General William T. Sherman to Senator John Sherman, November 17, 1875

HEADQUARTERS ARMY OF THE UNITED STATES,

ST. LOUIS, Mo., Nov. 17, 1875.

Dear Brother: . . . Belknap has acted badly by me ever since he reached Washington. . .

General Grant promised me often to arrange and divide our functions, but he never did, but left the Secretary to do all those things of which he himself, as General, had complained to Stanton. I don't think I ever used the expression often imputed to me of saying that the Secretary of War is only a clerk to the President. It is the opinion of many lawyers that the Secretary of War himself has no right to issue a military order to officers and soldiers that his office is civil etc., etc. The President is constitutional commander-in-chief, and when the Secretary issues his order he ought to recite the fact; whereas orders are issued by the Adjutant-General by order of the Secretary of War. This is done daily, and I cannot command unless orders come through me, which they do not, but go straight to the party concerned. This is the real question at issue between us. Congress ought to clearly define the relation between the Secretary of War and a General of the army. It is not the case now, but the Secretary of War exercises all the functions of the Commander-General under a decision of the Attorney-General. . . .

Yours, etc.,

W. T. SHERMAN.

SOURCE: Rachel Sherman Thorndike, Editor, The Sherman Letters: Correspondence Between General and Senator Sherman from 1837 to 1891, p. 346

General William T. Sherman to Senator John Sherman, December 29, 1875

HEADQUARTERS ARMY OF THE UNITED STATES,

ST. LOUIS, Mo., Dec. 29, 1875.

Dear Brother: . . . As to the army, I agree that it is entirely too costly. Twenty-five thousand soldiers with a due proportion of officers ought to be maintained at less than present estimates, which I see are stated at forty and also at fifty-five millions. This must embrace appropriations for forts, harbors, etc., whose disbursements fall under the engineer and other bureaus of the War Department. The heaviest cost to the army is in these expensive bureaus of which we have ten, all of which have a head in Washington and run, as it were, a separate machine. I have no hesitation in saying that if the Secretary of War has the lawful power to command the army through the Adjutant-General, then my office is a sinecure and should be abolished. Instead of being useful, it is simply ornamental and an obstacle to unity of command and harmony of action. No two men can fulfil the same office; and the law should clearly define the functions of each, or mine should be abolished. . .

Yours affectionately,

W. T. SHERMAN.

SOURCE: Rachel Sherman Thorndike, Editor, The Sherman Letters: Correspondence Between General and Senator Sherman from 1837 to 1891, p. 346-7

General William T. Sherman to Senator John Sherman, March 10, 1876

HEADQUARTERS ARMY OF THE UNITED STATES,

ST. LOUIS, Mo., March 10, 1876.

Dear Brother: I have purposely refrained from writing to you my opinions and feelings on the terrible fate that so suddenly has befallen General Belknap, because I want to say truthfully that I have never asked you to advocate my cause or to be compromised by my mistakes. I am proud of your position in the Senate, and would not have you to risk it by even the faintest partiality to your brother. But people will ask you what was the real reason why I left Washington; did I have knowledge of frauds and peculations? and was I not bound to reveal them? You may answer positively that I had no knowledge except what Congress and the President had. It was not my office to probe after vague rumors and whispers that had no official basis. The President and Belknap both gradually withdrew from me all the powers which Grant had exercised in the same office, and Congress capped the climax by repealing that law which required all orders to the army to go through the General, and the only other one, a joint resolution that empowered the General to appoint "traders."

The consequence was that orders to individuals of the army went over my head to them, and reports went back without coming through me, as required in every military service on earth. . . .

I have now from Moulton two letters, and from Dayton one. In all which is stated that the new Secretary, Judge Taft, has spoken kindly of me, and expressed a desire to meet me in Washington. I will not go to Washington unless ordered, and it would be an outrage if Congress, under a temporary excitement, should compel my removal back. I came out at my own expense, and never charged a cent for transportation, which I could have done. I can better command the army from here than from there. The causes that made a Belknap remain and will remain. . . .

If you see Judge Taft, say to him that my opinion is that I can fulfil any general policy he may prescribe, and enforce any orders he may give better from St. Louis than Washington.

Affectionately, etc.,

W. T. SHERMAN.

There are two ways to govern the army, its generals, and the other through the staff. If orders and instructions are made to individuals composing the army direct by the Adjutant-General, and not through the commanding General, the latter is not only useless but an incumbrance, and had better be away. But if Secretary Taft is willing to trust me to execute and carry into effect his orders and instructions, all he has to do is to order, and he will find me ready.

Affectionately,

W. T. SHERMAN.

SOURCE: Rachel Sherman Thorndike, Editor, The Sherman Letters: Correspondence Between General and Senator Sherman from 1837 to 1891, p. 348-9

General William T. Sherman to Senator John Sherman, January 7, 1875

HEADQUARTERS ARMY OF THE UNITED STATES,        

ST. LOUIS, Mo., Jan. 7, 1875.

Dear Brother: I see my name was used in the debate yesterday on Louisiana matters.¹

Neither the President or Secretary of War ever consulted me about Louisiana matters. Sheridan received his orders direct from the Secretary of War and Adjutant-General Townsend, and started on telegraphic notice, writing me a short note stating the fact, and that the Secretary of War would explain to me.

The latter sent me a copy of the orders and instructions by mail, which I received after General Sheridan had gone, and I simply acknowledged their receipt.

I have all along tried to save our officers and soldiers from the dirty work imposed on them by the city authorities of the South; and may, thereby, have incurred the suspicion of the President that I did not cordially sustain his force. My hands and conscience are free of any of the breaches of fundamental principles in that quarter. And I have always thought it wrong to bolster up weak State governments by our troops. We should keep the peace always; but not act as bailiff constables and catch thieves. That should be beneath a soldier's vocation. If you want information of the conditions up the Red River, call for a report recently made by Lieutenant-Colonel Morrow, personally known to you. . . .

As ever, your brother,

W. T. SHERMAN.

_______________

¹ The "Louisiana matters" were the reconstruction difficulties which so many of the Southern States were experiencing. General Sherman objected to the detailing of army officers to assist the State authorities in keeping the peace.

SOURCE: Rachel Sherman Thorndike, Editor, The Sherman Letters: Correspondence Between General and Senator Sherman from 1837 to 1891, p. 342