Gen. Phil Kearny (June 1, 1815-Sept. 1, 1862)

Kearny, Philip, and William B. Styple (ed.). Letters from the Peninsula: The Civil War Letters of General Philip Kearny. Kearny, N.J.: Belle Grove Pub. Co., 1988.

Phil Kearny was an American soldier who entered the U.S. Army from civilian life as a 2d lieutenant of the 1st Dragoons in 1837. A lawyer by profession, he had inherited fabulous wealth but yearned for nothing more than a soldier’s life and had obtained his commission through the influence of his uncle, Gen. Stephen Watts Kearny. In 1839, he was posted as a student to the French cavalry school (Saumur) to study tactics. He subsequently served as an observer with the Chasseurs d’Afrique during the French conquest of Algeria (1840) and in the U.S.-Mexican War (in which he lost his left arm in a cavalry charge at Churubusco). Resigning his commission, he traveled to France and served as a staff officer in the French army during the War of France and Piedmont-Sardinia with Austria (1859), participating heroically in the battles of Magenta and Solferino, for which he was awarded the Legion of Honor.

With the outbreak of Civil War, Kearny returned to the United States and his native state, New Jersey. His initial command was the 1st New Jersey Brigade, which he trained to a high level but never led in battle. During the Peninsula campaign, he commanded the 3d Division, III Army Corps (Heintzelman) and participated in the battles of Williamsburg (May 4-5, 1862), Seven Pines (May 31-June 1), and several of the Seven Days’ battles (June 25-July 1). He had the utmost contempt for army commander General McClellan and several of his compeers and was outspoken in his views. Nonetheless, he was promoted brigadier general, U.S.V. (May 17, 1862) and major general, U.S.V. (July 4). He led his division at Second Manassas (August 29-30) and at Chantilly (Sept. 1), where he was KIA when he rode into the Confederate ranks during a tremendous thunderstorm and refused a summons to surrender. He was mourned by many high-ranking officers of both armies, including Gen. Robert E. Lee.

Kearny’s life and character are much-illumined by the book shown at the head of this sketch. The late (and much-missed) Brian C. Pohanka wrote the foreword, which in measured and sympathetic terms perfectly captures the essence and allure of Kearny’s dashing, volatile personality. Editor and compiler Styple’s Introduction provides a concise biography of Kearny, whose life was flamboyant and at times even Flashman-esque. The bulk of the book contains Kearny’s wartime letters to his wife, Agnes, and his friend and political ally, Cortlandt Parker. In terms of back matter, there is a brief but wholly adequate bibliography. Unfortunately, there is no index, which would have added much to the book’s value as a resource.

Below is a list of other books that might be consulted for information about Kearny and the 1st New Jersey Brigade, “Kearny’s Own.”

Baquet, Camille. History of the First Brigade, New Jersey Volunteers, From 1861 to 1865. Trenton, N.J.: MacCrellish & Quigley, state printers, 1910.

De Peyster, John Watts. Personal and Military History of Philip Kearny, Major General United States Volunteers. New York: Palmer, 1870.

Gottfried, Bradley M. Kearny's Own: The History of the First New Jersey Brigade in the Civil War. New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press, 2005.

Kearny, Thomas. General Philip Kearny: Battle Soldier of Five Wars. New York: Putnam, 1937.

Werstein, Irving. Kearny the Magnificent: The Story of General Philip Kearny, 1815-1862. New York: The John Day Co., 1962.

Fratricide: “This irrepressible battery ...”

The 4^th New York Battery of Gen. Joseph (“Fighting Joe”) Hooker’s Division, III Corps, had fought well enough at the Battle of Williamsburg (May 5, 1862) under its commander, Capt. James E. Smith. Subsequently, Smith moved on, and the battery was left in the hands of 1^st Lt. Joseph E. Nairn. It performed abysmally in the engagement of Malvern Cliff (June 30) on the eve of the Battle of Malvern Hill.

From the report of Capt. Stephen H. Weed, 5^th U.S. Arty., commanding Battery I:

 

Its contribution to the fight was also reported by Capt. Thomas W. Walker, commanding the 3d U.S. Infantry, who noted the names of his men killed by the fire of the battery.

New York State Military Museum

Above: Pvt. William Keane, 74th New York Infantry (2d Fire Zouaves)

This wonderful colorized photograph is a bit dark, but nonetheless worth a few moments of your time. It depicts a soldier belonging to the celebrated (or notorious) Gen. Daniel E. Sickles' Excelsior Brigade and is drawn from the website of the New York State Military Museum:  http://dmna.state.ny.us/historic/mil-hist.htm

As I continue with my research for scenarios of the Peninsular Campaign of 1862, I am of course having to characterize leaders, units, and formations. With respect to New York State, I've found the site referenced above not only an excellent point of departure but also an unparalleled resource. It covers NYS units from the Revolution through the Korean War.

Huger’s (and Lee’s) Presence at Oak Grove

Above: Part of a map showing the "Position of Troops, Morning of June 25, 1862." Huger’s Division’s position is shown at left center toward the top of the legend. This map was probably the principal source for Sears’ map of Oak Grove in To the Gates of Richmond. Source: Library of Congress. Geography & Map Division. Landers, Howard Lee, and Donald E. Windham. [Seven Days' Battles, Virginia, June 25-July 1, 1862]. S.l: s.n.], 1929.

