president or congress, no, you can't do that because it's just not within your constitutional powers. >> watch on cspan on cspan.org and using the free cspan radio app. next, from the civil war institute at gettysburg college, author of commander of all lincoln's armys. involved in every significant and military decision made during the civil war. this is about an hour at

mississippi state where he taught courses ton civil war, america and race relations. he earned his at noter game and joined faculty in 1973. during his time at mississippi state he also served as the director of distinguished scholars and managing editor and the papers of projects. author of more than 250 articles including his important work of soldier's passion for order. a finalist for the lincoln prize. he received the richard right literary award for national

distinction and history. he is currently at work on a book of the mythology surrou surrounding. he will be sharing with us more of his more recent work. [ applause ] >> thank you for all being here on a saturday morning. i will talk to you about scheduling a talk on henry hallic this early in the morning. i appreciate everybody being here. it was quite a while ago that actually the book came out. i had gone to a meeting -- actually a meeting of one of these history conventions.

we exchanged pleasantries with people. well, you wait for a response. i ran into a colleague and it's like what are you working on? i told him i had just started working on a biography. and he said john, you'll never finish it. you'll die of bordum first. i must say that the fear of death was not high on my priority list. i did check my pulse pretty regularly. i really had more concrete concerns. the concerns were really that i finished this book on sherman. sherman wrote to everybody all of the time during battle after

battle. >> he wrote all kinds of articles. i had a ton of stuff to use in that biography. he had written a ser ri of books but they were before the war. they were things like -- you can imagine him doing property rights, international law.

he had served longer than anyone else on either side. nobody had been can commanding general he was indeed considered the leading military thinker of that period. he was an important military figure in the civil war. early in the war he ork straited the union successed in the tennessee area.

it is the same because of his bureaucracy. that achievement was considered so important he did such a great thing that his soldiers gave him the nickname he hardly lost any in the process. it was then to become the commanding general. in that role henry w.hallick was involved with every major decision that was made in the

civil war, every major battlefield decision. you know, he advised. he encouraged. he rejoiced or in some cases he picked up the pieces. when grant assumed overall command in march of 1864 he stayed on. he became part of that important military theme. he was what was then called the chief of staff. it's not what we call it today hi w he took the burdens off of grant's shoulders. it was hallick who forged that mighty military machine that finally overwhelmed the confederate forces. in short i think it's fair to say that hallick play add major

role militarily in the outcome of the civil war. he was a leading general. he had an important influence on the nation's political leaders. no other military man was as as but henry w.hallick. most of you are saying that's nice. who cares? that's the usual response that we get. over the years most historians had not had a positive evaluation of this man. it was do to come up with ways. you heard all about buchanan. you can't compare to what was

said about henry w.hallick. for example he said hallick was not only stupid but jealous and ambitious. he was a whitless pesant. it was throughout the war worth more than that army corp. to the confederate army. that's pretty strong stuff. he said hallick had the reputation of being the most unpopular man in washington. it was a title he worked hard to gain. warming to the task i'm not sure

we ever said it about buchanan but we did about hallick. there are tons of similar stories. they pail in comparison to what was said about him by his contemporaries. the negative view of hallick is absolutely overwhelming. you have to look hard to find anybody in american history who has had such contempt expressed about him, which is ironic. during the war the two leading figures on the union side liked

hallick. he was called one of the greatest men of the age. sherman believed he was the directing genius behind union military successes. now, in all fairness, however, by the end of the war neither grant nor sherman liked him a great deal. now, most other union generals were negative about hallick from the very beginning.

>> he ridiculed the administertive role and unwillingness to take the field. you may have heard this. hallick serving as commanding general said hooker serving under those conditions was like being a man who got married but never intended to sleep with his wife. i didn't make that up. that's what hooker said. >> is that better? he became positively lyrical in his sustain for hallick.

it was hopelessly stupid. it was more difficult to get an idea through his head than can be conceive bid anyone who never made the attempt. i do not think he ever had a correct military idea from beginning to end. well, those kind of condemnations when added with the condemnations of historians, you know, bad enough, but they still don't reach the level of invective displayed by his political contemporaries. the people that he dealt with regularly in washington. remember him? he almost became president at one time? put him in command of 20,000 men

and he will not scare three sitting geese from their nests. adam, the polish born critic of the lincoln administration described his role in a war effort as the strangling pressure of an incubus. that's not the most inventive comment. i think these are better. you can decide which ones you like the best. namely a war secretary and general benjamin butler.

wells despised old brains with a passion. here is what we wrote in a diary. in this whole campaign hallick originates nothing, takes no responsibility, plans nothing, suggests nothing. is good for nothing. general ben butler agrees. and his are similarly inventive i think. you may know that hallick translated the four volume biography of thnapolian. at a moment when ever true man is laboring to his utmost, when

the days ought to be 40 hours long wow, an actual fact. he translated in 1840s when he was on a ship going around the horn. he actually braced himself. he tied himself to a bed post so he wouldn't slip and he was translating at that time. who was this henry hallick then?

