William Starke Rosecrans

Jim Klag

Ike the moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
3,690
Reaction score
2,296
September 6, 1819 - William Starke Rosecrans, American inventor, politician and US Army General (Union Army), born in Delaware County, Ohio (d. 1898)

 

5fish

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2019
Messages
10,846
Reaction score
4,584
I thought the Anti-Grant writers at the place the place without naming had a point about Grant vs Rosecrans. These guys backed Rosecrans even wrote books on the topic taking to make their point. I had some sympathy for them until I read the battle of Corinth and saw it was Rosecrans PR guys fighting the first across Grant's bow. I think up until then Rosecrans and Grant got along fine maybe even good friends, even thou Grant was a Catholic hater. It was Rosecrans that muddy the water between them...
 

Jim Klag

Ike the moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
3,690
Reaction score
2,296
I thought the Anti-Grant writers at the place the place without naming had a point about Grant vs Rosecrans. These guys backed Rosecrans even wrote books on the topic taking to make their point. I had some sympathy for them until I read the battle of Corinth and saw it was Rosecrans PR guys fighting the first across Grant's bow. I think up until then Rosecrans and Grant got along fine maybe even good friends, even thou Grant was a Catholic hater. It was Rosecrans that muddy the water between them...
Grant was a Catholic hater? Where did you get that?
 

5fish

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2019
Messages
10,846
Reaction score
4,584
Grant was a Catholic hater? Where did you get that?
I will hit the low hanging fruit like he was a light weight for the Know Nothing party... an anti-Catholic party...

Snip... There is a whole paper or book


The first hint of Grant's enmity toward Catholicism is revealed in his letters from Mexico during the Mexican-American War. After Grant's death, unfortunately , family members did not want his less flattering writings to become public, so they excised from the letters almost every potentially embarrassing comment that Grant had written while in Mexico. From what remains, however, one can piece together Grant's views. Grant believed that Mexico, with its abundant natural resources, would have been a great nation were its population not "degraded" by Catholicism. In Puebla, the twenty-five year-old Grant reported that "the mass of the people are the same poor degraded looking beings that we have seen all over the country. At a certain ring of the church bell or when the senior Priest of the place passes you might see them...

. One such nativist was Ulysses S. Grant.2 Grant was not an obsessive nativist. He expressed his resentment of immigrants and animus toward Catholicism only rarely. But these sentiments reveal themselves frequently enough in his writings and major actions as general and I would like to thank James McPherson, John Y. Simon, Brooks Simpson, Patrick Williams, and the Washington Seminar on American History and Culture for critiquing earlier versions ofthis paper.

Snip... as President...

A favorite rhetorical device in the 1870s was using the code words for Catholicism: “superstition, ambition and ignorance”.[127] President Ulysses Grant in a major speech to veterans in October 1875 warned that America again faced an enemy: religious schools. Grant saw another civil war in the "near future": it would not be between North and South, but will be between "patriotism and intelligence on the one side and superstition, ambition and ignorance on the other."[128] According to historian Charles W. Calhoun, "at various points in his life, Grant had bristled privately at what he considered religious communicants' thralldom to a domineering clergy, but he did not specifically mention Catholicism in his speech. Still, Catholic journals decried the president's seeming exploitation of religious bigotry."[129] In his December 1875 Annual Message to Congress, Grant urged taxation on "vast amounts of untaxed church property" which Professor John McGreevey says was "a transparently anti-Catholic measure since only the Catholic Church owned vast amounts of property – in schools, orphanages, and charitable institutions". Grant told Congress such legislation would protect American citizens from tyranny "whether directed by the demagogue or by priestcraft."[130]
 

Jim Klag

Ike the moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
3,690
Reaction score
2,296
I will hit the low hanging fruit like he was a light weight for the Know Nothing party... an anti-Catholic party...

Snip... There is a whole paper or book


The first hint of Grant's enmity toward Catholicism is revealed in his letters from Mexico during the Mexican-American War. After Grant's death, unfortunately , family members did not want his less flattering writings to become public, so they excised from the letters almost every potentially embarrassing comment that Grant had written while in Mexico. From what remains, however, one can piece together Grant's views. Grant believed that Mexico, with its abundant natural resources, would have been a great nation were its population not "degraded" by Catholicism. In Puebla, the twenty-five year-old Grant reported that "the mass of the people are the same poor degraded looking beings that we have seen all over the country. At a certain ring of the church bell or when the senior Priest of the place passes you might see them...

. One such nativist was Ulysses S. Grant.2 Grant was not an obsessive nativist. He expressed his resentment of immigrants and animus toward Catholicism only rarely. But these sentiments reveal themselves frequently enough in his writings and major actions as general and I would like to thank James McPherson, John Y. Simon, Brooks Simpson, Patrick Williams, and the Washington Seminar on American History and Culture for critiquing earlier versions ofthis paper.