Earlier I mentioned the fact that Lee had informed President Davis that Huger was not at his post when McClellan’s offensive of June 25, 1862, hit Huger’s Division along the axis of the Williamsburg Road. This attack was of the greatest concern to Lee, since McClellan hit hard at the weakest sector of the Confederate line just a day before Lee himself launched his great offensive against the weak Federal right flank (at Mechanicsville). McClellan, by dumb luck struck the Army of Northern Virginia where it was most vulnerable and threatened to derange all of Lee’s plans for his own offensive.

Huger’s absence at the outset of the Federal attack was unforgivable. The pertinent sequence of events is best followed not in the Official Records, nor in the secondary literature, but rather in the following source:

Lee, Robert E., and Clifford Dowdey. The Wartime Papers of R.E. Lee. Boston: Little, Brown, 1961.

Huger’s mission on the 25^th was outlined in Lee’s G.O. No. 75 (June 24), which was his mission order to his army for the first phase of the Seven Days’ offensive (doc. 210 in the above).

I have previously quoted from Lee’s Dispatches the evidence that Huger was not at his post. Lee’s actions subsequent to this discovery are outlined in a letter to Davis (doc. 211, which appears to be misdated June 24) and doc. 212, Lee to his wife, dtd. June 25.

In doc. 211, Lee states that he was “called to the Williamsburg road” by the fighting on Huger’s front and that the “affair on the whole was not well managed.” Nonetheless, he was determined to stick to his overall offensive plan. He states that he ordered Huger to hold his lines “at all hazards.” So, it is apparent that Huger did join his division during the fighting and that Lee firmly reiterated his orders and expectations to him.

In doc. 212, Lee gives the time of his arrival and other facts that indicate his preoccupation with events on Huger’s front.

Knowledge of the entirety of the documentation of events that day (such as it is) will definitely help to improve the Oak Grove scenario I’m designing for TCHAE. Also, the time spent in working through these events has rather tempered my sympathy for Huger for his shabby treatment by Longstreet and Johnston after Fair Oaks.

The YOU-gee Factor

Gen. Benjamin Huger, C.S.A. (Library of Congress)

One of the objections to profitably gaming the 1862 Peninsular Campaign is a perceived leadership gap or disparity or however you might characterize it between the Confederates (Lee and the rest of the First Team, CSA) and the top-down incompetence of the woeful Army of the Potomac (McClellan and his comically-inept supporting cast). That’s the meme, and like most such constructions, it attains a life of its own, since it satisfies the requirements of those who like an easy answer, and tends to close off not only further inquiry or discussion but also serious analysis. I’m going to look into this a bit more in a future post, but as I proceed with my own research, I have to say, I haven’t actually detected an instance where the meme is “at work.” In short, there’s a lot of good gaming to be found in the various battles and engagements of the campaign.

Which brings us to Gen. Benjamin Huger, the putative Confederate commander at the Battle of Oak Grove (June 25, 1862), the first of the Seven Days’ Battles. Before going further, I thought I’d  provide a brief primer on the pronunciation of this amiable gentleman’s name:

Huger  –  HU • gee, u • GEE

To avoid instigating any feuds, we figure we'd better call this one a draw. It seems that everyone has a different idea about which pronunciation is "correct" in which area of the state. We think you're doing good if you just drop the "r" from the end ... with one exception. Huger Street in Chesterfield County is actually pronounced HUE • gur!

(from: South Carolina’s Information Highway,  http://www.sciway.net/ccr/sc-pronunciations.html)

My own understanding, born of some long-forgotten reading, is incorporated in the label of this post.

Now Huger, “history tells us,” was the Confederate commander at Oak Grove. His opponents were Gen. Samuel Heintzelman and McClellan himself. I’ll address the question of Huger’s actual presence at the battle in a future post, but for now, I ask: Looking at these three, which side had superior leadership? Does the meme apply?

Nor must Uncle Sam’s Web-feet be forgotten

Above (top): USS Sebago; (bottom) USS Maratanza

In the aftermath of the Confederate evacuation of their defensive lines at Yorktown, the Union navy was unleashed, pursuing the Confederates westward toward Richmond on both sides of the Virginia Peninsula. Scouting, raiding, and generally raising havoc, the navy ranged ahead of the land forces, using the James River in the south and the York and Pamunkey rivers in the north. The navy’s forays beyond the flanks of the Confederates had important strategic consequences, not least among them the reshaping of the theater of operations decisively in favor of the Army of the Potomac – at least for a time. Occasionally too, as at Malvern Hill, the navy was a factor tactically. The joint army-navy operation at Eltham’s Landing was one such instance.

In defining the candidate engagements for my Peninsular Campaign scenario booklet, Eltham’s Landing just popped off the pages of the sources for any number of reasons, not least the presence of Uncle Sam’s Web-feet. Most sources identify the following gunboats as present at Eltham’s Landing:

USS Maratanza, double-ender, sidewheel gunboat (1 x 100-lb Parrott RML; 1 x 9-in Dahlgren pivot SBML; 4 x 24-lb howitzer)

USS Sebago, same as Maratanza

USS Wachusett, screw sloop (1 x 50-lb Dahlgren RML; 2 x 11-in Dahlgren SBML; 4 x 32-lb, 42-cwt)

Without doubt, a powerful force. However, I’m not convinced that all of these vessels were present during the combat. Moreover, the extent and effectiveness of their employment may be questioned. Then there is the matter of how to represent their fire in the circumstances of the historic combat under the rules. All grist for the mill of the scenario design.