Individuals At Gettysburg

Individuals at Gettysburg



  • Whatever Happened To...? -Officers Axed After the Battle

    These archived discussions are still open for comment. Last Updated 6/8/96 To join in write

    Reynolds and Buford Meet

    From: Terry Moyer Subject: Re: Buford and Reynolds meet


    In _Gettysburg July 1_, (which is an excellent book and which is taking me a millenium to read), David Martin comes down squarely on the side of the meeting in the cupola scenario with Reynolds. (p96 -97, esp 97). Martin describes some of the questions concerning the meeting, but says; "Since both Jerome and Doubleday expressly place Reynolds at the Seminary building, and Veil's accound does not definitely contradict them, the incident is best accepted rather that (sic - LOTS of typos in this book) rejected." The following citation appears in the bibilography section of the book on page 702: Cameron, Bill. "The Signal Corps at Gettysburg." The Gettysburg Magazine, No. 3: 9 - 15. Oh yeah, and the following appears on the acknowledgments page of the book. "I am also grateful to Edward G. Longacre for research help and advice on the role of Buford's cavalry in the battle, and to Benedict Maryniak and Tim Smith for similar help at interpreting the fighting on Oak Hill."

    Terry Moyer

    From: (Alexander Cameron)

    I decided to use the board to give you the Jerome information you asked about. There are a couple of folks in the group who are interested in this stuff. I'll give you some bio information on Jerome, some suggestions for use of Jerome related material, and some Signal Corps stuff which is related to Buford. I'm going to give you the short version of this stuff. If you get interested in using some of it, let me know and I'll give you the long version. I hope you can use some of it in your Buford book. If you want more details on any of this material, just ask.

    JEROME, A. BRAINARD, 1st Lieut. Died at San Francisco, Cal. (1st Lieut. 1st N.J. Vols.) Detailed; March, 1862, Army of Potomac; Yorktown, Pa.; April, U.S.S. "Aroostook"; Sept., Falls Church, Va.; Dec. 11 Middle Bridge sta, Fredericksburg, Va.; Dec. 14, Corn Bluff sta.; Chancellorville; July 2, 1863, Round Top Mt. Sta.; July, with General Buford, Gettysburg, Pa.; Sept. 18, app. 1st Lieut. S.C., to date march 3, 1863; April, 1864, Act. Ch. Sig. officer, Dept. of Gulf; with Adm. Porter on "Cricket"; Dept. hdqrs., La.; Aug., on U.S.S. "Beinville," Mobile exp; resigned Sept, 20, 1864.
    [J. Willard Brown, THE SIGNAL CORPS, U.S.A. IN THE WAR OF THE REBELLION, Boston, U.S. Veteran Signal Corps Association, 1896, p. 804]

    Jerome swam wire across the Rapidan during the Chancellorville campaign. If you want any background stuff on him, I'll dig it out or send you the pages from Brown. I only have a Xerox copy of some of the chapters but I have a reprint coming (thanks to Terry M.). I can copy what you need if you want to use any of this material. All of those pictures of the signal party on the log tower on Elk Mountain show Jerome. He's the one without the Kepi. (see the picture in my article on Luther Furst in Gettysburg Mag 10, p. 51)

    Jerome signaled from the Seminary cupola warning Howard of Ewell's advance. This is the message that I mentioned is listed incorrectly in the O.R. It is listed as having been sent on the 2nd but clearly it was sent on the 1st. To my knowledge, this message has NEVER been used correctly in a published work (except mine of course :). I think it is important. It shows Buford's command warning the field commander of the Confederate advance on the Union right. [O.R. 27, III, p. 488, also see my article "The Signal Corps at Gettysburg, 3, p. 9]

    As you probably know, Jerome is the source of the story of Buford meeting Reynolds at the Seminary. This has been argued back and forth a lot. Coddington didn't believe the story and neither does Richard Sauers in his article "Gettysburg Controversies" in GBM 4. I believe it. Either Terry Moyer or Dave Powell (sorry I can't remember which) told me that Martin, in his new book, bought Jerome's version. (this has to be a good book since my article made the bib :) I can present a good argument for the Jerome version if you want to get into that issue. [see Sauers article and Jerome to Hancock, vol. 1 of the Morningside version of the Bachelder papers. I don't have it handy at the moment, just look up Jerome. It's in there. If you don't have the Bachelder papers, let me know and I'll send you a copy of the letter.]

    Jerome went to Little Round Top when Buford was assigned the screening mission on the Union left. He signaled Berdan's foray ("Enemy Skirmishers are advancing from the west... and The rebels are in force, and our skirmishers give way") These two messages are on page 488 of part III also. An important point here is that Buford had his signal officer performing telescopic reconnaissance during his screening mission.

    The other issue I would recommend is the use of signals to control troop movement by Merritt. Not only did Buford use the Signal Corps to gather information and transmit that intelligence, he used it for command and control and that was not common. See what Ed Bearss wrote about it in the forward of GBM vol 4. Bearss made a point of this when he reviewed my article.

    If any of this stuff interests you, let me know and I'll get the details for you.



    Subject: Buford and Reynolds meet

    In a message dated 95-12-24 20:43:34 EST, Bill wrote:

    One the Jerome issue, I guess I believe Jerome on the issue of Buford being in the cupola when Reynolds rode up. The letter to Hancock was written right after the war (Oct 18, 65) [Bachelder I, p. 200-1]. Sauers questions it primary because he couldn't understand why Buford would be in the cupola but it is not that far from McPhearson Ridge and it is plausible to me that he went up there to see what was going on. Anyway, it is a case where Jerome would have had to just made up the story. Not enough time had gone by for him to get it mixed up. During my research on the Signal Corps, Jerome shows up a lot (he swam wire across the Rapidan, under fire, during Chancellorsville). Buford thought highly of him and he was an aggressive Lieutenant but there is nothing I have read that makes me think that he was prone to engage in hyperbole. He was writing to Hancock on behalf of Buford's role in the battle and I don't think it was particularly self serving. Could be wrong, you can become protective of these guys after you "get to know them".


    Have you read "Morning at Willoughby Run," by Richard Shue? (Talk about your micro history here - now we're not only getting major works on single days of the battle, but serious efforts on _parts_ of days.) Shue supports the seminary as the meeting site, for much the same reason - he finds Jerome wholly credible, and besides, there's corroborating evidence from Buford's aide and a civilian, as well.

    Shue's book is neat - in the back, he lists about 20 or so "controversies" and analyzes them point by point. His style is more readable than Martin's, as well.

    Dave Powell

    From: ( TERRY MOYER)

    CENTER> John Reynolds' Death


    Subject: Re: News Flash - Reynolds not killed by Sharpshooter! (or was he?)


    I believe either Martin or the Shue book I mentioned argues convinvingly that a sharpshooter was unlikely to have been able to shoot Reynolds, and attributes his death to a stray bullet from Archer's brigade.

    As for Morningside - they get far too much of my money already. Another catalogue could be crippling...

    Dave Powell

    From: (MR CRAIG L DUNN)

    Subject: Reynolds' Death

    To declare that Reynolds' death came from a stray shot as opposed to a sharpshooter's bullet may be another didactic exercize, but I will throw in my two cents. In researching Iron Men: Iron Will, Reynolds' death was mentioned in several sources. At the same time as Reynolds fell, many other men dropped at the same time. A particularly heavy toll was taken on the flag bearers which would give an indication that Archer's men concentrated their volleys in that direction. Would being killed by a bullet from a Confederate volley constitute being killed by a stray bullet? I don't think so. Being killed by a sharpshooter conjures up a mental image of a single gunman with rifle rested on a rock or limb taking slow aim. I tend to believe that Reynolds died from one of the blasts of a well aimed volley by Archer's men.

    Craig Dunn

    From: (Alexander Cameron)

    Craig, I'll leave the discussion as to the difference between a stray bullet and ;a well aimed volley; to you and Dave, however, Sanders' article in GBM quotes a number of primary sources and basically concludes that it didn't come from a sharpshooter. He discusses the possibility that Reynolds fell ;right after the 2nd Wisconsin had exchanged volleys with the 7th Tennessee ;. He discusses a number of other possibilities to include friendly fire (I hate that term, ain't nothing friendly about it). It looks like a well researched article and I can't do it justice in a short post.

    Welcome aboard. I saw your note when you first logged on but nothing since. Glad to have you here. I'm sure you'll enjoy it. I see that your book is listed by Morningside. How about telling us some more about it. Where did you do your research and how did the publishing process work?



    Ah hah, time for six pages detailing the differences between aimed fire and stray rounds.:)

    Actually, I was just repeating what I recalled in passing. I recall some discussion that Reynolds was out of line of sight of Archer's troops, and speculation that it was hence a stray bullet that caught him. A volley from one of Archer's regiments works just as well for me, however.

    Dave Powell

    Jim, if the version of Reynolds death I mentioned is myth, then I by all means would like to be corrected. I must first confess, that it has been over two years since I read Coddington, 6 months since I read the article in Gettysburg magazine, of which I vaguely remember bits and pieces, 30 yrs of ice hockey will do that to you; and have never read the Shue, or D. Martin works, though reviews of the Shue work I have seen do not consider it a very well researched, or scholarly work.

    Anyway, if Reynolds was shot, I believe you said, "most likely", by the 7th Tennessee, during a volley? I got to thinking, and hope you, or other members could help out? How many effectives were in place in the 7th Tennessee at the time of this volley? 100? 200? 300 guns? Was Reynolds on horseback or standing on the ground at the time of his being shot? Were any members of his staff with him, and were they on horseback or standing? Was Reynolds just caught between the lines when this volley was leveled, or was the 7th Tennessee shooting specifically at Reynolds? Was Reynolds, at the time of the volley, standing directly in front of the 7th Tennessee, or off to one of their flanks? Were there any other regiments to the right or left of the 7th Tennessee, thus covering their flanks, that could also have been shooting in the direction of Reynolds, or was the 7th out alone, with their left and right uncovered? Was it only one bullet that pierced Reynolds body, or was his body riddled from this volley? If he did have staff with him at the time of his being shot, were any of them hit?

    Sorry if I rambled, but Jim's response has, as mentioned, made me curious, and if I have been believing a myth all these years with regards to Reynolds death, I would at least like to know the truth. Are the questions I asked above addressed in the reference material listed in your response to John Leo? If yes, then I can dig out my Coddington's, and my Gettysburg magazine, but would appreciate, if practicable the info from the other sources, though as mentioned, based on the reviews I have seen, the Shue book may be suspect.

    I appreciate the assistance.


    Jeff says:

    Hi Jim,

    Well, now I am even more perplexed. I did dig out my issue of Gettysburg magazine, and while I have Coddington's, I was not able, at least last evening, to look through 30 some odd packed boxes to find it, and I am leaving this evening for Virginia, and will not have that opportunity for over a week. Also, as previously mentioned, I do not own the other two books you mentioned; Shue's and D. Martin's.

    However, upon rereading the Gettysburg article, I found the following: ( I do not have the article with me, as I am at work)

    Sanders' conclusion is most interesting with regards to this issue, for while in the 1st paragraph it is stated, "it is almost impossible to determine what actually transpired that fateful July morning." continuing on to indicate that he can correct that using actual reports, his conclusion would indicate that he really does not know, and that alot of his article is speculation. Also use of the word almost in the above sentence, I believe only allows for him to propose his theories on this subject, and really should not be used upon reading his conclusion, and much of the text.

    These, if not verbatim, are close to what he states in the conclusion:

    "It is at this moment the record becomes confused, making it impossible to determine exactly where Reynolds was when he rec'd his fatal wound" he adds to this that "Possibly his horse dragged him"

    An even more telling statement:

    "The greater likelihood is that "he was felled" near East McPherson Ridge, shortly after the 2nd Wisconsin had exchanged volleys with the 7th Tennessee."

    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ IMHO, this statement is not a ringing endorsement that it was the 7th Tennessee who necessarily killed Reynolds, mainly because of the words, SHORTLY AFTER. I read from this, the volley has already taken place, and it is after the volley that he is felled. Would not the words, "he was felled near McPherson Ridge, AS A RESULT OF, a volley exchange between the 2nd Wisconsin and the 7th Tennessee" be a stronger statement for his conclusion. Since it is shortly after, as Sanders states, and not as a result of the volley, could not a lone gunmen have killed Reynolds? I know one of the reference materials he uses, mentions that it was a specific soldier of the 7th Tennessee who killed Reynolds, as reported in a Confederate publication? Well, if it was during a volley, how would any one soldier know he killed this officer? If it was this gentleman, could not he have fired after the volley, striking the general down? If yes, then could not it then be believed that a sharpshooter in fact killed him? I believe that by Sanders using the words, "shortly after', instead of a strong stance, or statement such as, "as the direct result of" or "as the result of" weakens his position on this issue. Also, if it was the result of a volley, how come only one bullet hit him? Why did none hit his horse? What of Sgt. Veil? Why was he not hit? Nor his horse?

    Another telling portion of his conclusion:

    "it was "Probably" enemy fire which killed him, but it seems equally plausible

    ^^^^^^^^ that it was "Friendly fire""

    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Well, this adds a new twist to the puzzle? Could create a whole new myth? This only further muddy's what he's trying to say. Does he believe or have concrete proof who killed Reynolds, or how Reynolds was killed? From as best as I can tell, he does not, and his conclusion confirms this. And once again, his use of words, "probably", would indicate that he is not sure, does more harm, than enhance this article. would not "definitely" ben a better word, and that would eliminate the "friendly fire" issue. But, since he chose "Probably" then questions should continue to be raised.

    He uses in his text, alot of officers reports, many who were not there to show how the "myth" grew. Many of the accounts came after the war. It appears from his text, only Sgt. Veil, who was allegedly with the general produced anything during the conflict, and if I recall, he does not say anything in either case, whether it was a full volley, or a lone gunmen who killed him, but tells of being with him, and removing him from the field.

    Anyway, in lieu of the above three statements, I've quoted, or attempted to quote from Sanders' conclusion, I do not think he presents a strong case on the killing of Reynolds. His conclusion shows IMHO, alot of speculation as to what really happened, and I do not see where he actually pins this honor on the 7th Tennessee?