Snip... as President...

A favorite rhetorical device in the 1870s was using the code words for Catholicism: “superstition, ambition and ignorance”.[127] President Ulysses Grant in a major speech to veterans in October 1875 warned that America again faced an enemy: religious schools. Grant saw another civil war in the "near future": it would not be between North and South, but will be between "patriotism and intelligence on the one side and superstition, ambition and ignorance on the other."[128] According to historian Charles W. Calhoun, "at various points in his life, Grant had bristled privately at what he considered religious communicants' thralldom to a domineering clergy, but he did not specifically mention Catholicism in his speech. Still, Catholic journals decried the president's seeming exploitation of religious bigotry."[129] In his December 1875 Annual Message to Congress, Grant urged taxation on "vast amounts of untaxed church property" which Professor John McGreevey says was "a transparently anti-Catholic measure since only the Catholic Church owned vast amounts of property – in schools, orphanages, and charitable institutions". Grant told Congress such legislation would protect American citizens from tyranny "whether directed by the demagogue or by priestcraft."[130]
Grant's is a conventional mid-19th century protestant viewpoint. As president he welcomed immigrants, most of whom were Catholic and Jewish and said they should be granted citizenship. What Grant did not like about Catholicism was what he believed was the Catholic's divided loyalty - the old bugaboo about taking orders from the Pope that was still alive even in JFK's presidential campaign. I'm pretty sure that about 95% of the anti-Catholic complaints center around the papacy. I don't believe these beliefs in any way affected Grant's relationship with Rosecrans. I think Rosecrans and his buddies badmouthing Grant after Corinth/Iuka was a significant factor as were reports that old Rosy was the first to skedaddle at Chickamauga.
 

O' Be Joyful

ohio hillbilly
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
3,491
Reaction score
3,136
I will hit the low hanging fruit like he was a light weight for the Know Nothing party... an anti-Catholic party...

Snip... There is a whole paper or book


The first hint of Grant's enmity toward Catholicism is revealed in his letters from Mexico during the Mexican-American War. After Grant's death, unfortunately , family members did not want his less flattering writings to become public, so they excised from the letters almost every potentially embarrassing comment that Grant had written while in Mexico. From what remains, however, one can piece together Grant's views. Grant believed that Mexico, with its abundant natural resources, would have been a great nation were its population not "degraded" by Catholicism. In Puebla, the twenty-five year-old Grant reported that "the mass of the people are the same poor degraded looking beings that we have seen all over the country. At a certain ring of the church bell or when the senior Priest of the place passes you might see them...

. One such nativist was Ulysses S. Grant.2 Grant was not an obsessive nativist. He expressed his resentment of immigrants and animus toward Catholicism only rarely. But these sentiments reveal themselves frequently enough in his writings and major actions as general and I would like to thank James McPherson, John Y. Simon, Brooks Simpson, Patrick Williams, and the Washington Seminar on American History and Culture for critiquing earlier versions ofthis paper.

Snip... as President...

A favorite rhetorical device in the 1870s was using the code words for Catholicism: “superstition, ambition and ignorance”.[127] President Ulysses Grant in a major speech to veterans in October 1875 warned that America again faced an enemy: religious schools. Grant saw another civil war in the "near future": it would not be between North and South, but will be between "patriotism and intelligence on the one side and superstition, ambition and ignorance on the other."[128] According to historian Charles W. Calhoun, "at various points in his life, Grant had bristled privately at what he considered religious communicants' thralldom to a domineering clergy, but he did not specifically mention Catholicism in his speech. Still, Catholic journals decried the president's seeming exploitation of religious bigotry."[129] In his December 1875 Annual Message to Congress, Grant urged taxation on "vast amounts of untaxed church property" which Professor John McGreevey says was "a transparently anti-Catholic measure since only the Catholic Church owned vast amounts of property – in schools, orphanages, and charitable institutions". Grant told Congress such legislation would protect American citizens from tyranny "whether directed by the demagogue or by priestcraft."[130]
hum...what once was old...

And I is Baptist.
 

5fish

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2019
Messages
10,846
Reaction score
4,584
Grant's is a conventional mid-19th century protestant viewpoint.
Grant's views were anti-Catholic and he lead a party that was anti-Catholic... He was a closet bigot...

Remember the Overland Campaign and Hancock had the Irish brigade which got mauled I also wonder why he always lead Hancock and with the Irish... like fodder... makes you wonder...
 

Jim Klag

Ike the moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
3,690
Reaction score
2,296
Grant's views were anti-Catholic and he lead a party that was anti-Catholic... He was a closet bigot...