he is the first of a daughter and local magistrate. he live add very unhappy childhood. he could not get out from under his father. that's all he wanted him to do. hallick wanted an education. so what hallick had to do to escape this drudgery, he went to live with his maternal grandfather who was able to give hallick the education he so wanted. at the age of 20 he went to west point, but while he is at west point he is finishing his degree at union college in new york.

he gets his degree while he is in the middle of his west point years and he also gets one of the first keys from the founding union college. during his third year at west point hallick kbagave the 4th o july address at west point. this was an honor left only for the best military and academic scholars. he graduated in 1838 third in his class. by the way, the two people ahead of him didn't do a thing during the civil war. he was so impressed with faculty that even while a cadet he was teaching classes to other west point cadetings. when he graduated they immediately named him an assistant professor of chemistry

and engineering. in 1841 he published what was the first of many books, wonderful title. varieties and properties in use. no doubt very sentlating. i have to admit, i have never read it. it deals with the topics most talk about. they don't talk about benefit of at fall. that's a major issue. who can understand the book though? that book and the fact that he was the whether or not you know fortified new york harbor and he served an assistant to the federal government's board of engineers resulted in a to become an assistant professor

there. he received an honorary masters degree. he made a trip to europe to inspect -- the west there. of this in turn caused the institute of boston. they invited henry not to give one measly lecture, but to give 12 lectures one night after the next. filled the hall every night. these lectures were later gathered together and published in his major book elements of military art and science, which came out in 1846. keep in mind, he is 31 years

old. 31 years old. so he travels to, he stayed and traveled to california and sherman is one of his bunk mates on this terrible ride they have, waives going up and down. they say he didn't west any time. everybody else is playing cards and all of the rest he is translating and napolian said he creates that volume you can still get if you would like. it i peered in 1964. so she not in the main part of the war, california, a very important area of the war. when he gets there there's still fight to be done. he participates in some local level fighting.

he does very well. he is a very good small unit commander. he also served as secretary of state after he becomes part of the united states he serves under several military governors. he is also collecting spanish man scripts, translating mexican l law. he helped form the major law firm in california. he supervised the construction of a four story building, a four story building that was built out in the field of san francisco harbor. he came up with a brilliant idea

of actually taking redwood, making a platform, something like 40 feet deep and building this four story building on top of it. you know what? when the great earthquake came and the 20th century that building with stood the earthquake. why? because it moouved. that building stayed okay until about the 1920s, 1930s when they had to inject cememeninjectment. as only americans can do it was levelled for a parking lot. it was levelled for a parking lot. if you want to know where it is today, take a look at a san fan sis owe, the transamerican tower

is where his building existed. so she an architect on top of everything else and a major architect. he is doing other things too. that's not enough to keep him busy. he also an influential member of the constitutional convention. he also became of a major quick silver mine. the gold rush and gold that was discovered could not be separated from the rock that it was in. so the very important role that he plays, he is also the inspector of california's lighthouses. she a member of the first board of directors of the allegedly

wre -- in 1864 a lot of people resigned. the reason hallick resigned is so he can give his full attention to his law firm. by the way, too, he is also president of the pacific and atlantic railroad which ran from san francisco to san jose. i remember looking through the old card catalog. of what did they have? they had a map of this railroad. i said this is great.

they looked at me funny. could i see that? one of the coming out with a ply with wood showing that. you say big deal. it's not a long distance. that was meant to be the end of the transcontinental railroad. it never was but that was the plan. and for good measure he publi published several more books on and law. so that's not bad for one person

to do in that short period of time. i told you how many people thought he was a total loser. i didn't take me long to figure out there was a difference between hallick and the precivil wars and hall dpts ick. there he was a success at one time and a tail yur at another time. it was january of about 2000 or so, 1999. i was giving a talk about how -- to some of you are fwlar this, civil war education foundation. i know many of you go there. i gave some sort of talk and --

i didn't understand why he hadh understand how he had such a contrasting personality, successful, yet a failure, it seemed. so i asked these people and i said spread the word. i'm writing all over the place asking for information on henry hallek. asking why he's a success and then he's a failure. it just so happened in that audience there were several medical doctors. at least four that i talked to, anyway. and there were others because they said they had talked to others too. several individually came up to me after the talk and asked had

i thought about the possibility that hallek had graves disease. graves disease is a thyroid gland problem. maybe this is why there's such a difference between success and failure. what these physicians urged me to do and i did was to consider the impact of health on halleck's behavior. so what i started doing, i started making a list, making a list of symptoms that he talked about at various times.

