Shortly after the beginning of the Civil War, Congress established the Joint Committee on the Conduct of the War to investigate various matters in connection with the war. By examining the conflict between Congress's constitutional right to investigate and the impropriety of its action, historian Bruce Tap raises questions and issues that are just as applicable today. 12 photos.
| ||||||||||||
Book Description
Editorial Reviews
From Library Journal
This century has had the House Un-American Activities Committee on and the Watergate, Iran-contra, and Whitewater investigations, but in the 19th century the congressional committee that grabbed public attention was the Joint Committee on the Conduct of the War. Originally designed to investigate Civil War military contracts, treatment of the wounded, and disloyal government employees, the committee soon geared its efforts toward emancipation, the use of black soldiers, and the design of top military leadership. This "design" was based on whether a general was considered truly antislavery. The sincere but ill-placed efforts for abolition by radical Republicans polarized top leaders, interfered in strategy, and caused demoralization. Tap, an independent historian and writer of Civil War articles, has done a thorough job that both builds on and yet modifies previous historians' efforts, most recently Hans Trefousse's The Radical Republicans (LJ 1/1/69). Recommended for public and academic collections.?Katherine E. Gillen, Luke AFB Lib., Ariz.
Copyright 1997 Reed Business Information, Inc.
Copyright 1997 Reed Business Information, Inc.
From Kirkus Reviews
The Thompson committee on campaign fundraising abuses is hardly the first controversial congressional investigative body, as demonstrated in this revealing study of a Civil War prosecutor. Dominated by its Republican majority, the Joint Select Committee on the Conduct of the War possessed virtual carte blanche to probe all phases of the conflict--a mandate it used freely to prod the Lincoln administration toward its emancipationist goals. Although the committee occasionally wielded its power responsibly (including ferreting out military supply abuses, the Fort Pillow massacre, and Union troop deaths in Confederate prisons), more often it interfered with Lincoln's management of the war, according to independent historian Tap. Its members, proudly ignorant of military strategy, disparaged the West Pointled regular army in favor of enthusiastic state militia; it promoted the cause of incompetent generals who professed abolitionism, such as John Pope, Joseph Hooker, and John C. Fr‚mont; and it charged disloyalty against other generals who were Democrats or even nonpartisan. Several Federal generals, looking to curry favor with the committee, accused each other of incompetence, and some were influenced by the committee's preference for the perpetual offensive enough to order rash assaults (e.g., Ambrose Burnside at Fredericksburg). Tap does not adequately credit committee members for foresight in pushing emancipation as a wartime measure, but he convincingly explains why the committee's Democratic minority (including future president Andrew Johnson) often sided with their more partisan colleagues (a combination of group dynamics and a shared ethic of self-made men), and he marshals abundant evidence to show that the committee was as myopic as it was meddlesome. An informative (and always timely) case history of the damage resulting from congressional abuse of its oversight function and from using military commanders as partisan whipping boys. (12 photos, not seen) (History Book Club selection) -- Copyright ©1997, Kirkus Associates, LP. All rights reserved.
Product Details
Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images?
|
More About the Author
Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.
Customer Reviews
|
Share your thoughts with other customers:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
3 of 3 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Interesting and very readable analysis.,
By A Customer
This review is from: Over Lincoln's Shoulder: The Committee on the Conduct of the War (Modern War Studies) (Hardcover)
The author covers the Joint Committee activities in detail and makes a convincing argument about their goals and actual accomplishments. Bruce Tap gets into many primary sources to paint a complete picture. However, the book is very readable and doesn't bog down in the details. It is a very important addition to Civil War historiography and closes a gap in the activities of Congress during this period.
3 of 3 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
A Penetrating Study and a cautionary tale.,
By A Customer
This review is from: Over Lincoln's Shoulder: The Committee on the Conduct of the War (Modern War Studies) (Hardcover)
In this penetrating study of the Joint Congressional Committee on the conduct of the war Bruce Tap shows us the danger of giving Politicians too much control over military affairs. The Committee's radical majority almost certainly played a role in persuading Abraham Lin- coln to turn the Civil War into a war for slave liberation, but at a terrible cost.The Committee had this bizarre idea that wars are won not by military professionalism but rather by superior ideology. Consequently the Committee harassed and discredited competent Generals who happened to be Democrats. At the same time they promoted the careers of incompetent Generals who expressed Abolitionist sentiments. Considering all this it is almost a miracle that the Union won the war. This book is a cautionary tale about what can happen when a divi- ded nation goes to war. Even if you are not a Civil War buff this book is well worth reading.
5.0 out of 5 stars
Convincing Indictment,
Amazon Verified Purchase(What's this?)
This review is from: Over Lincoln's Shoulder: The Committee on the Conduct of the War (Modern War Studies) (Hardcover)
Bruce Tap's, book may force the reader to rethink the benefits of the North's partisan political system. Historian Mark Neely has also questioned how partisanship benefited the war's prosecution.
The CCW was a highly partisan commission that investigated northern military failures and scandals. Tap exposes how the committee's leaders Ben Wade and Zachariah Chandler tried to purge the Union army of all conservative elements, believing that only antislavery Republicans could win the War. While the committee did help expose racial atrocities and minor corruption, the total lack of military knowledge on the CCW more often than not impeded the war's prosecution. Pressure for a general advance may have contributed to the disaster at Fredericksburg. It is telling that the committee's favorite generals seemed to have been Ben Butler, John C. Fremont, Joe Hooker, Ambrose Burnside, and John Pope. A Must read for all Civil War nuts.
Share your thoughts with other customers: Create your own review
|
|
What Other Items Do Customers Buy After Viewing This Item?
Suggested Tags from Similar Products(What's this?)Be the first one to add a relevant tag (keyword that's strongly related to this product).
|
Sell a Digital Version of This Book in the Kindle Store
If you are a publisher or author and hold the digital rights to a book, you can sell a digital version of it in our Kindle Store.
Learn more
Customer Discussions
|
This product's forum
Active discussions in related forums
Search Customer Discussions
|
Related forums
|
