Word: johnstons
(lookup in dictionary)
(lookup stats)
Dates: all
Sort By: most recent first
(reverse)
When Beauregard posted his army along the creek called Bull Run on July 20, 1861, he had Napoleonic strokes in mind but not much sense of the terrain. General Joseph E. Johnston, his superior, just arrived from Richmond, had to assume Beauregard's knowledge of the country since he had none himself. Beauregard worked until 4:30 a.m. on an order for attack which Freeman calls "a gloomy instance of the manner in which . . . the ignorance of a commanding officer may be as gross as that of the men and infinitely more expensive in blood and misery...
...height of this doubtful battle "Old Bory" had the face to ask Johnston to retire and leave him in sole command. In the months that followed, Beauregard's weakness for putting his vainglory on paper-and in the newspapers-made Johnston and Davis weary of him. He finally departed to Kentucky...
...touchy strategist, popular with his officers but fatally careless of administrative detail, was Joseph Eggleston Johnston, who took over the army Beauregard left. "Small, soldierly and greying, with a certain gamecock jauntiness," Johnston was already smoldering with rage at Jefferson Davis over being placed fourth in a list of full generals. Ceremonious, bad-tempered notes passed back & forth. The Secretary of War, Judah P. Benjamin, maddened Johnston by going over his head in military matters and out-arguing him afterward. At one sore point, Johnston beseeched Benjamin to help "create the belief in the army that I am its commander...
...career of World War II censorship. If it was true, as the Tribune said in its story, that the information about the Japanese dispositions came from naval intelligence, the story may have given away a Navy secret. But the jury apparently accepted the explanation of Editor Maloney and Reporter Johnston that they had doped out the whole story in the Tribune office...
...Government's case was so weak that an indictment was not likely, why had it raised the issue? Why had it publicized its intention by an advance announcement (TIME, Aug. 17)? Why had former Attorney General Mitchell, who conducted the investigation with scrupulous fairness, allowed Maloney and Johnston the unusual privilege of appearing to make a defense? If the Government was leaning over backwards to be fair to an anti-Administration paper, why did it attempt to prosecute? And if its case was not shaky, what happened? Answers to these questions will be heard after...