on the war. He noted that under Lincoln
and Grant politicization of the army was
at last being subordinated to the war effort.
He also gained insight into the political
character of the war and its prosecution,
observing that finances, morale, elections,
and political consensus were important ele-ments in achieving victory. The young offi-
cer was proud to be part of Grant’s staff
and a force “unequaled in history.”
Although Porter referred to the Confed-
erates as the enemy, there is no evidence in
his correspondence or records that he held
Confederates in contempt. By 1864 hisearly critical comments about secessionists
and slaveholders had been tempered by
feelings of common humanity, suffering,
and wartime experiences shared by both
armies. A key meeting on May 3, 1864 to
coordinate Union strategy reflected the atti-
tude he learned from and shared with
Grant. Porter knew what was needed to
win the war. He was pleased to be at the
center of decision making. Grant’s military
analysis included advantages of interior
lines, terrain, and supplies. Porter appreci-
ated Grant’s plan at that May 3 meeting
“to launch all his armies against the Con-
federacy at the same time, to give the
enemy no rest.”
Porter liked the democratic, informal style
of Grant’s headquarters. Grant preferred
staff members to dine with him rather than
in small messes according to rank. After the
politics and formality of McClellan’s staff
and the War Department, Porter enjoyed
the chance to speak his mind, learn the
strategic picture, and participate in deci-
sions. Grant was criticized in military cir-
cles outside the Army of the Potomac and
by politicians. Porter disapproved the neg-
ativism, particularly regarding Grant’s
alleged slowness in moving against Lee in
the spring of 1864. Porter speculated that
Grant’s critics were not aware of his respon-
sibility to direct all Union armies, not just
the Army of the Potomac.
Porter saw action throughout the cam-
paign toward Richmond that spring. On
May 6, 1864 he was breveted major for
“faithful, gallant and meritorious service at
the Battle of the Wilderness.” Grant antic-
ipated the terrible human cost of victory,
and Porter appreciated his concern for
needless death from hasty or incorrect deci-
sions. Both abhorred what the war had
become. Porter described the tragedy of the
Wilderness campaign “as though Christian
men had turned to fiends, and hell itself
had usurped the place of earth.”
By late June, Union forces had been on
the move and under fire almost constantly
for six weeks. Following Cold Harbor in
early June, and frustrated, they probed for
another opening around Lee. In a letter to
Sophie from Cold Harbor, Porter wroteLibrary of CongressPorter was present at newly captured Fort Harrison in the fall of 1864 when shell bursts startled every-
one except Grant, who calmly continued to write a dispatch. Fort Harrison had bolstered the Confeder-
ate line between Richmond and Petersburg.Q-Spr16 Horace Porter_Layout 1 1/14/16 12:25 PM Page 63