and i also talked to some medical doctors and i also got to thinking, you know, maybe there's something there psychological that i ought to be looking at. so i also talked to some psychologists and people who work with this kind of thing. it was a big thrill because one of these people was my own son who has a phd in this and has a practice and teaches and all. so it was great to listen to people talk about that. well, i learned pretty quickly that this man had a lot of physical problems. my wife is not able to be here with me and she always comes to these things and she always starts to cringe if i talk about halleck because she knows i'm going to say this. one of the big problems halleck had was he had hemorrhoids. don't talk about that, oh for heaven's sake. don't talk about that.

they called them piles in those days but you know what i'm getting at. in those days, the common medical thing to do if you have hemorrhoids and if you went to a physician is that you would -- they would give you an opium suppository. now, i leave it up to your imaginations from this point on. but in any case, that's what they did with halleck. he went to a doctor. he was so sick with hemorrhoids during the war that he literally could not stand up. he had to lie downside ways -- down sideways on a couch until he got over this stuff. so opium suppositories. i found other things too, not as glamorous as that, but i found other things too. so i consulted with these

medical people and these psychologists and all. and several of them are mentioned in my book. if you really really want to be bored, i have this that i wrote up about my conversations with them and what halleck had and didn't have and all the rest. in any case, what i came up with is, no, he did not have graves disease. it looks like he suffered, looking at the whole range of his physical background, he suffered from something known as he hemochromatosis which is an iron retention problem which can cause a variety of symptoms. there's one other thing. some of you know who jean baker is. she wrote a book on mary

lincoln. i was talking to her and her husband happened to be there and he was chief of surgery at johns hopkins. so we got talking about halleck. he said, i don't know anything about this, but i know some people who know something and you ought to look at mercury poisoning because he was in charge of this mercury thing. so i did. he sent me all kinds of learned articles, some of which i understood. but the point was, i didn't think it was mercury poisoning. hemochromatosis seemed to be the issue. and then another issue struck me, the psychological issues. he suffered from terrible psychological problems because of his very bad relationship with his father and with his family. with his father, when he left to live with the maternal

grandfather, he never came back. he wrote letters to his mother, never mentioned the father, never came to his funeral. so there was this very, very big break. but in any case -- and then there were other issues. he was actually born a twin, but the girl, whose name was catherine, same name as his mother, died in childbirth. some of the psychologists say there is a psychological trauma that develops in cases tli s lit where people blame themselves. what i'm saying here is that halleck did not become a failure suddenly in the civil war. that the seeds of these wartime problems were evident even

during the time of his success. now, it's much more complicated than this as you can imagine. i'm going to shamelessly tell you buy the book and read all about it. i'd be happy to talk about it any time. and one of the things, be sure you buy one for your neighborhood physician and psychologist because i think that would be nice too. what can we say finally? just who was halleck? he was many things. he was a success in his life, but he was also a failure. he was a very brilliant man, but he was also stupid. they weren't making some of these things up. he had very few friends, yet he had many important acquaintances

both in his military and business lives. he inspired the deepest animosity in people. he was a nasty human being. no question about this. yet he never tried to adjust his behavior to mollify his critics. one of the doctors said i wouldn't say hemorrhoids would cause him to be a failure in civil war, but it could explain why he was such a mean son of a [ bleep ]. it seems to me that he certainly played a major role in the union victory, no question in my mind. but i think he's a lot like rodney dangerfield. he gets no respect.

and that's too bad, i think. because we can learn a lot from this man who was one of the major americans of the 19th century. thank you very much. [ applause ]. >> as you know, i wear a hearing aid. i'd love to answer any questions you might have, but if you do, yell them at me because i may or may not hear you. >> the floor mikes are open for questions. >> i'm lee elder from ohio. i have to ask this question. who was hated more, braxton brag or henry halleck? >> well, i think braxton brag was probably more hated, maybe even more hated by historians.

you know the story about a famous historian writing the first volume of his biography of braxton brag, getting to hate him so much he never wrote his second volume and made one of his graduate students do it. but then i did the biography of halleck. so what does that say about me? i don't know. yeah. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> at the very beginning of your lecture you mentioned that after halleck came to washington, he was involved in every major decision. can you think of any player north or south that could have done his job almost as well or as well or maybe even better than he did? >> good question. everybody hear that?

