Anaxagoras
Banned
In the last days of the Confederacy, even as their country and army was falling down around them, General Joe Johnston informed General John Bell Hood that he would call his former subordinate before a court martial in order to examine his behavior during the Atlanta Campaign the previous year. Of course, the Confederacy collapsed before the court martial could be held.
I've always wished that somehow such a court martial had been held, because I have always found the actions of Hood during the campaign to be disgraceful.
Hood was regularly communicating by letter with both President David and Braxton Bragg (de facto chief-of-staff), openly criticizing the strategy and performance of General Johnston. All this went on without Johnston's knowledge, much less his permission.
In one such communication, in early July, Hood predicted that Johnston would soon be withdrawing across the Chattahoochee River. Hood wrote that he opposed this strategy and believed it would be a great mistake. However, in a war council with Johnston and other corps commanders, Hood actually URGED the withdrawal across the river. To me, this seems like a clear effort to get Johnston to pursue such actions as made it more likely to get him removed from command, so that Hood could take his place.
And when Bragg visited the army in mid-July, Hood met with him secrelty, without permission from Johnston, and basically told Bragg that Johnston was a walking disaster, faslely claimed that the men were demoralized, and asserted that he (Hood) should be appointed to command the army. If this isn't insubordination, I don't know what is.
So, if the court martial had been held, what should the verdict have been? Was Hood guilty of insubordination, or was he innocent?
I've always wished that somehow such a court martial had been held, because I have always found the actions of Hood during the campaign to be disgraceful.
Hood was regularly communicating by letter with both President David and Braxton Bragg (de facto chief-of-staff), openly criticizing the strategy and performance of General Johnston. All this went on without Johnston's knowledge, much less his permission.
In one such communication, in early July, Hood predicted that Johnston would soon be withdrawing across the Chattahoochee River. Hood wrote that he opposed this strategy and believed it would be a great mistake. However, in a war council with Johnston and other corps commanders, Hood actually URGED the withdrawal across the river. To me, this seems like a clear effort to get Johnston to pursue such actions as made it more likely to get him removed from command, so that Hood could take his place.
And when Bragg visited the army in mid-July, Hood met with him secrelty, without permission from Johnston, and basically told Bragg that Johnston was a walking disaster, faslely claimed that the men were demoralized, and asserted that he (Hood) should be appointed to command the army. If this isn't insubordination, I don't know what is.
So, if the court martial had been held, what should the verdict have been? Was Hood guilty of insubordination, or was he innocent?