history, when few of the now living had been born, and thenceforward
continually, I can not but think we are still his debtors. I submit,
therefore, for your consideration what further mark of recognition is
due to him, and to ourselves as a grateful people.

With the retirement of General Scott came the Executive duty of
appointing in his stead a General in Chief of the Army. It is a
fortunate circumstance that neither in council nor country was there, so
far as I know, any difference of opinion as to the proper person to be
selected. The retiring chief repeatedly expressed his judgment in favor
of General McClellan for the position, and in this the nation seemed to
give a unanimous concurrence. The designation of General McClellan is
therefore in considerable degree the selection of the country as well as
of the Executive, and hence there is better reason to hope there will be
given him the confidence and cordial support thus by fair implication
promised, and without which he can not with so full efficiency serve the
country.

It has been said that one bad general is better than two good ones, and
the saying is true if taken to mean no more than that an army is better
directed by a single mind, though inferior, than by two superior ones at
variance and cross-purposes with each other.

And the same is true in all joint operations wherein those engaged _can_
have none but a common end in view and _can_ differ only as to the
choice of means. In a storm at sea no one on board _can_ wish the ship
to sink, and yet not unfrequently all go down together because too many
will direct and no single mind can be allowed to control.

It continues to develop that the insurrection is largely, if not