    I know during the article, one of Sanders' strongest statements for believing it was not a sharpshooter who killed him is the lack of an autopsy to determine the trajectory of a bullet. However, two issues with this, is that he is really only rebuking the thought that the sharpshooter was stationed in a tree shooting down. He does not make a ny stance on the possibility that the sharpshooter could be elsewhere? Also, lack of an autopsy does not prove anything, nor does it disprove anything. Sanders needs that autopsy to strengthen his statement that the sharpshooter was not in a tree, but the lack of an autopsy does not automatically disspell the possibility of a sharpshooter, it just opens up for argument the possible angle of the bullet. Also, because there is no mention of an autopsy, does not mean one was not performed? Records do get lost, destroyed, etc. Anybody have a good background on medicine at that time? Were autopsy's routinely performed, even if someone perhaps knew the cause of death? If yes, then it's commonality to the times may be why no mention was made?

    I guess I will have to dig out my Coddington's. But as best as i can tell, this article is not a strong affirmation that Reynolds was not killed by a sharpshooter. If I am reading this wrong, please, someone let me know. I am just trying to get this straight, for if the sharpshooter story is a myth, I along with others would like that info. IMHO however, this article does not go far enough to dispell that notion.



    Stephen Weed & Charles Hazlett

    From: Douglas M Macomber"
    Subject: Weed and Hazlett

    As you all know of Weed and Hazlett both died together at the same spot, but I can't help but wonder what relation did Hazlett have to Weed? Was he a realitive,a former subordinate or just a friend?

    From: Bill Cameron
    Subject: Weed and Hazlett

    Weed was an artilleryman in the 5th Corps prior to being appointed Brig. Gen. He was promoted to captain of the 5th Artillery on May 14, 1861. He commanded a battery during the Peninsular Campaign. He was given command of all of the artillery in the 5th corps during Fredericksburg and Chancellorsville. On June 6, 1861 he was promoted from Captain to Brig. Gen and given command of his brigade. Hazlett served under weed during his command of the 5th Corps Artillery. I am uncertain if they were ever in the same battery but I am looking at it. My impression is that they were also friends.

    Bill Cameron

    Subject: Additional Info

    For Paul Macomber

    Actually Paul, Weed lived for a few hours. He was removed to a field hospital were he died. Lt. Rittenhouse (replaced Hazlett as the battery commander) went to him first where Weed said "I am cut in two, I want to see Hazlett." Later when Weed's adjutant told him that he would be alright, Weed responded "By sundown I will be as dead as Julius Caesar." The source for this is Benjamin F. Rittenhouse, "The Battle of Gettysburg as seen from Little Round Top", M.O.L.L.U.S., District of Columbia, no. 3.

    Paul, I have a ton of information on the Gettysburg Campaign. I'll be glad to help you anyway I can. See in information on the Gettysburg bibliography in the last paragraph of this email.

    Merritt was in reserve on the 1st, scouting around what is now Thurmont, Md., but was engaged on the field on the 3rd. Merritt wrote in this report "On the 29th ultimo, we marched, by order, through Frederick City, and encamped near Mechanicstown, Md. [now Thurmont]. At this point the brigade was engaged for two days picketing, scouting, and patrolling the roads through the mountains.

    Detachments visited Hagerestown, Cavetown, and other important jpoints, keeping headquarters informed as to the movements of the enemy in those localities.

    On the 2d instant, we marched to Emmitsburg, where Lieutenant Thompson was killed...

    On the 3d instant, in compliance with orders received from corps headquarters, I marched with the brigade about 12 m. to attack the enemy's right and rear, and annoy him, while the battle was progression on the right. I marched on the Gettysburg road about 4 miles, where my advance and skirmishers were engaged. Here the brigade drove the enemy more than a mile..." [O.R., 27, 1, p.943]

    On the Cavalry engagements prior to Gettysburg, I would start by reading the Cavalry commander's reports in the O.R. After that, the best Gettysburg Bibliography I have seen is published the the Military History Institute at Carlisle Barracks, PA 17013. It gives all of the references held by MHI and lists them by each part of the battle.

    Bill Cameron

    Patrick "Paddy" O'Rorke

    From: (Brian Bennett)
    Subject: The many burials of O'Rorke

    Dennis wrote:

    It is my understanding that O'Rorke's widow exhumed his body fromthe Burg and buried it in Rochester, New York. After the funeral services she entered the Convent of the Order of The Sacred Heart of Jesus.

    O'Rorke's body did a lot of traveling. It was originally carried by four members of Company A to the regiment's surgical station on the reverse slope of Little Round Top and subsequently taken to the division hospital behind the hill, on the farm of Jacob Weikert. After the day's fighting ended Lt. Porter Farley traveled to the hospital to view the body. The path of the bullet that had ended O'Rorke's life was traced by a "bloody froth on each side of his neck." Farley, who later in life became a practicing physician, would then judge that the ball "probably pierced the spine at the base of the neck, and he sank to the ground with every muscle relaxed - dead on the instant."

    The bodies of O'Rorke, Weed and Hazlett were placed side-by-side on the porch of Weikert's farmhouse and covered with sheets. Artillery Lieutenant Malbone F. Watson was later brought in wounded and carried onto the porch. A gust of wind pulled the sheets away, revealing the three corpses. Weed was Watson's former commander, Hazlett his classmate at West Point and O'Rorke a year his junior. The shock of seeing the bodies "almost killed him," he would later tell a fellow artillerymen.

    A grave for Hazlett was dug in Weikert's garden, but the bodies of O'Rorke and Weed were moved to another hospital on the farm of Lewis Bushman. There they were buried by Sgt. Major James Campbell of the 140th and Lt. William Crennell, quartermaster of the 140th, who served as an aide to Weed during the battle. (It was to Crennell that Weed made his famous "I'm as dead a man as Julius Caesar" quote.) Crennell noted that the interrment was a "very perplexing job" on account of the lack of material for suitable coffins. The pair were placed in the ground in rear of the Bushman house "on the west side of the first apple tree," with Weed's body closest to the tree. The two men marked the spot in case the families wished to recover the bodies.

    Escorted by a Mr. Putnam, O'Rorke's wife Clara arrived in Washington on July 7 and received a military pass to travel to Gettysburg through Baltimore to recover the body. It is unclear as to whether or not the pair made it to Gettysburg, or if they or someone else exhumed the body from the Bushman farm. At some point Capt. Thomas Bishop (Clara's brother; an officer in the 25th N.Y.) arrived, as a member of the 140th reported that officer as having charge of O'Rorke's body in Baltimore on the 10th of July.

    O'Rorke's body, along with the corpse of Company K's 1st. Lt. Hugh McGraw arrived in Rochester via train on July 14. O'Rorke's funeral took place the next day, with his body buried in St. Patrick's Cemetery on Rochester's Pinnacle Hill.

    The original plot was near the summit of the hill and as his widowed mother made daily trips, it became more difficult for her to make the walk, so at some point the body was moved to a point lower on the hill. By 1871 the cemetery was starting to fill up, so the Catholic Diocese purchased a new tract of land for burials. By 1879 St. Patrick's had the look of abandonment, but it was another eight years before a new plot for the O'Rorke family could be purchased in the new cemetery (Holy Sepulchre) and the bodies moved.

    The graves of O'Rorke, his mother (who died in 1881) and Col. George Ryan, who succeeded O'Rorke in command of the 140th, all have matching stylized Maltese Cross headstones. Ryan, who was not from Rochester or even New York, was also buried and move four different times. He was killed at Laurel Hill on May 8, 1864 (the first collision in the fight for Spotsylvania) and buried on the field. Almost a year to the day later, as the 140th was marching north to Washington after the surrender at Appomattox, the regiment was the vicinity and exhumed the bodies of Ryan and Major Milo Starks, who had also been killed at Laurel Hill. Starks' body was sent home to Brockport (same county as Rochester) and Ryan to his parents' home in Decatur, Illinois.

    In 1870 a group of 140th veterans sought to have the remains of their two colonels reunited. After receiving permission from Ryan's family to move the body, 49 veterans traveled by private railcar to nearby Chicago. The remains were brought back to Rochester, and after elaborate and widely-attended ceremonies and processions, buried next to O'Rorke's grave in St. Patrick's Cemetery. Ryan then made the move with O'Rorke to Holy Sepulchre.

    O'Rorke's young widow Clara entered the novitiate of the Society of the Sacred Heart and in 1871 took her final vows. She subsequently became Mother Superior of her order in Detroit for two different periods, during which she oversaw the building of the convent at Grosse Point, Michigan. She subsequently returned to New York when she moved to Kenwood Convent in Albany, one of the largest novitiate houses of the order in the country. Her final assignment was at Elmhurst, in Providence, Rhode Island, where under her leadership the academy was enlarged and "what is said to be one of the most beaituful church in this country" was built. She died in February 1893 at the age of 56. Along with her many accomplishments she was acknowledged as being an excellent musician and a "particularly strong" teacher of math and chemistry."

    From: (Brian Bennett)

    As far as the O'Rorke Memorial Society (of which I am a member), its goals were very similar - trying to get some public acclamation here in Rochester of O'Rorke's service and sacrifice. Our end product was more modest, but we were equally successful. The final form of the O'Rorke memorial is larger than life bronze bust of O'Rorke. The bust is mounted on a pedestal and accompanied by two museum-type 4' x 5' information panels (with illustrations) outlining the part played in the war by Rochester and Monroe County. The first panel details the happenings on the homefront (including info on well-known Rochesterians Frederick Douglass and Susan B. Anthony); the second panel includes info on O'Rorke, along with info on the Rochester/Monroe County regiments that found in the war.

    The memorial was unveiled in the Visitors Center at High Falls, an urban museum located in the downtown Rochester Browns Race Historical District, a restored area above the Genesee River's Middle Falls, which played a large role in Rochester's milling past. During the summer, a nightly laser show is projected on the walls of the gorge below the falls. The memorial was originally intended to be a temporary exhibit (in space intended for such materials) but the center liked it so much it expressed an interest in keeping it. At the time the committee had no alternative site, so it allowed the exhibit to remain, although the new exhibit area is well out of the way of the visitors, and in our opinion, not very acceptable.

    However the city of Rochester has been planning, over the past 5-6 years, to expand its downtown library and groundbreaking was just done, with the expansion to be completed (hopefully) by March 1997. We have contacted the library about moving the exhibit to the new part of the library, possibly the local history area, and they are interested.

    Some two years ago a founding member of the commitee commissioned a local artist to do a painting of O'Rorke and the 140th on Little Round Top. That may also go to the library for permanent display. The painting turned out extremely well (I think) - it's not a Troiani (but what is, other than a Troiani). It is also historically accurate (I was asked to provide the specifics) and include portraits from photographs of O'Rorke, Capt. Milo Starks, Sgt. Major James Campbell and Lt. Porter Farley. The artist received permission to produce prints and is selling for $100. E-mail me privately if anyone is interested in information on the prints - I could send a full-color flyer.

    I would be happy to answer any further questions as to the Col. Patrick O'Rorke Memorial Society.

    Brian Bennett

    Paula Gidjunis <> says:

    Hi everyone!

    I just finished reading "At GB, or what a girl saw and heard of the battle", by Mrs. Tillie Pierce Alleman. In her book, Tillie discusses the death of Weed, whom she insists died at the Weikert's house. Now, I have heard the story where he was killed on LRT, and how Hazlett was bending over him to hear if he had any dying words, and then Hazlett was killed. Is Tillie's story accurate?

    The intro to the book is by Wm. Frassanito, whom of course is well known in his own right. The only thing he disputes in her book is her account that she was able to witness the charge of the Pa Reserves on July 2 on the other side of LRT. So did Weed die at the Weikert's house?

    Paula says:

    It seems that Gen. Weed was not instantly killed. Shot through the body, possibly severing the spinal column, he sent for Lt. Hazlett, and was giving him some last messages when Hazlett was shot in the head and killed (or died very soon thereafter).

    -- Hazlett by the way was wearing a light colored hat, according to his West Point chum Col. Martin D. Hardin -- who advised him to take it off as it would make a target. Apparently Hazlett did not....

    In any case there is some debate over the location of Weed's death. Gregory Coco discusses this in his book "A Vast Sea of Misery." Tillie Pierce, among others, describes him dying in the Jacob Weikert farm, while Porter Farley of the 140th NY has him being taken to the Lewis A. Bushman farm. Yet another of the enduring questions of that battle.

    Brian Pohanka (Brian Bennett) says:

    Paula's original post asked about Stephen Weed's wounding and death and if Tillie Pierce's remembrances of seeing Weed at the Weikert house could have been accurate. Brian Pohanka noted the discrepancies in different reports, and since I had most of the relevant materials on hand, here is the long version, from the pens of the participants:

    best against Hazlett's gunners, and it was while standing among them that Weed received a mortal wound. Believing that he was about to die he was in the very act of committing his last messages to his friend Hazlett, who stooped over him, when there came the whiz and thud of another bullet as it sunk into Hazlett's brain, and that brave artilleryman fell a corpse across the body of his dying friend.

    "...The general was carried at once behind the shelter of a rock, and was soon taken in an ambulance to the farmhouse of Louis A. Bushman, which, as well as his barn and outhouses, had been taken possession of and was being used as our division hospital. Weed suffered intensely, but for some time after he was hurt was entirely conscious and able to communicate the messages which he had begun to give to Hazlett. This he did to Lieutenant William H. Crennell, quartermaster of our regiment, who with the other quartermasters of our brigade had served during this campaign as Weed's aides. Among other things, Weed asked that when he was dead the ring which he wore might be taken from his finger, and with the pocketbook containing his private letters, be carried to the young lady to whom he was engaged to be married. As the father of that young lady had for many years been a public character it may not be inappropriate to state that she was the daughter of Simon Cameron of Pennsylvania.

