"Richard Garnett's Ride to Death." Topic

"Was Jackson justified with Richard Garnett's Court-Martial? When is it acceptable to call retreat? Do all Generals have to have the approval of the commanding General to call retreat? These are questions I have to ask. Richard Garnett was by all accounts a very brave solider. At the battle of Kernstown in 1862 Stonewall Jackson suffered a rare defeat. Richard Granett now commanding the Great Stonewall Brigade issued an order for his men to retreat. The confederate General (Jackson) had received bad reconnaissance information pertaining to the numbers of the enemy. Once engaged Garnett learned that the enemy he faced was 9000 strong (twice his numbers), running low on ammunition and outnumbered and almost surrounded Garnett ordered a withdrawal.

This infuriated Jackson who brought court-martial charges against Garnett for an unauthorized retreat. This tarnished Garnett's name. The exocentric Jackson and one of his aids were the only ones to testify against Garnett at the court-martial. Lee put an end to it and ordered Garnett back to his position. Garnett felt as if his reputation had been ruined. He came from a very proud Military family…."
From here.
link

Interesting… Jackson was wrong??…

Amicalement
Armand

In this case, I believe that Jackson believed that his personal honour and more importantly the honour of the Stone Wall brigade had been besmirched. So a miliary court martial would be the only way to satisfy that breach of honour.

Put it another way, it was a duel by other means, and General Lee saw through this, and didn't want his most important general driven any further mad by this, didn't want a promising and by all accounts courageous comander damaged by the preceedings when the war was far from over (Fredericksburg would be at the end of the year), and didn't want the judicial services of the Army of Northen Virginia reduced to the status of seconds in a duel.

TLDR, Jackson was wrong because he wasn't thinking straight.

Nothing to me says that Garnett was a coward, he rode into the jaws of death at Gettysburg.

Garnett got a raw deal. If you are looking for mistakes Jackson made, there's Cedar Mountain where he was rescued by AP Hill. There is most of the Seven Days where he was inert. There's the hole in his line at Fredericksburg which allowed the sole Union success and most of the Confederate casualties. He was good and aggressive but certainly not infallible.

Jackson was notable for his willingness to court-martial his subordinates. In addition to Garnett (who, I agree, got a raw deal), Jackson had A.P. Hill arrested during the Maryland Campaign (though he never went to trial.)

Jackson could get away with things others could not because he was Jackson. His subordinate commanders and his troops quite often paid the price for this. However in relieving Garnett Jackson ended up with a commander for the Stonewall Brigade that he did trust, and someone whom Jackson felt comfortable letting command his division when Jackson stepped up to wing commander.

Having done a very detailed analysis of the Battle of Kernstown for my master's thesis I would have to say that Garnett's actions were very questionable. Granted that it was Jackson's fault his army was in such a desperate situation that day, but Garnett's actions made things much, much worse.

The basic situation was that Jackson's three infantry brigades were on Sandy Ridge being attacked by over twice their number of Federals. Both flanks were in danger of being turned and there was intense pressure all along the line. Jackson, himself, had gone to the rear to bring up reinforcements and could not be found by his brigade commanders at the critical moment.

A retreat was certainly in order, but it was Garnett who decided to retreat on his own. His brigade was in the center of the Confederate line and arguably in the least danger of the three since at least his flanks were secure. But Garnett ordered the retreat, without telling Jackson (since he wasn't there) but also without telling the other two brigade commanders. So when Garnett's men fell back, the Federals surged into the gap and the other two Confederate brigades were then hit on both flanks at once and routed. What might have been an orderly retreat became a complete rout and only the arrival of Jackson with his two reserve regiments (along with the fall of night) allowed him to extricate anything at all of his army.

So the defeat was Jackson's fault. The rout can be largely blamed on Garnett.

SW, I respectfully disagree. The Officer Commanding took himself out of the fight. He should have sent a subordinate to bring up the troops. Jackson's place was HQ so that he could control his entire command. Garnett was only responsible for the well being of his brigade, not the whole command. Granted, once he decided to withdraw he should have notified the flanks.

Scott-I believe you made a similar statement a couple of years ago in response to a question I posted. Since then I have read just about everything I could find. Union reports differ greatly from Confederate. Jackson's report differs from his subordinates. From what I've read though I would say Jackson's allegations are not proven.

I suppose it would depended on what orders Jackson gave his brigade commanders when they took their positions. If he gave them orders to "hold here" or some such, then Garnett didn't have any leeway in his actions. If the orders were more vague then perhaps he did.