yeah. you know, is there anybody else that could have done that job? i'm sure there was. but sometimes people say, you know, lincoln really blew it when he appointed halleck instead of grant to be commanding general back there in 1862. i don't think so. i don't think grant would have done the job. i think grant grew into that position. sherman couldn't have done it. the thing about halleck was that he was somehow able even though it steamed people because he wouldn't make decisions. he would say, look, you're the commander on the battlefield, you make the decision. i'm far away. i can't do this. but the result was that oftentimes the decisions -- even when people asked him like burnside did, he wouldn't answer. but could there have been anyone

else? i don't know of anybody. and keep in mind that one of the happiest days of henry halleck's life was when lincoln named grant to be commanding general, because now he's free. he doesn't have to make these decisions. what he can do is -- and he does it -- is he writes letters to the various generals saying, well, general grant says you better shape up or we're going to get rid of you. so he was very happy to do that. i really don't know of anybody else that -- that's one of the problems. it's easy for us like was said in the earlier session, easy for us to be critical, but we're not wearing those same shoes. >> i'm from mechanicsburg, pennsylvania. i read your book and enjoyed it. i'd like to check my understanding with you as far as his relationship with grant. it seems to me as though at first he figured grant wasn't

doing the paperwork correctly and that's why grant was a lousy general in his eyes. and it seems to me he thought that he had taught grant how to do the paperwork correctly and that's why grant turned into a success. is that true? >> yes and no. your first part, i think, is correct. halleck can't believe that grant can be so sloppy with his paperwork. and it's true. halleck not only tried to teach grant but he tried to teach all his other generals. there's a very famous let their grant has his chief of staff send to all his generals saying this is the way i want you to fold letters when you send them to me. and you're right. he doesn't think grant is a good general because he's so sloppy. for example, halleck defends grant after shiloh, but he still

calls grant on the carpet and says you really screwed up, not so much in the battle. i don't say anything about the surprise. but afterwards, you've just been sloppy. look at the mess out here. you've done nothing to get things organized. and the interesting thing is that halleck, when he and mcclellan are talking about grant, brings up the fake news, the fake news of grant's being a drunk. and grant doesn't know this. he doesn't know this until adam, his aide, is writing his history and grant is helping him and they come across the letters that make this point. that's it. yes. anything else? >> can you comment on his relationship with abraham lincoln and what lincoln thought about him? is there anything public on that? >> good question.

you've heard the famous statement abraham lincoln said, he's a mere clerk. he also said, of course i have to like him, because if i don't like him, nobody will. lincoln is very frustrated by halleck for this reason. he brings halleck on board because lincoln is smart enough to know that he doesn't know a whole lot about military stuff. of course he knows a lot more than he thinks and by the end of the war he's teaching his generals. but at this particular time lincoln wants somebody learned in the military skills to be at his side to help him organize the union war effort. i want you to tell me what i should do. and halleck won't do it. he just simply takes the position -- in fact, he almost resigns. he offers to resign. if you make me tell you what i think ought to be done, i'll

resign. and lincoln throws up his hands. i think lincoln maybe understood that this is it, this is the best i got, this guy knows his stuff. maybe i can teach him, maybe i can work him into saying some things. but lincoln is not a great supporter -- well, he's a supporter of halleck, but i wouldn't say they were close. and halleck had a very dour personality as we've talked about. so i don't know. yes, sir? >> i have an education in engineering. i could see technical near he e halleck all the way. also the fact that he had that hemorrhoid problem tells you he would not have been a good general in the field going with a combat army and trying to direct it in combat.

>> that's very true. you don't see halleck in the saddle very often. let's just put it that way. as you probably know, at the beginning of the war particularly, there were stock images of everything but a person's head with horses doing all sorts of wonderful things. and so there is a picture of halleck in the saddle, but he is not a battlefield general. his campaign comes down to the fact that he's going to make sure there's going to be no surprise. he's going to make sure that everything he does is according to the book. and yet the interesting thing is by the end of the war maybe it's sherman, maybe it's grant, maybe it's lincoln have taught halleck

that war has changed. you've got to change. you've got to take a different approach. and so you have halleck saying things at the end of the war that he would never say at the beginning of the war. there's just not any relationship. yes, sir? >> i just got to compliment you on how much i appreciate your talk this morning. it's nice to see somebody peel back the onion, look at a person's spire lientire life, s, failures and contributing factors. i think too many of us are critical of people without knowing all the facts that contribute to a person's life, their successes and failures. i just wanted to compliment you. appreciate it. >> thank you. you've heard of the great man theory of history and all. one of the things historians

do -- and i blame myself as much as anything when i was teaching -- is we tend to look for perfection. maybe a better thing for us to do would be to maybe look at ourselves. all of us have got some skills that we're good at. but i don't know of any human being that's good at everything, that's absolutely perfect at everything. i think sometimes with people like halleck that's what we expect. i didn't each mention he was probably one of the wealthiest guys in the united states. he was worth over $500,000 when the civil war began. we expect somebody to be good at everything. we don't expect our people, the people we study to have flaws. and certainly halleck had flaws. certainly lincoln had flaws. everybody has flaws. the question is what do we do with it? how do we over c