Head-Quarters Camp of Instruction,
Benton Barracks, (near St. Louis, Mo.,)
Oct 11th 1861
Honored and dear Sir1
Your excellency’s letter2 the 7th Ins’t desiring me to express my views, in regard to Genl Fremont frankly and Confidentially to the Secretary of War ; was presented by him this morning, and I have complied with your Excellencys request.3
I have complained of assaults on the General, because I considered it our duty to sustain and correct errors which I supposed grew out of embarrassments in a new avocation to which he is called, and a consequent ignorance of details and laws relating to the service, and I still reproach some who were early associated in intimate terms with him.
But he has been surrounded with strangers, and adopted citizens, who do not know our language or laws, and for myself, although I tried to be agreeable, I have had very little opportunity to make suggestions to him. In the meantime things seemed at loose ends and utterly inconsistant with law and usage.
Since I was placed in Command here, I have become more acquainted with the erratic course and irregularity of his orders, and I am greatly obliged to your Excellencys letter which breaks the restraints of military etiquette & enables me to relieve myself of a painful silence.
In my judgement General Fremont lacks the intelligence the experiance the sagacity and regard for system and economy necessary to such a command as he now holds. I have arrived at this conclusion reluctantly and gradually. There is a kind of reserve which he maintains that evinces embarrassment or vanity which I never could overcome so as to fully ascertain his views. He would talk of plans, but when he attempted to explain them they were trifling movements of a General here or there “to drive away the enemy” with no relation to a general purpose, which I have finally believed he never conceived.
Forces are scattered and isolated without being in supporting arrangements, and when I hoped in painful apprehension which I have expressed to him I perceived no special exertion to repel or relieve the danger till it was too late. I know the demands made on him to guard every point have been oppressive; but there stood the exposed unsupported points inviting assault and so some continue to remain beyond supporting distance. This is a professional criticism which you may not care to consider but the forces should be concentrated, with arrangements which the rivers and railroads furnish, of sudden movements to any desireable points. What has particularly surprised me is the Generals mode of calling, organizing, and officering troops and workmen, introducing the greatest irregularity which must lead to interminable controversy, extravigance and insubordination. He appoints one a General to raise a Brigade, another a Colonel to raise a Regiment another to be chief of engineers and gives a Col [Fiala] Fiedla4 entire controll of all the forts, and another command of all the troops in the fort, and then gives me command of the city and vicinity: but fortunately owing to the good sense of these quasi Col-onels, without any refusal on their part to respect my commands.
These officers are given printed Commissions “subject to the approval of the President,” but they are so lavishly awarded, and men being paid on them, the holders feel confident of their validity, and even regular army officers flourish their Cheverons under such acquisitions of rank and power to the mortification of their seniors and associates. Your excellency will perceive the basis of such a fabric is ruinous to the structure and to the subordination of the army. Everything rests on the personal favor of the General.
The expense and insubordination which must insue and the evils growing out of the pendency and discussions of the question you propound “Ought General Fremont to be relieved from, or retained in his present Command” seem to require early and final determination.
The public opinion is an element in this war and must not be neglected. Unfortunately the question has assumed a personal form and some are anxious to make it more so. The masses, and especially the German element, have espoused Fremonts side, and the press is entirely under his control. Identity of interest is supposed to exist, and while commissions and pay are vested in him, the sentiment is well founded. His proclamation confiscating the rebels Negroes was popular, and I confess the negro part received my cordial approval. Col OFallon says “if I turn traitor take my negroes be confiscated” and this sentiment prevails in this country. I thought his onward progress with freedom to the rebel’s slaves as a war cry would carry great terror among rebils who use the slaves as sappers & miners against us. But he was not prepared to carry it out, and like the proclamation leveying contributions on the vicinage in North Missouri, was not successfully attempted.
Yet the public was pleased, and a sympathy for Fremont is deep seated and should be respected. Hopes and expectations which his promises and agreements have created, should be kindly and liberally regarded.
Your Commissions should immediately be disturbed (distributed) to reasonable pretenders, while upstarts should be reduced to their natural level. A large sum of money should be sent out to be cauticisly, (cautiously?) honestly, and wisely disbursed by the Commissary Quartermaster and Paymaster; discriminating as far as possible towards Loyal creditors. Some force and more arms should be moved this way. These acts should preceed or be cotemperanious with any change. I take the liberty to name these things, because I would fortify you against all possible danger of reaction; and believing as I do that in any view of the question, and to support any course you may pursue, some effort must be made to siience clammer and insure harmoney among our associates. Determine as you may, your army and country will sustain you. The notice of Genl Wools coming did not as the papers said create disturbances in my camp. Some acts of resentment may insue but they will be temporary, (but I desire unanimity in our ranks. In my judgement Fremont must be superceded, but the time and manner should be well considered. I would evince no apprehension of resentment, but would be prepared for it. In the meantime, whatever be your determination, I shall faithfully and earnestly sustain you,–crossed out)
Do as you would be done by in view of our cause and country and leave the rest to an overruling Providence which I implore for your direction and support.
I have the honor dear sir to remain
Your Excellencys obediant friend & Servt
Saml. R. Curtis Brig Gen USA
1. President A. Lincoln. See Nicolay & Hay, Lincoln, 4, 432, for excerpt of letter. Date given by Nicolay & Hay is Oct, 12, probably the date Curtis wrote his finished copy of the letter.
2. Not found. The letter was probably an open letter used by Secretary Cameron to show the authority of his quest to secure information. (7/8/2016: With the internet of the 21st century, the content of the letter was readily found in multiple places)
3. Lincoln had shown an increasing uneasiness over Fremont’s course in Missouri since the latter’s proclamation of Aug. 30. Fremont, who had succeeded in alienating the support of the powerful Blair family, formerly his supporters, was charged with reckless expenditures, excessive and irregular issuance of commissions, and moreover, of surrounding himself with too many foreigners. Cameron’s visit was the second investigation within a month. Montgomery Blair and Montgomery C. Meigs, the latter being quartermaster gen. of the army. had inspected the situation in Sept. Cameron was accompanied by L. Thomas. See Official Records, War of the Rebellion 1st ser. 3, 466-486, Passims, 538-651, passim ; Nicolay & Hay, 1st ser., 4. 411-15, Allen Nevis, Fremont, Pathfinder of the West, 498, passim.
4. John T. Fiala, Hungarian born, Lt. Col. 2nd Missouri Reserve Corps, May 7. 1861, later col. topographical engineers, was a member of Fremont’s staff. Sept-Nov. 19, 1861; resigned from the service June, 1864.