    "Weed's bravery even unto death, and his bluff, outspoken manner, were well exemplified by the clearness with which he made his dying requests, well knowing they were such, and by the emphasis with which he spoke, particularly in a reply which almost epitomizes the character of the man, made to Crennell when he said to him, "General, I hope you are not so very badly hurt." Said Weed, "I'm as dead a man as Julius Caesar." He soon became delirious and died at about 9 o'clock that evening."

    Note: In this source Farley also discusses going back to the Bushman Farm to view O'Rorke's body. Farley remained with the 140th until well after the fighting on Little Round Top, and since he apparently traveled directly to the Bushman Farm, probably did not know of the first stop at the Weikert Farm. His descriptions of Weed's preparations for death most likely came through conversation with Crennell.

    Relevant excerpts from Lt. William Crennell's diary (Crennell was the quartermaster of the 140th NY and served as an aide to Weed during the battle):

    July 2: "...about six o'clock General Weed was hit Captain Hazlett was killed while receiving his last words... wrote down what he wanted done he died at 5 minutes after 9."

    July 3: "Rose very early after sleeping about three hours.... Got orders in regard to disposing of the remains of Col O'Rorke and General Weed. Burried them on the Bushman place. A very perplexing job on account of the lack of material etc for the coffins.

    A. Bushman, Gettysburg Adams Co. Cumberland Township. The bodies of General Weed and Col O'Rorke are burried in rear of his house on the west side of the first apple tree in rear of his house. The Generals body being placed nearest that tree."

    Sunday July 5: "Wrote General Weeds Brother"

    Crennell was assisted in the burial by one man from the 140th NY, most likely Sgt. Major James Rennick Campbell. From a letter written by "J.R.C." comes the line: "Quartermaster and myself were the only men from the Regiment who were at the burial of Col. O'Rourke and Gen. Weed. We marked the spot, so that if the folks would like to have the bodies sent home they can easily find them."


    "In a few moments Corporal Taylor, chief of the piece just placed by Lieutenant Hazlett, called me, "General Weed is wounded." He was lying on the rocks along, and near Taylor's piece. I ran to his assistance. He said "I am cut in two." I replied, "Not so bad as that I think, General," and unbuttoned his coat. A ball had passed through his spine and paralyzed the lower part of his body. He asked me to send for Hazlett. I sent one of the men for him, for he was on the left at the time. He rode up and dismounted, and knelt beside the General. General Weed intrusted him with some messages, and then drew him closer to say something confidential, when a ball pieced dear Hazlett's brain, and Corporal Taylor caught him in his arms.... We carried Hazlett below the crest. I gave the bugler orders to take him to the hospital and remain with him as long as he lived, and then report to me..."

    Wounded artillery Lieutenant Malbone F. Watson was carried to the Weikert house where he saw "some bodies on the porch covered with sheets; as he got on the porch the wind blew the sheets off, and then he saw his captain, General Weed, and his intimate friends and classmates, Colonel O'Rourke and Lieutenant Hazlett, cold in death. He said, "the shock almost killed him."

    In "A Vast Sea of Misery" by Greg Coco, he quotes a letter from Dr. Clinton Wagner, surgeon-in-chief of the Fifth Corps' Second (Ayres') Division, in which Wagner describes selecting the Weikert farm as a hospital, and also writes:

    "On the porch of his house [Weikert's], the bodies of three valiant soldier lay during the night of Thursday, all of whom were killed in the struggle on the summit of 'Little Round Top;' they were General S.M. Weed, Col. O'Rourke, 140th N.Y. Vol., and Lieut. Hazlitt.

    "General Weed was not killed instantly as many accounts of the battle state. I was riding to the front when I met the stretcher bearers carrying him... I dismounted; he begged me not to stop for him, 'he said I could do nothing for him;' I examined and found he was right... he was taken to the far house and survived about an hour or two."

    Coco notes that the officers were first brought to the Weikert farm, which was behind Little Round Top, but were moved to the Bushman farm, farther east, due to shelling from Confederate artillery.

    In terms of Hazlett's interment, Coco quotes from a letter from Captain Robert G. Carter, 22nd Mass., in which Carter states that Hazlett "was temporarily buried at the east end of Weikert's garden."

    (Personal note: in referring to both my regimental history of the 140th and my biography of O'Rorke, I was appalled to find that I did not properly cite Coco for his information on Hazlett's burial site as well as Wagner's letter, which pegged the three dead bodies as lying on Weikert's porch (Rittenhouse's article did not identify the farm at which Malbone Watson saw the bodies). My apologies to Greg and to readers of either book.)

    It would appear then, that O'Rorke (dead), Hazlett (probably dead) and Weed (mortally wounded) were all taken first to the Weikert Farm. As two men remembered seeing all three men dead and covered with a sheet here, Weed must have died here, as Pierce recalled. What's more interesting is why Hazlett was buried here, but Weed and O'Rorke were taken farther back to the Bushman Farm. Weed died at 9:05 p.m. according to Crennell's diary, so Hazlett's burial took place later that night and it is doubtful that shelling would have disrupted any work that night. It seems pretty clear from Crennell's detailed description of the burial spot of Weed and O'Rorke, that the pair were indeed buried on the Bushman Farm.

    Brian Bennett

    George Custer

    Original Query from MICHAEL E HARTENSTINE
    Subject: General George A. Custer

    Weeks before the battle of Gettysburg George A. Custer was made Brigidier General. From writings I have read, Custer was just a lieutenant.If this is true? What did he do which was considered above and beyond to be promoted this high rank? I don't think this was commissioned rank just brevet.At his death at Little Big Horn I think his stone has down Lieutenant colonel as his rank. Am I wrong let me know.

    Reply from James Epperson

    A clarification: his promotion in June of 1863 was to Brigadier General, United States *Volunteers*, and therefore was not a promotion within the Regular Army. For most officers, their Regular Army rank lagged behind their Volunteer rank. When the war ended, they all reverted to their Regular Army rank, hence Custer became a Lt. Col.

    I think it was John Gibbon who told US Grant that the toughest change in rank for an officer was *not* when he was promoted from 2nd to 1st Lieutenant, as was commonly thought, but when he went from Major General (USV) to Captain (USRA)! (Although I think and *hope* that Gibbon's RA rank was higher than that at war's end.)

    Reply from Benedict R Maryniak

    This is a long answer to Mike's question about George "the-Indians-finished-Trevilian-Station" Custer, but it's my favorite Buford anecdote. It appears in a number of resources, but I recall it is definitely in Starr's three-volume set on the Union cavalry.

    While General Buford's division marched north towards Gettysburg, his men caught a spy near Frederick. A drumhead court-martial condemned the man to death and the sentence was carried out immediately. A committee of indignant citizens confronted Buford regarding the matter, and the General stated he had been afraid to send the prisoner to Washington because he knew the authorities would make him a brigadier-general.

    It took a while for me to grasp the full relevance of Buford's alleged jibe - he was expessing his displeasure at the June 29,1863, transformation of three cavalry captains into brigadier generals -

    * "Temporary Captain" George Armstrong Custer was made Brigadier Genl of US Volunteers on June 29 of 1863 at age 23. He rose to Major Genl a week after Appomattox.

    * 2nd US Cavalry Captain Wesley Merritt was made Brigadier Genl of US Volunteers on June 29 of 1863 at age 29. He rose to Major Genl on April 1, 1865.

    * Captain & Aide-de-Camp Elon John Farnsworth was made Brigadier Genl of US Volunteers on June 29 of 1863 at age 36. Genl Pleasonton reportedly had to lend him a coat with brigadier shoulder straps upon receiving the surprise notice about his promotion. Farnsworth was killed July 3 charging Longstreet's right flank at Gettysburg.

    Ben Maryniak

    James Kemper

    Subject: Kemper Digest

    Original query from MICHAEL E HARTENSTINE

    Wasn't Brig. Gen James Kemper taken prisoner by the federal army? After he was wounded leading his brigade during Picketts charge. The movie "Gettysburg" depicts him of being retrieved by his own men.

    Reply from Dave

    Subject: Re: Gen.Kemper

    Gen Kemper was retrieved by his men after the attack, but because of his serious wounds, they had to leave him to the mercy of the enemy during the retreat. He fell into Federal hands on July 6, 1863. -Dave

    Reply from Bryan Meyer

    You are correct...the movie "Gettysburg" has another flaw. I was wondering about this myself after reading Gettysburg: Battle & Battlefield by W.C. Storrick. He mentions Kemper's medical situation in the medical field hospital after the battle. He was captured, but was so seriously wounded, that he could not be moved.

    According to the Historical Times Illustrated Encyclopedia of the Civil War (Patricia L. Faust, Editor), here is a quote of Kemper's situation: "Encountering severe flanking fire, it (Kemper's Brigade) was eventually repelled, and withdrew with the battered remnants of that fateful charge. Its commander remained on the field, desperately wounded and a captive of the Union forces."

    It also says: "In 1864 Kemper was exchanged and returned to Richmond, where he served in a staff position. He was promoted to major general Sept. 19, 1864, and commanded the defense of Richmond after its evacuation at the end of the war."

    Reply from Dennis

    Dave and Bryan are both correct, but that does not preclude the movie scene from also being correct. I cannot find a report from Kemper, but here are the few sources I could find.

    Stuart recounts the conversation almost as exactly as does the movie on page 257 of _Pickett's Charge_

    "Some men came by, bearing the wounded Kemper. Lee turned to him, 'General Kemper, I hope you are not very seriously wounded.'
    'I am struck in the groin and the ball has ranged upward; they tell me it is mortal.'
    'I hope it will not prove so. Is there something I can do for you?'
    'Yes, General Lee, do full justice to this division for the work it did today.'
    'I will.'"

    Stuart cites as his source R.A. Bright 's article "Pickett's Charge" SHSP, xxxi, 228.

    Sergeant David Johnston, 7th Va., details Kemper's location after his wounding in Richard Rollins' _Pickett's Charge: Eyewitness Accounts_ page 93.

    "About dark I was placed in an ambulance and carried some few miles from the battle field whither General Kemper was also removed and placed in the barn... It was thought General Kemper would not live during the night his sufferings were so great --- almost beyond endurance."

    GEO. G. MEADE, recants the capture of Trimble and Kemper in a letter he wrote to Halleck on July 6, 1863-8 p.m.

    " General [J. L. ] Kemper was found mortally wounded on the road to Fairfield, and a large number of wounded, estimated as several thousand. " OR page81 ; Chapter XXXIX , THE GETTYSBURG CAMPAIGN.

    R. E. LEE wrote to Jefferson Davis on the status of several Confederate officers. July 4, 1863.

    "Generals Garnett and Armistead are missing a prisoner . Generals Pender and Trimble are wounded in the leg, General Hood in the arm , and General Heth slightly in the head . general Kemper , . it is feared , is mortally wounded."


    Kemper returned to politics and campaigned for Greeley for President. He was elected Governor of Virginia in 1873. He practiced law until his death in 1895 in Orange County, Va. where he is buried.


    Winfield Hancock

    From: "Douglas M Macomber" (

    Subject: Hancock and Howard

    When Hancock arrived around midafternoon, after the eleventh corps had been routed. He went straight to General O.O Howard, some sources say Howard refused Hancocks assumption of command. Yet, other scources say Howard split command with Hancock, dividing command between them. I cannot tell exactly which is right. Since, I am working on that book I was telling you about which is where I am about now, I need an answer to be fairly accurate.


    In response to the question of Hancock and Howard. Pfanz in his book Gettysburg: Culps Hill and Cemetary Ridge comments on page 101 that they met near the crest of Cemetary Hill where Howard was putting his men into position where Hancock presented his order from Meade, which Howard did not look at ( H. Osborn, Trials p. 97). Howard wrote later that he told Hancock to take the left of the Pike and he would work the right. Hancock took issue with this later and said he was in full command (W.S. Hancock, Gettysburg, pp. 823-824). After his arrival (Hancock), Howard gave orders to only 11th Corps.

    From: (Anita Jackson-Wieck)

    Don't for a moment take this as a slap at Hancock, but I think Tucker overstates the impact of his arrival. Buford, the much-maligned Howard and the already-deceased Reynolds deserve more credit than Tucker gives them here. They chose the ground and placed the troops. Certainly Howard had viewed Cemetery Hill as the fall-back position - witness Von Steinwehr, the 2000 troops, and the three batteries of artillery Howard left there before moving the XI Corps forward.

    What Hancock found there was not of his doing; what he did with them, perhaps, was. But even then...the whole business of whether Howard or Hancock was in charge at the time of the latter's arrival has at least one thing upon which all seem to agree - there was no disagreement as to how to place the troops.

    Further, unless Ewell was psychic, he couldn't have known that Hancock had arrived nor assessed his impact upon the troops on Cemetery Hill. His decision not to attack would have been based on what he saw (artillery and thousands of massed troops) and not who was in charge. Even if he did know who the generals on the scene were, he would have assumed Howard was in command (the senior officer) since he could hardly have known of Meade's orders to Hancock.

    Hoping to head off a barrage of "god-like" Hancock posts...

    David Wieck

    From: "MICHAEL E HARTENSTINE" Subject: general hancock

    I just read from historical society encyclopedia of civil war, that General Hancock was sent home to his native home of Norristown Pennsylvania, after receiving his wound at Gettysburg. I thought from common knowledge that he almost died in a field hospital, which he finally recuperated from his wounds. Then given command of II corps again by the end of the year of 1863. Thank You for any help that can be given.

    From: Dan Szepesi (

    Subject: general hancock (fwd)

    I was just in Norristown this past weekend and was given a grand tour of Montgomery Cemetary where Hancock is buried. It is an old cemetary that is no longer maintained by the state or by a church, so it is frequently vandalized and falling into disrepair. The friends of Montgomery cemetary do a great job keeping it up, considering everything, and they recently have saved the cemetary from being plowed over and converted to townhomes !!! I think it is up for sheriffs sale soon...

    The friends are planning a large living history / dedication of Hancock's tomb there on Oct. 7 (?). This will include a parade through town, a ceremony at the recently restored tomb, and a living history event there. I have a good friend in my re-enactment unit who is a large fan of 'Hancock the Superb' and I can forward your address & phone number to him if you are interested.