Remember the Overland Campaign and Hancock had the Irish brigade which got mauled I also wonder why he always lead Hancock and with the Irish... like fodder... makes you wonder...
Okay, everything has to have the worst possible face put on it. Your closet bigot was the foremost fighter for the rights of freed slaves, natve Americans and immigrants (the vast majority of whom were Catholic) and supressed the KKK. When a young man he supported the Know-Nothing party. So what. As for Hancock and the Irish Brigade, 2nd Corps was considered the best in the army and the Irish Brigade was its best brigade. The Irish brigade had been in all the hot places since the beginning. Every other commanding general also abused the Irish Brigade, from 1st Manassas through Gettysburg because they were good, reliable fighters.
 

O' Be Joyful

ohio hillbilly
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
3,491
Reaction score
3,136
Grant's views were anti-Catholic and he lead a party that was anti-Catholic... He was a closet bigot...

Remember the Overland Campaign and Hancock had the Irish brigade which got mauled I also wonder why he always lead Hancock and with the Irish... like fodder... makes you wonder...

Horse -"apples" as to your above opinion.
 

5fish

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2019
Messages
10,846
Reaction score
4,584
As for Hancock and the Irish Brigade, 2nd Corps was considered the best in the army and the Irish Brigade was its best brigade.
The Irish thought they were fodder...


By then, Irish soldiers had already died in their thousands. In fact it was the perception they were being used as cannon-fodder that fuelled anger in New York and elsewhere. But the civil war would be a defining experience for their community. Soon, those same slaughters became the heroic myths out of which rose a more confident and powerful Irish America.

Snip... fodder...


Thanks to their toughness and bravery, the five-regiment Irish Brigade led the Union charge in many of the Army of the Potomac’s major battles. This meant that they suffered disproportionate numbers of casualties. At the Battle of Antietam, in September 1862, about 60 percent of the soldiers in the 63rd and 69th New York regiments, almost 600 men in all, were killed in battle. A few months later, at the Battle of Fredericksburg, 545 of the brigade’s 1,200 men were killed or wounded. “Irish blood and Irish bones cover that terrible field today,” wrote one soldier. “We are slaughtered like sheep.

snip... the Irish knew...

Many historians say that the Battle of Gettysburg was the Civil War’s turning point toward Union victory. It was also the turning point for the Irish Brigade. By the summer of 1863, the tragically high numbers of casualties in the Brigade led many Irish soldiers and their families to believe that the Union Army was taking advantage of their willingness to fight by using them as cannon fodder. T
 

O' Be Joyful

ohio hillbilly
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
3,491
Reaction score
3,136
The Irish thought they were fodder...


By then, Irish soldiers had already died in their thousands. In fact it was the perception they were being used as cannon-fodder that fuelled anger in New York and elsewhere. But the civil war would be a defining experience for their community. Soon, those same slaughters became the heroic myths out of which rose a more confident and powerful Irish America.

Snip... fodder...


Thanks to their toughness and bravery, the five-regiment Irish Brigade led the Union charge in many of the Army of the Potomac’s major battles. This meant that they suffered disproportionate numbers of casualties. At the Battle of Antietam, in September 1862, about 60 percent of the soldiers in the 63rd and 69th New York regiments, almost 600 men in all, were killed in battle. A few months later, at the Battle of Fredericksburg, 545 of the brigade’s 1,200 men were killed or wounded. “Irish blood and Irish bones cover that terrible field today,” wrote one soldier. “We are slaughtered like sheep.

snip... the Irish knew...

Many historians say that the Battle of Gettysburg was the Civil War’s turning point toward Union victory. It was also the turning point for the Irish Brigade. By the summer of 1863, the tragically high numbers of casualties in the Brigade led many Irish soldiers and their families to believe that the Union Army was taking advantage of their willingness to fight by using them as cannon fodder. T

Send in the Irish, arrows cost money.

 

5fish

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2019
Messages
10,846
Reaction score
4,584
See @Jim Klag the Irish are nothing but fodder even in Medevil times. Brave Heart shows us...lol
 

5fish

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2019
Messages
10,846
Reaction score
4,584
@Jim Klag, you know, @PatYoung read through this thread he would agree that the Irish were used as fodder by the union army and the Republican party push an anti-Catholic agenda... 1870's...
 

Jim Klag

Ike the moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
3,690
Reaction score
2,296
@Jim Klag, you know, @PatYoung read through this thread he would agree that the Irish were used as fodder by the union army and the Republican party push an anti-Catholic agenda... 1870's...
Do you seriously believe that Irish soldiers were used as fodder in some deep Republican anti-Catholic conspiracy? No comment other than you seem to have punched your ticket to the looney bin.
 

Jim Klag

Ike the moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
3,690
Reaction score
2,296
It an't me it the Irish back in the day if you read my links...



The Republicans was the Protestant party and it is the Catholic saying the Republicans are bias...
And you repeating it. That's how the conspiracy mill gets started.
 
Top