with limited constituencies there was the further necessity of playing up the exploits of favorite sons. Their little heroes became big fools, as Sherman observed, when these accounts were copied in the metropolitan dailies. No sooner was a battle fought than every colonel and captain in it became illustrious. For a month after Shiloh the average newspaper reader in Illinois and Missouri would have supposed that McClernand's and Lew Wallace's achievements on that field were far superior to Sherman's, whereas in reality their parts were quite subordinate.[1] It was, indeed, the hard-headed and efficient general who was most likely to be written down, while those who achieved dazzling glory were almost always of second-rate quality.[2] Because the laconic Grant would not disclose his plans to visitors, the newspapers denounced him as idle, intemperate, and incompetent, such men as Frémont and McClernand being designated as suitable successors.[3] So desperate did Grant become at one time because of the use of the press against him by his rivals that he planned to return home, and his purpose was only altered by Sherman's strenuous persuasion.[4] It was not uncommon for disappointed correspondents to vent their spite by misrepresenting generals and falsely reporting conditions in the army. When General Cox in his West Virginia campaign declined to allow correspondents to be taken into the officers' mess and given military rank, they proceeded to write down the general and to describe his army as a rabble of ruffians and plunderers incompetently commanded.[5] In addition to these evil effects, popular impatience for victory was voiced through the press, and unnecessary bloodshed
- ↑ M. A. De Wolfe Howe (ed.), Home Letters of General Sherman (New York, 1909), p. 227.
- ↑ The generosity which General Rosecrans, not without ulterior motives, exhibited toward correspondents is well presented in the Memoirs of Henry Villard, war correspondent of the New York Tribune. Rosecrans received Villard with profuse cordiality on slight acquaintance, invited him to his mess, and offered to furnish sleeping quarters, horses, and servants. In his conversations with Villard the general freely criticized his superiors (suggesting, for instance, that Halleck and Stanton should be got out of the way) and gave intimations as to his plans. He even allowed the newspaper representative to read his reports in advance of their transmission to Washington, and to copy them for publication. Villard declined the proffered privileges, and refused to be Rosecrans's mouthpiece, but W. B. Bickham of the Cincinnati Commercial showed no such scruples and served as the general's publicity agent. Thomas, the successor of Rosecrans, was much more cautious and reserved in his dealings with correspondents. Memoirs of Henry Villard, II. 212 ff.
- ↑ Personal Memoirs of U. S. Grant, I. 458.
- ↑ Home Letters of General Sherman, pp. 227–228.
- ↑ R. U. Johnson and C. C. Buel, Battles and Leaders of the Civil War, I. 141–142.