    BTW, there are also upwards of 400 cw vets buried in the cemetary, most of them from PA units such as the 51st PA, but there is actually one Confederate buried there as well.

    Walter Taylor

    John Jackson Griffin, 50th Ga @ Gettysburg

    I am enclosing this draft of research on my GGGF:

    John Jackson Griffin
    Private, Co. I, 50th Georgia Volunteer Infantry
    By John Alfred Griffin, a great great grandson
    John Jackson Griffin, born in Irwin County Georgia 18 April 1832. He was the son of Benjamin Daniel Griffin and Sarah (Henderson) Griffin. He first married Martha Giddens. Martha died on 2 July 1860. Two years to the day, John Jackson would be fighting for his life in Gettysburg. Griffin enlisted as a Private in Company I, 50th Georgia Volunteer Infantry, Confederate States of America on 22 August 1862 at Calhoun, Georgia by Major J. Dunwody. This was only 8 months after his second marriage to a Martha Mathis.

    On the Company Muster Roll for 31 August 1862 we find him as a member of the regiment. His enlistment was for a three year period or the end of the war, whichever came first.

    The 50th Georgia Volunteer Infantry also known as the Berrien Light Infantry. Most of the 50th was made up of men from the South Georgia area. The original commander was Col. W. R. Manning. The 50th fit into the Military Organization, Department of Georgia, CSA on 30 Apr 1862 as follows: Major General, JC Pemberton Commander of South Carolina , Georgia, and Florida, Brigader General Alexander Lawton Commander of Georgia, Brigader General H.W. Mercer 2nd Brigade.

    In this Brigade along with the 50th were 1st, 13th, 25th, 26th, 29th, Georgia Infantry Regiments, 3rd Georgia Cavalry, 8th and 11th Georgia Battalions, Savannah Guards, Chatham Light Horsemen, Effingham Hussars, Hardwich Mounted Rifles, Georgia Artillery Company D, and Stanton Hill Virginia Artillery.

    John Jackson Griffin received training beginning in Calhoun. The 50th was then later sent to the Savannah area. On 17 July 1862 Major General J.C. Pemberton ordered Manning and the 50th from Savannah via railroad to Richmond to join forces with Robert E. Lee and the Army of Northern Virginia. When the 50th arrived in Richmond they fit into the Organization of the Army of Northern Virginia under command of Robert E. Lee, General James Longstreet's 1st Corps, Major General David R. Jones Division, Brigader General Thomas F. Drayton's Brigade. At this time Drayton's Brigade was made up of the 50th & 51st Ga, 15th SC, and Phillip's Legion. They were in the first Maryland campaign, serving at the Second Battle of Manassas. The 50th battled at Boonesborough-South Mountain, Crampton Gap, Harpers Ferry, Sharpsburg-Antietam, and Sheperdstown Ford. On 26 Nov 1862, the 50th was re-assigned to the brigade of Brig General Paul J. Semes, along with the 10th, 51st, and 53rd Georgia Regiments by order of General Robert E Lee. This brigade was included in the division of Major General Lafayette McLaws of General James Longstreet's 1st Corps.

    John Jackson Griffin is found on the Clothing Receipt roll for the 4th quarter of 1862 (Oct-Dec). January-February 1863 Payroll by Major JE Davis QM through Dec 31 1862. Receipt Roll for Clothing, 1st Quarter 1863 date of issue 11 March 1863. A notation was made that he was absent, sick when returns made.

    The men of the 50th were now on line for the Second Maryland campaign and next battled at Fredericksburg and later Chancellorsville.

    2 July1863 finds John Jackson Griffin fighting with his regiment in the Wheat field area in Gettysburg. A union musket ball hits him slightly above the left knee, shattering the lower femur bone. This is 2 years to the day of the anniversary of the death of his beloved first wife. It is not known for certain, but it is believed that he was brought to a field surgeon by Confederates. His wound required that the left leg be amputated above the knee. From the research I have, it appears that he was left behind with the sick and wounded and was taken as a prisoner of war by union troops on 5 July 1865. One entry I have found states 2nd of July as capture date. Since two researched entries are in conflict of each other the exact date can not now be determined. If the July 2nd date could be verified, it would indicate that his leg may have been amputated by Union surgeons.

    Griffin appears on a roster of sick and wounded in hospitals in and about Gettysburg, Pa. after the battle of July 1-3, 1863. Complaint listed as leg amputated; remarks secondary hemorrhage occurred 20 times between July and August, checked by phosphate of Iron. On Pennsylvania Register 556 Gettysburg page 28.

    Appearing on a roll of prisoners of war at Seminary Hospital, Gettysburg Pa, 10 Aug 1863, Griffin is listed as captured at Gettysburg 5 July 1863, remarks state amputation of right leg (mistake made by recorder as it was the left leg.) He is later transferred as we find him on a hospital entrance admission to Camp Letterman US Army General Hospital in Gettysburg Pa, admitted 4 Sept 1863, complaints listed wounds above left knee, amputation at thigh, Sent to General Hospital 14 Oct 1863.

    He next appears on a Roll of Prisoners of War in Hospitals in and about Gettysburg, captured July 1-3 in Gettysburg County, remarks, transferred to General Hospital Baltimore, 3 Nov 1863. A Letter accompanying this roll is dated 2 Dec 1863.

    John Jackson Griffin was paroled by the Federals on 17 Nov 1863 and appears on a Roll of Prisoners of War at Wests Buildings Hospital Baltimore Maryland 12 Nov 1863 transferred to City Point, Virginia Hospital, with where captured listed as Gettysburg 2 July 1863. The Rolls endorsed "received City Point, Va, 17 Nov 1863 of Major John E, Mulford, 2nd Inf. NY Vol, comander under flag of truce. On these rolls 350 parolled confederate prisoners of war, less one dead.

    He also appears as admitted to 2nd Division General Hospital, Camp Winder, Richmond, Va. 18 Nov 1863, When furloughed 28 Nov 1863 Time says 60 days for furlough remarks marked P.P. (paroled prisoner) and on a Hospital muster roll of sick and injured 2nd Division General Hospital, Camp Winder, Richmond, Va. Nov 1863 and on a recipet roll for clothing 2nd Division General Hospital, Camp Winder, Richmond, Va., 19-20 Nov 1863 listed as a paroled prisoner granted furlough until exchanged.

    On the Company Muster Roll John Jackson Griffin is listed on Feb 29-Aug 31 1864 last paid by H Hegan though June 30 1863, as absent-sick, wounded, Sept Oct 1864 last paid by H Hegan thoro June 30 1863, as absent-sick, wounded, Nov-Dec 1864 last paid by H Hegan though June 30 1863, as absent-sick, wounded and Jan-Feb 1865 last paid-Unknown, was absent-sick, wounded.

    John Jackson Griffin returns to Berrien Co, Ga. dies in 1889. He is burried next to his father & mother and first wife Martha Giddens Griffin, at the old Ben Griffin Cemetry, on the Lax-Ocilla Road.

    I would appreciate any of you who know more about Gettysburg, the battle where the 50th was at, the hospitols, exchanges, ect. to share your information with me so I can update this draft. If you know of additional resources for me to check or other information, please email me. I am particularling interested in finding out for sure if he was administered first by confederates and then left behind to be taken POW or if he was removed from the battlefield by Union troops and treated at a Union facility first.

    Any information, recommendations, comments are welcome.

    John Griffin



    Did some digging the past few days and have found very little specifically about where the 50th GA field hospital may be. In general, the CSA division hospitals were situated along Marsh Creek and stretched from South Emmitsburg Rd. to Chambersburg Pike. I might be able to narrow it down some if you could give me the name of the division the 50th GA served with as my maps relate to divisions. There were also CSA hospitals along Huntertown Rd for Johnsons Division.

    Since you say he was taken to the Seminary Hospital, I would assume he was on the west side (Marsh Creek). However, since he became a POW, it is possible that he was treated at a Federal aid station and then transferred to the Seminary and never was treated by the CSA medical.

    It is interesting to me that he was paroled and held at City Point in Nov. '63. City Point POW camp was nothing more than a corral to hold temporary POWs and really was not considered a camp until the late was. More than likely he was just put on a steamer to City Point and processed at the point of departure. Most of the POWs were let off at CP and told to find their own way to Richmond. CP was just the closest dock to Richmond.

    He was also lucky to be paroled. Most CSA prisoners were taken to Point Lookout in So. Md. which was created to handle the tremendous amount of POWs from Gburg. A quick check of the POW lists at Point Lookout found a William Benifield from Co. I, 50th GA who was detained as a POW and died at Point Lookout. Hope this helps.

    Gouverneur K. Warren - Some Gibbon

    Subject: Our buddy Warren

    (This discussion is an offshoot of the Lee Retreat - Meade Pursuit" file. Moderator's Note)

    Bill Wrote:

    On another issue, from reading Warren's testimony, my opinion of Warren continues to be just a tad lukewarm. Be interesting to know what you, Jim and others think about it. Not withstanding his actions on LRT, he criticizes Sykes for being slow (who gave him a brigade when no one else would), tells Congress Meade should have attacked (as he should have if he thought that but it still figures into the equation), and blows his own horn when describing the need to conduct a reconnaissance after the battle. Yet earlier, he did not accept Meade's offer (request?) to be the acting Chief of Staff. Meade would have had a LOT less problems if Butterfield had not been Chief during GB. The truth is, I think Warren's description of what he did on LRT, written nine years after the battle, is a bit self serving. He did it, but I think the description was romanticized by Warren. I'm probably the one person alive who feels this way.

    Actually, I agree with you about Warren as well. The problem with both his testimony and his account of LRT is that they are both highly self-serving. Warren was looking for a field command (and, sadly, got Sykes' at the latter's expense) after the battle, and then once in command of V corps, was not a great performer. Given that he was all but summarily relieved by Sheridan at the end, his reputation was in need of polishing. Taken in that context, his motives for 'enhancing' his role in events is much more clear.

    Warren did OK as a brigade commander on the Peninsula and 2nd Manassas. he was far too cautious as a Corps commander, and his proformance with the V Corps in the Wilderness was very wanting - pipe in any time here, Mr. Epperson, as I recall you have words on Warren at the Wilderness:) - On the whole, I think the reason he didn't take Chief of staff was that he didn't know if Meade would succeed, and didn't want to hitch his wagon to a failure. Hardly a noble reason.

    Dave Powell

    From: "James F. Epperson" (
    Subject: Re: Our buddy Warren

    Well, Dave, if you insist ;-)
    Yes, I have my reservations about Warren as well. This is not based on any micro-knowledge of what he did at LRT. I am willing to give him some credit there, although perhaps he did embellish his role; I simply don't know. But as a corps commander he was atrocious, to be polite. Along with the cavalry officer JH Wilson, he was probably the man most responsible for Wilderness turning out the way it did -- I could go on at great length here, but it is Christmas morning and besides, it is off topic.

    An interesting thread that ran for a short while on alt.war.civil.usa concerned Warren and Humphreys. I have long thought that Meade made a major mistake in not making Warren his chief of staff and putting Humphreys in charge of V Corps. Humphreys had more, more recent, and larger, command experience than Warren. I know Brooks Simpson now lurks here and his thoughts on this would be good for all to hear. Brian Pohanka lurks on alt.war.civil.usa, and he did sort of disagree with me.

    Jim Epperson

    From: (Alexander Cameron)
    Subject: Re: Our buddy Warren

    We're probably going to get some hate mail on this one. I previously posted the business about Capt. Hall trying to convince Warren that there were Confederates in the woods. I believe that Warren had Smith fire a shot, but he gives absolutely not credit to the signallers for giving him any information and clearly they did. His account reads like he went down there and figured it out on his own. Some of the secondary accounts are even worse. He did a great job of getting troops on the hill, I just have a problem with the self serving stuff. To me, the testimony just confirms my feeling that he was not particularly loyal or a "team player". The truth is, he certainly wasn't the only GB participant with an agenda but you sure don't read anything about it, least, I haven't.

    The fellow I really respect, is Gibbon. Gibbon flat tells on himself in his book. It is intellectually honest. He admits to a lot of human frailty. I really admire him. He may have screwed up in the Wilderness, but they all screwed up at some point in time. I also admire his loyalty to Meade and even when he was "duking it out" with Hancock, he was a gentleman about it.

    You're right, Sykes got the shaft. I think ole George did a pretty slick job getting forces to contact. He stood up to Sickles' attempts to shanghai his corps and responded immediately to Mackenzie's request for a brigade.

    We all look at this stuff differently. I can't help relating some of it to my own experiences. I always looked for loyalty and gave it. I simply can't imagine what Meade must have went through with all the newspaper articles, congressional testimony, and intriguing going on among his officers. It must have been fun. :(


    I am much less qualified than yourself to comment on Warren's performance as a corps commander, but from what I do know, I agree. I also agree on the chief of staff issue. Warren should have accepted it prior to Gettysburg. When a brand new army commander wants you to be on his team, you should say "thanks". I think Dave is right about Warren's motives for not taking the chief position. The truth is, I know gosh darn well he is. Take a look at this letter from Warren to his wife.

    Middletown, Md. July 9
    Dear Emily:
    I am very well. I am not chief of staff, as the papers announce with so many compliments to me. I did not want it, so do not feel disappointed. I SHALL DO BETTER, I HOPE, IN THE END. (emphasis is mine, awc :) ) We are on the march. The enemy is cornered, and we shall have another battle. May God continue to prosper our cause, and peace will soon smile on the land.

    Yours [?]

    Boy, I love to see this stuff in black and white. Sounds like he wanted a Corps, doesn't it?


    From: "James F. Epperson" (
    Subject: Re: Our buddy Warren

    On Mon, 25 Dec 1995, Alexander Cameron wrote:
    > Jim,
    > I am much less qualified than yourself to comment on Warren's performance
    > as a corps commander, but from what I do know, I agree.

    My research on Warren was more macro than micro, so you (as the letter you typed in indicates) could well be aware of things I haven't seen.

