retaking the lines lost on Culp's Hill- He wanted to clear that front so that he could more easily move more of his army to the other flank where Newton, who had the trust of Gibbon and others who started the voting that night, believed the next day's attack would be.
Despite the lore surrounding Meade telling Gibbon the attack would come to his front on the 3rd day, Meade had changed his mind after examining the front there with artillerist Hunt, and was surprised when the attack took place there.
The most amazing part of all the Sickles controversy is that anyone with half a brain could believe anything Sickles said if he bothered reading any of the records and orders of Meade.

[datzdtruth]

Originally Posted by mgronski

There is enouh evidence, especially in Pfanz's books, that the first worry Meade had was an attack on Culp's Hill exposing his supply line on the Baltimore Pike where 6th Corps was coming.
Slocum put in some nebulous info back to Meade that he couldn't make an attack (which may be right, but done so amateurishly we may never know).
Meade was pushing both 5th and 6th Corps to get to the battlefield (neither Corps had rested or eaten) to at least shore up defenses.
Meade had the plan in place to move 5th Corps behind 3rd Corps when Sickles move and Longstreet's attack made 5th's move a pell mell rush to LRT, instead of the organized move Meade planned.
In fact , if Longstreet had attacked earlier, Meade would have done what he first started to do, move 2nd corps brigades over to Sickles front and move 5th Corps to fill in 2nd Corps.
Two things saved Longstreet, he started later and 6th Corps got there later.
Likewise, if Meade had made the attack on Lee's left with 12th and 5th Corps, Sickles move would have been the ruin of Meade's position unless 12th and 5th would have been successful attacking through & around town. I think Meade might have tried it hadn't 1st Corps been so depleted along with 11th Corps., so he passed on the notion until his largest corps was on the field.
The last bit of information that changed Meade's mind after the 2nd day was after Gen Newton arrived and took over the 1st Corps was the need to keep Lee from flanking him on his left. This was the major discussion of the second night meeting- how to readjust the lines to prevent Lee from making that flanking attack. This worry resulted in Meade attacking and retaking the lines lost on Culp's Hill- He wanted to clear that front so that he could more easily move more of his army to the other flank where Newton, who had the trust of Gibbon and others who started the voting that night, believed the next day's attack would be.
Despite the lore surrounding Meade telling Gibbon the attack would come to his front on the 3rd day, Meade had changed his mind after examining the front there with artillerist Hunt, and was surprised when the attack took place there.
The most amazing part of all the Sickles controversy is that anyone with half a brain could believe anything Sickles said if he bothered reading any of the records and orders of Meade.

Mike,
Even though I'm not sure that you answered my question, I can see from what you say that since the poop was getting ready to hit the fan, Sickles was probably Meade's choice for the left by default. Since he may have had no other options, it may be that events were getting to unfold that had been initiated some time before. For instance, promotion by cronyism and ability to recruit men, and of course Sickles' arrogance. Fortunately, Meade was able to put out the fire before the damage became irreparable.

Have a good one, John

[mgronski]

3rd Corps had already gotten to the field before daylight of the 2nd day, it would have been crazy on Meade's part to move an entire corps, so he was stuck until 5th and 6th Corps got to the field.
5th was there first and the plan was layed in for them to reinforce Sickles.
Sickles actions had made it near impossibe for 5th corps to do it alone.
I haven't read the new book on Sickles, but as it turned out Doubleday had much to do with spreading th lies that Sickles and Butterfield started- all had an ax to grind against Meade for relieving them of duty.

[datzdtruth]

Originally Posted by mgronski

3rd Corps had already gotten to the field before daylight of the 2nd day, it would have been crazy on Meade's part to move an entire corps, so he was stuck until 5th and 6th Corps got to the field.
5th was there first and the plan was layed in for them to reinforce Sickles.
Sickles actions had made it near impossibe for 5th corps to do it alone.
I haven't read the new book on Sickles, but as it turned out Doubleday had much to do with spreading th lies that Sickles and Butterfield started- all had an ax to grind against Meade for relieving them of duty.

Thanks for the information. I've read lots of books on the war and the effects of slavery on our country, but I don't have one of those wonderful minds that retain well. I've done alright in life with my four cylinder brain so it doesn't bother me very much, except the lack of memory retention makes history a stretch.

Have a good one, John

[Martok]

Originally Posted by mgronski

The most amazing part of all the Sickles controversy is that anyone with half a brain could believe anything Sickles said if he bothered reading any of the records and orders of Meade.

I have read Meade's orders, and they were not as explicit and authorative as is generally stated. Whatever else Sickles was he wasn't stupid. He was able to manipulate Meades' words because of how Meade framed them.

The primary reason Meade has been defended on this issue over time? The WPPA.