    Something I came across which really soured me on Warren was that, at the moment he heard that Sedgwick had been shot, he was in the process of writing up a letter to Meade lambasting the performance of all the other corps commanders in the Wilderness. He had the good grace not to finish or send off the letter, but the fact that he was writing it says something very ugly about having him as a subordinate. (And what the hell could he find fault with Hancock over?)

    Your comments regarding Gibbon also struck a chord with me. There has been some discussion of the Buford bio. Has anyone done a Gibbon bio? I've read his book and agree heartily with your assessment, both of him and the book. (Except I am not sure he screwed up in the Wilderness; I think the staff man did.) To merge this with the thread about pursuing Lee, Gibbon is precisely the kind of man I would want to put in Lee to try and cut him off, not that it is a practical suggestion given that he had been shot a few days previous. But anyway, I would =love= to read a good biography of the man.

    BTW, Gibbon's loss may have been more serious during the pursuit than many realize. With Hancock gone, Gibbon is the man Meade would have put in charge of Second Corps, but with both of them gone the corps command devolved on William Hays, of whom history has dutifully recorded very little. But this meant that Second Corps was under very shaky leadership during the pursuit.

    Jim Epperson

    From: (Alexander Cameron)
    Subject: Gibbon

    I am not aware of a current book on Gibbon. However, there is an article on him in the most recent issue of GB mag. It is co-authored by Steven J. Wright who is the curator of the Civil War Library and Museum in Philly. According to the "about the author" blurb, Wright is working on a book based on the Gibbon and Hancock papers dealing with Reams Station. Wright has access to both sets of papers and I am under the impression that there is a LOT of information there. The article is about both Gibbon and the monument recently erected to him at GB. The portion about the man is a broad brush bio. He does not mention the Wilderness episode but it looks like he is going to concentrate on Reams Station.

    I have never met Mr. Wright, but I have corresponded with him several times and he has some diaries there that I want to review. He certainly is in the position to do a good job.

    As far as the incident in the Wilderness, let me confess that I have not looked at it hard. I read Gibbon's account and several secondary source accounts some time ago. I just tossed it out there to show some balance. Maybe I should reach back in and get it. :)

    Anyway, I am a big fan of Gibbon. I just loved the incident where he took over the gun at Antietam and fixed the elevation. Now I believe that. Every darn word of it. He also has the gift of telling it in a manner so that you don't come away thinking he is a braggart.

    Bill (Bill Cameron) says: Here is a starter list on Warren.


    1. Emerson Gifford Taylor, GOUVERNEUR KEMBLE WARREN: LIFE AND LETTERS OF AN AMERICAN SOLDIER, Boston: Hooughton Miffin Company, 1932.
    2. William Powell, THE FIFTH ARMY CORPS, Dayton, Morningside, 1984
    3. Ezra J. Warner, GENERALS IN BLUE, Baton Rouge, Louisiana State University Press, 1964
    Gettysburg specific:

    4. O.O. Norton, THE ATTACK AND DEFENSE OF LITTLE ROUND TOP, Dayton, Morningside, 1983
    5. Warren testimony, REPORT OF THE JOINT COMMITTEE ON THE CONDUCT OF THE WAR, Washington, GPO 1863, Part I, p. 376-388
    6. Bill Cameron, "The Saviors of Little Round Top" GETTYBURG MAGAZINE, vol 8
    Hope this helps.

    James Pettigrew

    Subject: Pettigrew's wounds

    The following information is from "Carolina Cavalier" by Clyde N. Wilson

    At the battle of Seven Pines Gen. Pettigrew received a rifle ball through the throat. It grazed his windpipe, severed an artery and tore the bone and muscle in his right shoulder. His men helped him to dismount and laid him on the field. Gen Pettigrew later said "I refused to allow myself to be taken to the rear....I thought the wound to be fatal; it was useless to take men from the field, under any circumstances for that purpose."

    Lying on the battlefield, Gen. Pettigrew received a gunshot wound to his left arm and was bayonetted in the leg. He was taken prisoner by the 20th Massachusetts and received at a Union field hospital. The Union doctors determined that the arm wound was minor. The bayonet wound was more serious and it was some time before Gen. Pettigrew regained the use of his leg. The wound in his neck caused the damage to his right arm rendering it useless.


    Issac Trimble


    >From the Bachelder Papers, Vol 2 p. 921:

    Letter from Maj. Gen Issac R. Trimble to J. B. Bachelder dated Feb. 8th, 1883:

    J. B. Bachelder
    Dear Sir:
    I enclose you a brief account of what I saw and what I did at Gettysburg -the 1st and 3rd day.

    On reporting to General Hill for orders the 3d day, I read General Lee's order of Battle, and give it to you almost word for word -this- "General Longstreet will make a vigorous attack on our right, Genl. Ewell will make a demonstration on our left; to be converted into a vigorous attack if circumstances justify it. general Hill will hold the center at all hazards."

    R. E. Lee

    If you have not obtained this order, it may be of value.

    I.R. Trimble

    (footnote 153: Original letter in file ends here. Balance of this report is from typed transcript attached to Trimble's letter. Writer not identified and original version not in the file) The following is extracted from the narrative on p930ff:)

    As nothing in Gen'l Ewell's department indicated a design to advance against the enemy, Gen'l Trimble remembering Gen'l Lee's impressive words a few days before to "crush the advance of the enemy and attack him vigorously in detail", or words t to that effect, he approached Gen'l Ewell and said, "General don't you intend t to pursue our sweep and push the enemy vigorously?" His reply as "No, I have orders form Gen' Lee not to bring on a general engagement." to which Gen'l Trimble rejoined, "But Gen'l that order cannot have reference to the present situation, for we have had a general engagement and gained a great victory, and by all military rules we ought to follow up our success, and we are losing golden moments," to which appeal there was no reply. Gen'l Ewell turned and walked slowly about, his whole manner indicating [ir]resolution and that kind of impatience which springs from mutual indecision, or a feeling that three was a momentous crisis, and he did not see clearly what course t to take. His manner separated him from his staff and the approach of others.

    NOTE: (Gen' Lee had issued orders to Gen'l Ewell about June 26th when directed him to march into Penn. "not to bring on a general engagement with the Federal army, with his corps.")

    Deeply regretting the indecision of Gen'l Ewell, Gen'l Trimble left him, and rode around the outskirts of the city on the northern and north eastern side to learn the topography of the security. ..... Returning in half an hour he spoke t Gen'l Ewell and said, "Gen'l if you have decided not to advance against the enemy and we are only to hold our ground, I want to advise that you send a brigade with artillery to take possession of that hill (Culp's Hill). It commands Gettysburg and Cemetery Hill." "How do you know that?" said he. "I have been round there," was the reply, "and you know I am not often mistaken in judging of topography, and if we don't hold that hill, the enemy will certainly occupy it, as it is the key to the whole position about here and I beg you to send a force at once to secure it. "When I need advice from a junior officer, I generally ask it, " was Gen'l Ewell's ungracious reply. when Gen'l Trimble terminated the interview by saying, "Gen'l Ewell I am sorry you don't appreciate my suggestions, you will regret it as long as you live."

    (Footnote 166: The following is from the original letter.) [as continued on page 932]

    Gettysburg When the contest was ended, the first day, about 3:30; I and others urged Gen. Ewell to pursue our success and attack the enemy. This he did not do, on the plea that his troops were not in a condition to do so. Now Rhodes' division, which was the only one that began the fight on our left, had not been seriously injured and was in the finest spirits at the end of the fight. Early's div. came into action late in the contest on our extreme left, and was hardly injured at all; Johnson's division was but a few miles off, and came up about sundown.

    Then, on the maxim of war, that "a routed enemy should be pursued, it seemed plain, that Ewell should have pressed forward, informing Gen. Lee and Gen Hill that he intended to pursue the enemy, and send express to Johnson to hasten forward, and follow him.

    Whether successful or not; that, was the game play and Ewell ought to have taken the responsibility.

    Finding he did not intend to do so, I strongly advised the occupation of Culps Hill at once. This was about half past 3 o'clock, not later than 4 o'clock I am sure. I said to him "that is the key of the position on Cemetery Hill." He answered, "How do you know," I said "I have been round, to north of the town and can see plainly that it commands Cemetery hill - and ought to be occupied by us, or the enemy as soon as possible" - General Ewell did not take any steps to occupy the hill, at once, and on after reflection decided not to attempt it. I think from reports of Federal Officers, Culp Hill was not occupied by any force of Meade's until about 5 to 5:30 P.M.

    Jerry, Penfield, NY

    Women at Gettysburg


    ok..I have a question that builds on the above subject. what would motivate a woman to disguise herself to be a male soldier..and to go out there and fight.

    there was one (maybe more) confederate soldiers (dead :( ) found at gettysburg..

    any info, opinions?

    were there any women fighting that battle in the union ranks? (don't beat me, but...) in the Maine 20th?


    From: (Benedict R Maryniak)

    Regarding females passing as male soldiers - "An Uncommon Soldier" is a slim but interesting book that came out recently and is a collection of letters written by a young woman who passed as a soldier in a NY regiment. She died of disease (in Louisiana I think) and is buried where she died in a Natl Cemetery under her male name. Lauren Burgess (I'm still without my books so forgive an error in spelling) put the book together (the lady who dragged Antietam NMP into court for not letting her reenact a female passing as a male soldier) and Natl Archive staffer DeAnne Blanton helped out with research. I'm a friend of DeAnne's and we've talked a lot about the whole subject. Beyond this book and Tom Lowry's "Sex in the CW", other books that deal with this subject are all rip-offs which repeat the same old stories.

    In times of peace during the 19th Century, women frequently passed for men in order to earn better money and/or to simply get out from under "the woman as a vessel" attitude of the times that imprisoned women in ivory towers. The Uncommon Soldier subject was, in fact, working a male job (Erie Canal-related, I think) when the war came and she joined along with the rest of the boys. It was that simple. Neighbors at home knew of her charade and played along, but her fellow soldiers were completely fooled during most of her time in the regiment.

    There were many more impersonations than you'd suspect. My personal opinion is that most went into the army with a loved one. As officer-of-the-day, Adrian Root came upon a New Jersey unit on picket and one of the "men" was giving birth. He took it pretty calmly and thought it funny that the mother was enlisted as a "nine-month man."

    And here I am, strayed far from the topic.

    Ben Maryniak

    Oliver Howard

    From: Dave Navarre (

    While discussing Lee, Norm wrote: "try Oliver Howard, commander of the XI Corps., AoP. He wasn't even that bad as a general!!"

    I'm not too familiar with OO Howard, but if memory serves, his Corps did collapse through Gettysburg and I've heard he is a sort of "Teflon General" (none of the bad things that happened around him affected his reputation).

    Anyone have some references that can clarify this issue in my snow-enfeebled mind?

    Dave N


    Howard's Eleventh Corps was also the one that collapsed at Chancellorsville, but I'm not certain how much of the blame should rest with Howard, as he inherited the largely German corps from the less-than-mediocre Franz Sigel, I believe. However, I think your point is well taken that, while Howard may be somewhat underappreciated, he had his problems, too. Hell, McClellan was a great humanitarian, too, when it came to the lives of his troops!

    From: (Thad Humphries)


    Stonewall Jackson would agree that Howard was a "good" general. The failure of Howard to guard his right flank made Chancellorsville possible. The "good" general Howard was later sent to Sherman and did do an adequate job in the Atlanta Campaign. After the War he became associated with the Freedmens Bureau and his service there made him a favorite of the Radical Republicans. Much of his favorable standing today rests on that service. His major memorial is, of course, Howard University.

    Sherman's memoirs portray Howard favorably. Sherman says Howard was the unanimous choice to lead the Army of the Tenn. after McPherson was killed-- Logan was a politican while Howard a West Pointer. Logan did leave for a while to campaign for Lincoln in the '64 election.

    _Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee_ by Dee Brown also gives O.O. Howard a good shake for his treatment of the Indians. Not that he was great but better than other whites and, according to Brown, would have done better in Washington allowed.

    Thad Humphries

    For a recent, fresh view of Genl Howard's postwar endeavors, I recommend "A Friend to God's Poor - Edward Parmelee Smith" by Wm H Armstrong. (The University of Georgia Press, Athens GA 30602 - 518 pages - $50 plus postage & handling.) This is another superbly researched, definitive biography from the author of "Warrior in Two Camps - Ely S Parker, Union General and Seneca Chief."

    EP Smith, a Congregational minister born in Connecticut, ran the western department of the United States Christian Commission from 1863 through war's end and then served as a field secretary into 1867. He became US Commissioner of Indian Affairs in 1873 and president of Howard University, Washington DC, during 1876.

    Although not exclusively about Howard, he shows up a great deal in this book.

    Ben Maryniak

    James Kemper

    From: Paul Esposito (
    Subject: Kemper's Wounding
    Recently while on a trip to my in-laws house in Mass., my mother-in-law handed over some Gettysburg related info.

    Well to make a long story short. My mather-in-law is into genealogy. She handed me a copy of her family history. In it a member of her family makes a claim to be the man that shot Kemper during Pickett's charge.

    Myron Jameson was a member of Company C 14th Vermont Volunteers under General Stannard at Gettysburg. He was with the 14th from August 1862 until mustered out on July 30 1863. He died in Vermont from Typhoid fever in May 1865. The quote below is from a family friend who served with Myron at Gettysburg.

    The following is taken from the History of the Jameson Family: (spelling is theirs)

    "We herd the wild cries of the enemy bearin apon us, chargin fast, runnin and yellin like all hell broke. Smoke billowed from our guns as we were rushed by the enemy, but as we fired they fell from our heavy fire. As they dropped, we continued to advance and then engaged their men. Then Myron yelled saying that he shot the grey on the horse, but I couldn't say as we were all busy firing, and reloading, and firing. We learned later that it was Brig. General Kemper who was shot and led the charge against us."

    Is anyone aware of any other folks claiming to be the person who wounded/shot Kemper?


    Please send me the complete citation of the source for this quote: author of the book, full title, place published, publisher, and date of publication, page number. I appreciate it. I have seen no other claims for the wounding of Kemper

    Lee's Health

    From: (John Blair)
    Subject: Lee's condition at Gettysburg

    This was sent several days ago but I have not seen it echoed back. If this is a repost - my appologies.

    Here are a couple of things from Glen Tucker's "High Tide at Gettysburg" regarding Lee's physical condition.

    On page 49 (June 27) he says

    In Maryland and Pennsylvania Lee apparently made the mistake of eating an abundance of fresh fruit. The entire army indulged in the cherries. On his earlier invasion of Maryland a lad named Leighton Parks had met him and now Parks returned with a quantity of raspberries for the General. Fresh raw fruit undoubtedly was the cause of Lee's partial indisposition on the second day of the battle of Gettysburg.

    Later on page 88 (June 29) Tucker is discussing Lee's aggravation regarding the missing Stewart.

    Lee's apprehension extending almost to physical agony, impressed itself forcibly on Dr. J. L. Suesserott, one of Chambersurg's leading physicians, although the doctor did not understand its cause. He went to Lee on Monday, June 29, to obtain an exemption of his neighbor's blind mare form seizure. While Lee had the paper prepared, the doctor studied the features and movements of the noted commander. He said he had never seen so much emotion depicted on a human countenance as on Lee's. "With his hands at time clutching his hair, and with con- tracted brow, he would walk with rapid strides for a few rods and then, as if he bethought himself of his actions, he would with a sudden jerk produce an entire change in his features and demeanor and cast an in- quiring gaze on me, only to be followed in a moment by the same con- tortions of face and agitation of person" Even if allowance is made for some exaggeration, it is clear that Lee was deeply disturbed or Physically unwell.

    Imagine that Lee is so distracted that he momentarily forgets that there is another man in the tent with him. He paces, turns and realizes now that he is not alone. He is focused on, or perhaps obsessed with Stewart's whereabouts. Now re-read the Dr's quote. He (Lee) sees that he is not alone. He "casts an inquiring gaze" and may be about to ask, "Can you tell me where Stewart is?", or some such. Before he speaks he knows that his guest will know nothing about Stewart and begins his pacing anew. As I read the Dr's words I see Lee repeating this behaviour over and over again. The commander of the Army of Northern Virginia probably has an upset stomach with diarrhea, may be mentally unbalanced, is certainly distracted at this moment atleast, and probably was suffering the effects of a heart condition. Now the question is not whether Sheen did justice to Lee, the question is, how the HELL did Lee manage to do so well at Gettysburg? ('scuze me, ladies) This raises another question. If Lee had decided to temporarily relieve himself from command, who would he have placed in his stead, (my guess is Longstreet), and how would the new commander have behaved differently than Lee? (or is it "differently from"?)

    One of my facinations with history is how fragile, for lack of a better word, the reality is. What tiny events can conspire to change all of history. The famous three cigars of Sharpsburg, for instance. If the two enlistedmen had taken a break just 10 yards distant from those cigars....... If Lee had not had a couple of handsfulls of probably not quite ripe rasspberries..... If it had not been foggy on the Gulf of Tonkin -- yea, I know, Johnson would have found another excuse - the ba@#$^^! But I digress.

    John Blair

    Ghosts of Gettysburg

    From: " 'Lisa Mucha'" ( Subject: Ghosts

    Re: Ghosts of Gburg

    The entire "ghosts of gburg" phenomenon started (it seems to me) after Mark Nesbitt published his first tewo ghost story books. They are pretty good, but I must say I am rather disappointed with the new third one. I have the highest respect for Mark Nesbitt ... he did the LRT portion of a tour I was on once... but I thought the third book had weak stories (I did not buy a lot of them) and too many references to Nesbitt's other books (as in 'buy these,too').

    A friend of mine went on one of the tours operated out of the building Greystone is in on Steinwehr Ave (I think). She said the information was pretty good, but they overbooked the tour and it was packed. So if you are looking for ghosts, they ain't going to show up next to a gaggle of tourists (sorry, if I sound crabby...I spent the morning on an archeological dig to excavate my car from the snow 8-P ).

    In addition, the battlefield was full of more than the usual tourists the one time I was there in the dark last summer. People were driving past Devil's Den and also walking through that area looking for ghosts. It seems to me that this is not so bad 'cause the presence of extra tourists may keep some of the recent vandalism down during the night.

    Anyway, I would recommend the first two Nesbitt books, but when you get to Gburg and see all the ghost stuff, please view it with a touristy grain of salt! 8-)

    Lisa Mucha

    Gullian Weir

    Subject: Weir's Battery C 5th US

    Hello GDG

    I have quickly reviewed the Bachelder Papers all 3 vols and I find the vols extremely useful. I have just one question for our group.

    In Vol 2 a few letters deal with the abandoment of Weir's guns on the second day near the Wheatfield etc. I am at my office and do not have the exact pages handy etc. I can furnish if necessary.

    It appears some have accused Weir of being a coward etc.

    I have not read of this incident before, can some of our more knowledgable members shed some light on this incident or direct me to a better source on the matter.

    Marc Riddell
    Cooper's Battery B 1st Pa Light Artillery

    From: ( TERRY MOYER) Subject: Re: Weir's Battery C 5th US Marc,
    The letters written by Hancock to Bachelder concerning Weir and the 2d days incident with his battery are very interesting aren't they? After I read about Weir I became interested in the incident also and did a little investigating. Since the 19th Maine was originally assigned to guard the battery I went to Maine at Gettysburg for an account of the incident from that regiments point of view. The regimental sketch spoke of the fighting which led to the abandonment of the guns of Weir's battery. Fortunately Maine at Gettysburg has been reprinted and is available for $45 in Gburg. I can get the name of the publisher for you if you are interested. The 13th Vt recovered the guns of the battery. I have in my collection a speech entitled: Vermont at Gettysburgh, which was given before the Vt Historical Society, July 6, 1870, bu George Scott, 1st Sgt of Co. G, 13th Vt. Here is an excerpt from that speech dealing with the recovery of the guns:

    "As Hancock saw Randall he said 'Colonel where is your regiment'? 'Close at hand' said Randall. 'Good,' said Hancock, 'the enemy are pressing me hard - they have just captured that battery yonder (a battery about 20 rods in front) and are dragging it from the field. Can you retake it'? 'I can, and pretty damn quick too, if you will let me.'

    At that moment they both observed a rebel brigade deploying from the woods to the left (codori thicket - twm) and making for the guns. In a moment Randall was at the head of his regiment ... He led us into the gap. We were now in front of the enemy who was dragging off our guns. They did not await us; many fled, others threw themselves into the grass, we passed over them, and they were picked up by other regiments in the rear. They doubtless supposed from the steadiness and rapidity of our movements that we were fresh troops and much more numerous than we were. We deployed in line of battle, discharged our muskets into the enemy and gave three cheers, and then at the command 'Charge'! bayonets bore down upon the enemy. We retook the guns and dragged them to the rear. The artillerymen to whom they belonged came up with horses, took them from us and thanked us for recapturing them. This was battery 'C' of the fifth regular artillery"

    Perhaps tomorrow I can drag out the account of the 19th Maine and excerpt it for you.

    I noticed as I was reading the Hancock correspondence that he would be visiting the field along with Weir and a number of other personages to tour the area with Bachelder. It so happens that Hancock, Bachelder and the entire tour group was photographed during this visit, once in front of the High Water mark (before the iron fence was in place, as I recall) and once in front of the site where Hancock was wounded. At least one of these photos appear in the Gburg magazine article about Bachelder by Sauers, entitled something along the lines of "John B Bachelder Gov't Historian of the Battle of Gettysburg" the issue number I think is 3, though as you can tell I have none of this material close at hand to check right now. Although Weir is not identified in the photo caption in this article (nor in other sources where I have seen this photograph) he certainly must be one of the members of this group. I tried to pick out the tortured soul who must be Weir, but couldn't come up with any candidate who would obviously be Weir.

    (According to the Ladd's, Weir could not stand the shame of abandoning his guns on the 2d day of the battle, and eventually committed suicide by shooting himself. When you read his letters in the Bachelder volumes you can see the turmoil in his soul.)

    Terry Moyer

    From: John Kelly (
    Harry Pfanz wrote a short section about Gulian Weir who was placed near the Codori barn on the right of Humphreys (III Corps)almost at the Emmitsburg Road. Weir's fight is described in Pfanz's book GETTYSBURG-THE SECOND DAY pp377-378. Weir did indeed lose three guns, and never got over it. He finally shot himself in 1886 at Fort Hamilton in Brooklyn NY. I have also seen something else about Weir in another source, but I do not remember the title, unfortunately, and am not able to find it in the disorder I call an office.

    Regards, Jack Kelly

    From: ( TERRY MOYER)
    Subject: Re: Weir's Battery C 5th US

    Marc and GDG,
    Another place that you would want to look to find information would be regimental histories for the 19th Maine or 13th Vt (if they exist - Ben Maryniak would know about that).

    John Kelly brought up Pfanz's 2d Day book. At least that source is easy to locate!

    Here is Randall's account:
    Series 1, Vol 27 Pt 1, Page 351-353
    Report of Col. Francis V. Randall, Thirteenth Vermont Infantry,
    July 10, 1863.

    GENERAL: In compliance with your request, I make the following report of the part taken by my regiment (Thirteenth Vermont) July 1, 2, and 3 instant: ... The brigade then marched to Gettysburg, arriving there on July 1, at about 5 p. m. My regiment, with the Fourteenth and Sixteenth, took position on Cemetery Hill, in rear of our line of battle, made up of the first and Eleventh Corps.
    On the morning of the 2d, we occupied substantially the same position until about 2 p. m. , when I was ordered to advance five of my companies, under Lieutenant-Colonel Munson, to support a battery on our front. Soon after this, I was ordered to advance the balance of my regiment a little to the front and to the left of our former position, which brought us nearly in rear of the right of the Second Corps. This took me entirely out of the line occupied by the rest of our brigade, and I received no further orders from our brigade headquarters during the remainder of that day. A heavy fight was going on in wi received some injury from the artillery fire of the rebels without being able to engage in the fight. At this time an officer, whom I did not know at the moment, but who proved to be General Doubleday, came galloping over the hill from General Hancock's position, and approached my regiment. After having found what regiment we were, and making a few inspiring remarks to my men, he directed and report to General Hancock, whom I would find there, and hard it before I could get there, I started, riding in advance of my regiment to meet General Hancock and find where I was needed, so as to be able to place my men in position without exposing them too long under fire. As I reached the ridge or highest ground between the cemetery and Little Round Top Mountain, I met General Hancock, who was encouraging and rallying his men to hold on to the position. He told me the rebels had captured a battery he had there, and pointed out to me the way they had gone with it, and asked me if I could retake it. I told him I thought I could, and that I was willing to try. He said it would be a hazardous job, and he would not order it, but, if I thought I could do it, I might try. By this time my regiment had come up, and I moved them to the front far enough so that when I deployed them in line of battle they would leave Hancock's men in their rear. They were now in column by division, and I gave the order to deploy in line, instructing each captain as to what we were to do as they came on to the line, and, taking my position to lead them, gave the order to advance. At this time my horse was killed, and I fell to the ground with him. While on the ground, I discovered a rebel line debouching from the woods on our left, and forming substantially across our track about 40 rods on ourfront. We received one volley from them, which did us very little injury, when my men sprang forward with the bayonet with so much precipitancy that they appeared to be taken wholly by surprise, and threw themselves in the grass, surrendering, and we passed over them. General Hancock followed up the movement, and told me to press on for the guns and he would take care of the prisoners, which he did, and we continued our pursuit of the guns, which we overtook about half way to the Emmitsburg road, and recaptured them, with some prisoners. These guns, as I am told, belong to the Fifth U. S. Regulars, Lieutenant Weir. There were four of them. We were now very near the Emmitsburg road, and I advanced my line to the road, and sent my adjutant (James S. Peck) back to inform General Hancock of our position. While he was gone, the rebels advanced two pieces of artillery into the road about 100 rods to the south of us, and commenced to shell us down the road, whereupon I detached one company, and advanced them under cover of the road, dug way, and fences, with instructions to charge upon and seize those guns, which they did most gallantly. We also captured the rebel picket reserve, consisting of 3 officers and 80 men, who had concealed themselves in a house near by. In pursuance of orders from General Hancock, we now slowly fell back to the main line of battle. It was dark, and no further operation took place on our part that night.

    Same source, pages 879-88-

    Report of Lieutenant Gulian V. Weir, Battery C, Fifth U. S. Artillery,
    First Regular Brigade.

    September 20, 1863.
    SIR: I have the honor to report the part Battery C, Fifth U. S. Artillery, took during the engagements of July 2 and 3, at the battle of Gettysburg. July 2. - Left camp near Taneytown, Md. , and marched to within a mile and a half of Gettysburg, Pa. , and went into park. After remaining here until the afternoon, moved to the front, by order of General Tyler. About 4 o'clock was ordered by Major-General Hancock to take up a position about 500 yards to the right and front, with orders to watch my front, as our troops were falling back on the left at the time. I was ordered by General Gibbon to open fire to the left with solid shot at 4 degrees elevation. In a short time the enemy showed themselves in front, and, in their advance toward the battery, met with no opposition whatever from our infantry, who were posted on my right and front. I opened with solid shot and spherical case, and as they continued to advance, I opened with canister. Soon it was reported to me that we were out of canister. The enemy being within a few rods of us, I immediately limbered up, and was about to retire when a regiment of infantry took position on my left and rear, and opened fire. I immediately came into battery again, hoping that our infantry would drive the enemy back, as their force seemed to be small and much scattered. The enemy were too close. I endeavored to get my guns off the field; succeeded in getting off but three, as some of the drivers and horses were disabled while in the act of limbering up. My horse was shot at this time, and, as I was rising from the ground I was struck with a spent ball, and everything seemed to be very much confused. I hastened off with the remaining guns. After the enemy had been driven back by the infantry, the other guns were brought off ...
    Very respectfully, your obedient servant,
    G. V WEIR,
    First Lieutenant Fifth Artillery, Commanding Battery.

    If this large post didn't "Weir" you out, I can probably excerpt a somewhat smaller account from the Maine at Gettysburg tonight. If I see a flurry of "unsubscribe" messages this afternoon, I will take the hint and desist...

    Terry Moyer

    Subject: Re: Weir's Battery C 5th US

    In a message dated 96-01-30 14:14:16 EST, you write:

    I usually study Gettysburg and the Artillery as my 2 favorite CW subjects. An artilleryman did not want to lose his guns at any cost and I can understand where Gulian Weir was upset with himself to the point of committing suicide in 1886.

    The cannoners themselves were originally only issued artillery sabers as the army wanted the men to protect the guns at all costs. Only officers and NCOs had pistols at the beginning, but many men acquired pistols on their own. The gun was like an arm to the artilleryman and to lose one to the enemy was not on their list of things to happen.

    Marc Riddell

    Cooper's Battery B


    As an aside, virtually any of the batteries that lost guns at Gettysburg had similar contretemps in the post-battle liturature to a greater or lesser degree. Weir's example was extreme, but not that far from common.

    Dave Powell

    Francis Barlow

    Subject: Barlow...boy general...
    Greetings all:
    Jim: I agree...he has a most interesting history....he was known as one of the 'boy generals' not because of his age but because he was clean shave, gentlemanly manners, and well kept as a soldier...not untidy.... During GB he was a Brig Gen. in the XI Corps....he did however come back from his wound and serve under US Grant as a Division Commander in the II Corps... he had a rather good run of victories under Grant including "Mule Shoe' spotsylvania, bloody angle..captured 3000 Confrd. 20 guns and 30 reg. colors., Saylers Creek, and Farmville...sometime after Gen Lee surrenders Barlow was commissioned Maj Gen I think on 25 May 65... When he returned home he entered the NY politic arena as you know and you are going to have to help me with this...he was involved in breaking up a major ring of ____ something and I can not remember what...but it made him famous for the time....

    All in All quite an admirable history...we should all be so lucky eh?


    From: "James F. Epperson" (
    Subject: Barlow

    I confess to being a Barlow fan, even if he was (a) a lawyer, (c) from New York, and (c) something of a snob with regard to his German troops. Despite this, there is something appealing about a man who works his way up from private to general as quickly as he did. He also was eccentric, which the AoP needed more of, compared to the ANV. I mean, wearing that flannel shirt all the time and beating on stragglers with his cavalry saber. The famous II Corps picture from spring, 1864, showing Gibbon, Birney, Barlow, and Hancock, is one of my favorites. If memory serves, Gettysburg was his first battle as a division commander, so I am willing to excuse his failures on that account, somewhat.

    So, what is the consensus? Is Epperson being a hopeless romantic, or is Barlow really a decent officer who had a bad day at Gettysburg? (Inquiring minds want to know . . . )

    Jim Epperson

    Subject: Barlow/boy general/Correction/Question
    In a message dated 96-02-02 03:33:35 EST, Mr Ed the talking Horse wrote:

    During GB he was a Brig Gen. in the XI Corps.
    Humbliest of Apologies to all... Altho the Good Gen was indeed a Brig Gen. in the XI Corp he was indeed a Division Commander as well....this is my first lasting impression of conflicting information between sources...why I did not use Coddington first I may never know...
    >From the "Historical Times, Illustrated, Encylopedia of the Civil War" I pulled the fact that he was a Brig Gen and Brigade Commander...upon my good friend Paul's watchful eye fell this grabbing my Coddingtons and checking the Official Rosters under the XI Corps...bigger than life...Brig Gen Barlow, First Division Commander...XI Corp....sorry for this...all remaining information is fine... And now I find another good Mainer steps in when Barlow goes down...must be very, very famous (this is for Eric (g)) Brig Gen Adelbert Ames.. hmm upon reading his history he was somewhat decorated...6 brevet ranks..Medal of Honour...all this said I do not have an opinion of his Command abilities and given Howards unique abilities for getting recognition I will not assume Ames to be anything until I read further...

    Question: related (sort of)...
    Does anyone have handy the dates of death of W.S. Hancock and F.C. Barlow.. I have early 1886 on Hancock and Jan 1896 on Barlow...but I would like to pinpoint the dates if available...
    Thanks ahead of time for the help...
    One last Question for today...I promise (as my noses starts growing): Can anyone elaborate on the care given Barlow by Gordon and how Barlow was ableto re-join the USA under Grant...Barlow was not considered a POW.?? I realize he was left for dead...I guess I need further light....References only are perfectly fine...I just need to understand this situation?

    E-mail me at I paid my bill this OK...(vbg)


    From: (Benedict R Maryniak)
    Subject: RIP, Arabella G Barlow

    Barlow married Arabella Griffith April 20 1861, the day before he marched off with the 12th NYSM as a private. Arabella joined the US Sanitary Commission in the summer of 1862, although she would probably have spent most of her time in hospitals because her husband seemed to be recovering from wounds through most of the war. She indeed died 7-27-1864 in Washington DC of a fever contracted in her hospital work. Frannie then married into the Shaw family (as in Robert G Shaw) and was a co-founder of the American Bar Assn .

    Sam Wilkeson

    From: (Benedict R Maryniak)
    Subject: Wilkeson
    To answer Doug M's question about Sam Wilkeson.

    The best resources for Sam Wilkeson would be Louis M Starr's "Bohemian Brigade - Newsmen In Action" (1954), J Cutler Andrews' "The North Reports The CW" (1955), and me.

    "Judge" Samuel Wilkeson was newspaperman Sam Wilkeson's father. Though he was dead by 1849, he was a founder of Buffalo (having talked DeWitt Clinton into ending the Erie Canal there) and of the American Colonization Socty. The Wilkesons were big-time wealthy - shipping, iron foundries, etc - and nextdoor neighbors of Millard Fillmore. The Judge's politics influenced his grandsons when the CW came. In addition to Sam's son Bayard, eight other grandsons were in the Union army and many not even 18. There was a 78th NYV Major, a Lieut killed with the 100th NYV, Col of the 11th NY Cav, pvt in 15th PA Cav, Lieut in the 21st NYV, Lieut in 1st Pa Btn, and Bayard's brother Frank who eventually took his place in Battery G.

    In command of Battery G, 4th US Artillery, on July 1, First Lieutenant Bayard Wilkeson took his Napoleon guns twelve miles on the Emmitsburg Road to reach Gettysburg that morning. Passing directly through the village, he reported to General Francis C Barlow whose XI Corps division was engaged north of town. Having noted Confederate activity on his right, Barlow dispatched Wilkeson to an elevation that would later be dubbed "Barlow's Knoll." Wilkeson initially deployed along a ridge on which the county poorhouse stood, ahead of federal infantry. Leapfrogging to the knoll's summit, Wilkeson's battery quickly drew fire from artillery battalions under Lieutenant Colonels Hilary P Jones and Thomas H Carter. Wilkeson went down "almost at first fire," wounded in his right leg. Eleventh Corps artillery chief Major Thomas W Osborn met Bayard being carried to the rear. "One leg had been cut off at the knee by a cannon shot," he recalled, "I knew at a glance that the wound was fatal." When XI Corps fled their field, Wilkeson was left behind at the poorhouse.
    New York Times correspondent Samuel Wilkeson reached Meade's headquarters that night, learning only that his son had been wounded and captured. Sam found out about Bayard's death and recovered his body after federal forces regained the battlefield. Before returning to Buffalo with the remains, "Samuel Wilkeson's Thrilling Word Picture Of Gettysburgh" was filed.


    Who can write the history of a battle whose eyes are immovably fastened upon a central figure of transcendingly important interest - the dead body of an oldest born, crushed by a shell in a position where a battery should never have been sent, and abandoned to death in a building where surgeons dared not to stay?

    The battle of Gettysburgh. I am told that it commenced on the 1st of July, a mile north of the town, between two weak brigades of infantry and some doomed artillery and the whole force of the rebel army. Among other costs of this error was the death of Reynolds. Its value was priceless, however, though priceless was the young and the old blood with which it was bought . . . the marvelous outspread upon the board of death of dead soldiers and dead animals - of dead soldiers in blue, and dead soldiers in grey - more marvelous to me than anything I have ever seen in war - are a ghastly and shocking testimony to the terrible fight . . .

    Oh, you dead, who at Gettysburgh have baptized with your blood the second birth of Freedom in America, how you are to be envied! I rise from a grave whose wet clay I have passionately kissed, and I look up and see Christ spanning this battlefield with his feet and reaching fraternally and lovingly up to heaven. His right hand opens the gates of Paradise - with his left he beckons to these mutilated, bloody, swollen forms to ascend."

    Sam brought Bayard's body home to Buffalo and it was buried without military overtones, though his marker is an upturned Napoleon tube. His son Frank ran off and joined the army soon after, and the frantic father spent weeks hunting for him. But that's another story. The entire Wilkeson clan is planted on a knoll in Buffalo's Forest Lawn Cemetery. Every so often I go up there and think about how, one of these days, I'll write the article on Bayard et al that I owe the CW Society's Bill Miller.

    PS -A&E's Civil War Journal contacted me about Wilkeson, gladly took my stuff, and then didn't list me in those credits that fly by at the end of each episode. But I'm in good company. They did that recent thing on the Lincoln assasination and left out Jim Getty's name even though he did Lincoln's voice.

    Ben Maryniak

    Subject: Re: Wilkeson

    Ben; Thanks for the grea post on Wilkeson.

    Can you shed some light on the Wilkeson "myth". I first heard the story from a GB guide a few years ago as to how, after receiving the shot, Bayard cut off his loosely hanging leg with his pocket knife and crawled on hands and knees to a house over a mile away (probably all up hill too).

    After hearing this story, I began looking for references to it in print. The oldest one I found in William C. Oates "Battle of Gettysburg" essay from his "Lost Opportunities..." work. Oates goes one step further and says Wilkeson was offered water but gave the canteen to someone more needy, then expired. What great romantic stuff!!


    From: (Benedict R Maryniak)
    Subject: Wilkeson

    Jerry asked about Bayard's battlefield legends.

    Although the leg-lopping is probably accurate (the Time-Life Gburg volume shows the actual knife from someone's collection!), it has obscured much of the less-sensational aspects of Bayard's story. My worst nightmare would be to have a gung-ho kid like him as a commander. Imagine you're satisfied with three squares, etc, in the US Regulars and here comes this teenager who gallops the battery when everyone else trots, who rushes out ahead of the Corps to deploy, who cuts away his own leg 'cause it's in his way, and then orders the men who carry him to the almshouse back to their posts! But, then, many battery commanders were pistols - Alonzo Cushing, Hubert Dilger, Pelham, Pegram, etc.

    Ben Maryniak

    Alonzo Cushing

    From: lawrence (Dennis Lawrence)


    Someone posted recommending Kent Masterson Brown's _Cushing of Gettysburg_ . I second the motion. The book opens with Cushing's burial at West Point July 12, 1863.

    "General (Winfield) Scott, massive in size, stood erect at the grave. Alonzo Cushing's grandfather, a volunteer in the Chautauqua County Militia, had followed Scott in 1812... The old general...knew Alonzo's prominent uncles and cousins from Ohio and Massachusetts well. Scott's career had spanned many years and it profoundly affected three generations of Cushings. General Scott would die in three years and his final resting place would be about twenty paces from Cushing's grave site in the West Point Cemetery.... The corps of cadets lined up in columns, and on command, fired three crisp volleys that resounded up and down the Hudson Valley. The last earthly remains of Lt. and Brvt. Captain Alonzo Hereford Cushing was lowered into the grave. The ceremony was over. Nearby, Milton Cushing, Alonzo's older brother wept. The air was still. As the smoke cleared the Cadet Corps reassembled in a column of platoons and marched back to the summer encampment on the Plain. In death, the heroic Alonzo Cushing, a lad born of solid New England Puritan stock, was united with fellow West Point comrades and kindred spirits: Lt. George Augustus 'Little Dad' Woodruff; Lt. Justin E. Dimmick; brilliant Col. Patrick Henry 'Paddy;' O'Rorke;..Brig. Gen. Edmund ;'Ned' Kirby and Lt. Charles E. Hazlett."
    From: Susan & Eric Wittenberg
    By the by, Cushing is buried right next to John Buford. In fact, if you read Brown's book, there are references in there to the fact that visitors to Buford's grave trampled Alonzo Cushing's to the great distress of his mother. Also, Benjamin F. "Grimes" Davis is buried on the other side of Buford in the West Point Cemetery. Pretty good company, if you ask me....


    Wesley Culp and Jennie Wade

    Usually the armies were good about rounding up local soldiers to serve as Guides. One of the first things Longstreet did when he got to Chickamauga, in GA, was to find two brothers in one of his regiments whose farm was in the middle of the battlefield and use them as guides.

    AT Gettysburg, at least one such source was overlooked. Wesley Culp - of Culp's Hill fame - was serving in the Stonewall Brigade, but was never called upon to help out. ( TERRY MOYER) says:

    I know that someone had posted a request some time ago, requesting information concerning instances of brothers fighting on opposite sides during the Civil War. In _The Jennie Wade Story (A True and Complete Account of the Only Civilian Killed During the Battle of Gettysburg)_ by Cindy Small there is a description of such an engagement called according to the author, 'the battle of Carter's Woods', in Va. In this case Wesley Culp in the 2d Va. Inf. and William Culp, his brother in the 87th Pa Vol., are said to have both participated in the battle on opposite sides. See page 16, 1st paragraph. The book is published by Thomas Publications (address is on the web site) and is readily available in the burg. The source cited for this reference is the Gettysburg Times, April 28, 1973. (Nikki Roth-Skiles) says:

    Along this same line, Greg Coco in his books _On The Bloodstained Field_, On The Bloodstained Field II_ and _War Stories_ writes of brothers who fought on opposite sides at Gettysburg. In most of the cases in his books, if not all, the brothers were reunited at Gettysburg upon one being taken prisoner by the other side. In one case, they were actually in units about 100 yards apart. These books are also published by Thomas Publications and are readily available - where else - the Burg!! (Nikki Roth-Skiles) says:

    According to Cindy Small's book, _The Jennie Wade Story_, 1991, Thomas Publications - the McClellan family (Jennie's sister who had the baby and at whose home Jennie was killed) still believed in 1991 that Jack Skelly had sent a message to Jennie with Wesley Culp, but since no one involved had survived, there was no way to prove it. Since the letter was never delivered or found, no one knows what was written in it. As to where Wesley Culp was buried - "On the evening of July 3, B.S. Pendleton, an orderly with the Stonewall Brigade, told Wesley's sisters the sad news of Culp's death. He soon left their home after minutely describing the burial spot as he had taken the pains to remember it. Wesley was supposedly buried under a crooked tree on Culp's Hill, his grave plainly marked. Wesley's sisters, Annie and Julia searched for their brother's grave along with uncles and cousins, but all looked in vain for the body. They found dozens of broken trees and lots of bodies under them, but they never found Wesley. They were able only to find the stock of a rifle with the words "W. Culp" carved on it." The author goes on to theorize maybe the family found the body but left it there due to possible anger by the residents over burying him in a local cemetery.


    John Kelly says:

    During our cemetery tour, the rumors about Jennie Wade's character were mentioned in an off-handed manner. This is the first I've heard of this, but the rumors/facts/ speculation were apparently virulent enough to drive the family to move to Iowa. Is there any one who has documentation on this, or more information to substantiate these rumors?


    Jack Kelly

    I know a few Gettysburg residents, and they all seem to echo the same sentiments; one said that she wasn't baking bread in that house; she was entertaining soldiers. I doubt if there is any documentation, and the whole thing sounds like the typical kind of character assasination that people like to go into about well-known people, and also the usual local questioning of a single woman's character, but there might be something to it...

    Stephen Haas ( TERRY MOYER) says:

    Cindy Small (Greg Coco's wife) put out a small book through Dean Thomas publishers (see Web page: [book-slingers] for ordering info) entitled: _The Jennie Wade Story / A true and completed account of the only civilian killed during the Battle of Gettysburg_

    The book has just about everything that is known about Jenny (Ginny) Wade included in it (the full details of the Jack Skelly, Wesley Culp, Jenny Wade 'message' story, etc.). There are several small appendices at the end covering non-story line related asides such as: II. The Moral Factor in Determining the Reputation of Mary Virginia Wade (pg 60-62). III The Relationship Between Jennie Wade and Jack Skelly(62-64) IV. Why Was John Burns antagonistic toward Jennie Wade and others in Gettysburg.

    I don't have time to excerpt from these this a.m. (got to go to work), but this book contains some great information about the stranger-than-you-think story of Jennie (such as her 3 burials).

    Wm Howard: you can pick this book up anywhere in the burg; especially the visitor's center and/or J.Wade house.

    Terry Moyer (Tom Desjardin) says:

    Like so many other wonderful Gettysburg books (shameless plug for my publisher) THE JENNIE WADE STORY is available through Thomas Publications.

    Regarding the source of this HIGHLY SPECULATIVE discussion about Jennie's character

    In her account of the battle, Tillie Pierce Alleman wrote of a young man living with her family on Baltimore Street. His name was Sam and he was Jennie's brother. Jennie lived diagonally across B'more street in the house now occupied by the GBPA. Jennie was worried about her brother who tried to take and hide the Pierce horses.

    "About this time the boy's sister, who was standing a short distance off, screamed at the top of her voice to Mother: 'If the Rebs take Sam off, I don't know what I'll do with you folks!' Thus holding us responsible for her brother Sam's safety even in times like that."

    Later in the day (July 1) Jennie apparently told CSA soldiers that Tillie's father was a "black Abolitionist; so black, that he was turning black; also that he had two sons in the Union army, whom he supposed had taken as much from the South as they were now taking from him." Tillie believed that this caused the CSA men to keep the Pierce's horses.

    "I am afraid her (Jennie's) sympathies were not as much for the Union as they should have been. She certainly manifested a very unkind disposition toward our family, who had been doing all we could for her brother. It would surprise a great many to learn who this person was, but as no detraction is intended, I will dismiss the subject at once."

    John Burns once made a sort of flippant comment about Jennie as well...

    "I knew Miss Wade very well. The less said about her the better. The story about her loyalty, her being killed while serving Union soldiers, etc., is all of fiction, got up by some sensation correspondent. You can refer to any loyal citizen for the truth...I could call her a she-rebel."

    Most of these statements could reasonably be attributed to either schoolgirl jealousies or Burns jeaolousy over Jennie as a competitor for local hero status. It is interesting, however, that so many claim she was promiscuous or "loose" as if any criticism of a 19th century woman must be really about that.

    Cindy Small's book offers other information as well.

    Tom Desjardin


    John Watts DePeyster

    Susan and Eric Wittenberg says:

    Hi, GDG--
    I wanted to pass on an interesting read for those interested in a different twist on the Sickles controversy. One of Sickles' closest friends was a man named John Watts DePeyster, Bvt. Maj. Gen. of the New York State Militia. DePeyster, who was a first cousin of Phil Kearny, apparently wrote a series of anonymous arictles under the pen name "Anchor". I first became aware of Anchor when I wrote my Buford article, and am now, after a good bit of dialogue with Bill Cameron, finishing a mansucript for G-burg Magazine on Anchor and another manuscript written regarding Buford's role on July 1. I originally thought Anchor was Buford's signal officer, Aaron B. Jerome. However, after tonight finishing re-reading the entire text of a short book called "Gettysburg and After", published by DePeyster in 1867, I have come to conclusion that DePeyster was probably Anchor. Anchor may have been Jerome, but there are a few clues which arise in subsequent articles which have caused me to re-evaluate my original opinion that Anchor was Jerome.

    In any event, Anchor and DePeyster both (DePeyster signed a piece or two in this book in his own name) strongly advocate for Sickles, and provide some interesting insight into the whole Sickles controversy. The book was reprinted by Olde Soldier Books in 1987, and is available from Morningside. I recommend it for those interested in reading more about this controversy.

    From: (Benedict R Maryniak) (Benedict R Maryniak) says: Thought I'd add a bit more on Major John Watts De Peyster. He was the namesake of New York GAR Post #71, Tivoli, Dutchess County. Post #71 was chartered in 1873, and the charter was revoked 1876. De Peyster was the son of a wealthy old Dutchess County family who met with what he perceived (and declared) to be prejudiced resistance from Abe Lincoln on down when he attempted to raise regiments. He joined 11th NY Cavalry as 1st Lt Co I June 1862 and was mustered out the same month. He was mustered as Major 1st NY Light Arty 6-26-1862 and dismissed 8-14-63, but dismissal revoked 7-3-1866 and he was listed as discharged to date 8-14-63. Eventually named brevet colonel US Vols, brevet colonel NY Vols. By a special act of the NY legislature (apparently very, very special), De Peyster was named brevet major general of NY National Guard. He died 4-12-1873.

    Ben Maryniak, Buffalo CWRT

    Carrie Sheads (Benedict R Maryniak) says:

    Dennis - Carrie Sheads ran a "female seminary" in the gingerbreaded house on the Chambersburg Road depicted in Frassanito's "Journey" book. The house was filled with wounded Yankees as the Johnnies swept toward town on the first day. Colonel Wheelock of the 97th NYV was in the basement, winded, 51 years old, overweight, when - well, I'll let Frank Moore tell the story . .

    "Among the last to leave the field were the 97th NY Infantry, commanded by Lt Col Charles Wheelock, who, after fighting hand-to-hand as long as there was a shadow of hope, undertook to lead his broken column through the only opening in the enemy's lines, which were fast closing around him. Arriving on the grounds of Oakridge Seminary, the gallant colonel found his only avenue of escape effectually closed, and, standing in a vortex of fire, from front, rear, and both flanks, encouraged his men to fight with the naked bayonet, hoping to force a passage through the walls of steel whch surrounded him. Finding all his efforts vain, he ascended the steps of the seminary, and waved a white pocket handkerchief in token of surrender. The rebels, not seeing it, or taking no notice of it, continued to pour their murderous volleys into the helpless ranks. The colonel then opened the door, and called for a large white cloth. Carrie Sheads stood there, and readily supplied him with one. When the rebels saw this token of surrender they ceased firing, and the colonel went into the basement to rest himself, for he was thoroughly exhausted. Soon a rebel officer came in, with a detail of men, and, on entering, declared, with an oath, that he would show them 'southern grit.' He then began taking the officers' side arms. Seeing Col Wheelock vainly endeavoring to break his sword, which was of trusty metal, and resisted all his efforts, the rebel demanded the weapon; but the colonel was of the same temper as his sword, and turning to the rebel soldier, declared he would never surrender his sword to a traitor while he lived. The rebel then drew a revolver, and told him if he did not surrender his sword he would shoot him. But the colonel was a veteran, and had been in close places before. Drawing himself up proudly, he tore open his uniform, and still grasping his well-tried blade, bared his bosom, and bade the rebel 'shoot,' but he would guard his sword with his life. At this moment, Elias Sheads, Carrie's father, stepped between the two, and begged them not to be rash; but he as soon pushed aside, and the rebel repeated his threat. Seeing the danger to which the colonel was exposed, Miss Sheads rushed between them, and besought the rebel not to kill a man so completely in his power; there was already enough blood shed, and why add another defenceless victim to the list? Then turning to the colonel, she pleaded with him not to be so rash, but to surrender his sword, and save his life; that by refusing he would lose both, and the government would lose a valuable officer. But the colonel still refused, saying, 'This sword was given me by my friends for meritorious conduct, and I promised to guard it sacredly, and never surrender or disgrace it; and Inever will while I live.' Fortunately, at this moment the attention of the rebel officer was drawn away for the time by the entrance of other prisoners, and while he was thus occupied Miss Sheads, seizing the favorable opportunity, with admirable presence of mind unclasped the colonel's sword from his belt, and hid it in the folds of her dress. When the rebel officer returned, the colonel told him he was willing to surrender, and that one of his men had taken his sword and passed out. The artifice succeeded, and the Colonel 'fell in' with the other prisoners . . . . . . On the fifth day after the battle, Colonel Wheelock unexpectedly made his appearance, and received his sword from the hands of its noble guardian . . . He had managed to effect his escape from the rebels while crossing South Mountain . . ."
    - Women Of The War (1867) Frank Moore, pages 241-243

    Ben Maryniak

    Terry wrote...

    As to Carrie Sheads and her family; Frassanito discusses the family in some detail in 'Early Photography'. The grave of Carrie, her father and brothers are all located in the Evergreen Cemetery, very near - almost against - the iron fence separating the Evergreen from the National Cemetery. These sites will probably be covered during the Cemetery tour on Sunday, at the Muster, as will the graves of other prominent members of the Gettysburg community we have grown acquainted with in our reading (David Wills, Lydia Leister, Jack Skelly...and Elizabeth Thorne - she and her husband were the first tenants of the Evergreen Gatehouse, and were married on the same day the cornerstone of the gatehouse was laid down)


    Jeff Hubbard says:

    Gen. Heth(Heth's Division, A. P. Hill's III Corp, Army of Northern Virginia, CSA) has seemed to adopted two first names in my studies of Gettysburg and the Civil War. Some articles state "Harry Heth" to be his name. Many notes upon this very server report to that effect. They even claim that R. E. Lee himself referred to his relative as "Harry."(Subject: REL's Use of Nicknames) In the movie "Gettysburg" from Turner(1993), Gen. John F. Reynolds clearly states to Brig. Gen. John Buford, "...Now let's go surprise Harry Heth." Yet...other sources say that "Henry" is his first name. In the book "The Civil War Years: a day-by-day chronicle of the life of a nation" (p. 300) it says qoute: " made up of troops from the divisions of Henry Heth..." Also in a computerized strategy game called "Battleground: Gettysburg", the leader database refers to Heth as "Henry." In the book "The Killing Ground: Wilderness to Cold Harbor" (The Civil War from Time-Life on p. 68), it states, "...a division led by Maj. Gen Henry Heth." (I know it does not relate to Gettysburg, but in the text he is connected to that great battle)

    Some collections defer the conflict altogether. In James Lognstreet's and J.E.B. Stuart's autobiography and biography, respectively, they make no reference to Heth's first name. In "The Battle of Gettysburg" by Col. William C. Oates, he NEITHER discloses Heth's ever-evading first. Also, Lt. Haskell (The Battle of Gettysburg) decided to leave him out of his story entirely.(That is understandable due to the fact Haskell WAS a Federal officer) I am almost at wit's end with this great puzzle. With each day, I grow more and more curious and determined to solve this mystery of mine. If anyone has an answer, or reference(as I enjoy reading about the battle) or just an interest, please reply. Thank you dearly.

    Jeff Hubbard

    "James F. Epperson" says:

    "Harry" is to "Henry" as "Jim" is to "James" says:

    Ezra Warner's boook Geerals in Grey reports Heth's full name as Henry Heth; and so does the Offical Records Vol XXVII, Part II.

    Matt (Tom Clemens) says:

    I am taking the liberty of borrowing my friend's e-mail to respond to this question. Please see _The Memoirs of Henry Heth_, edited by Janes L. Morrison. (By the way, "Harry" was a bit quirky. About Ambrose Burnside he wrote: "He was the only man I ever loved." Then again, if I were a Confederate general, I probably would have loved Ambrose Burnside, too!

    I remain, as always, Your humble and obedient servant,
    Mark A. Snell
    Director, The George Tyler Moore
    Center for the Study of the Civil War (MR WILLIAM R HOWARD JR) says:

    I'm glad Jack Kelly pointed out that 'Harry' for 'Henry' did indeed occur during Shakespeare's time, as shown perhaps most famously by the title character from Henry V referring to himself as 'Harry', but the interchangeable use of these names dates further back to Norman times, with Harry considered the English version and Henry the Norman one. Harry is therefore not strictly a nickname for Henry (in the sense that Billy is a nickname for William), but another linguistic form of the same name. The fact that Prince Charles chose to name his son Harry, quite unheard of in that circle for a long time, indicates that the native English name might be back in vogue.

    But I suppose that's quite enough on this topic.

    William Howard (Dennis Lawrence) says:

    Since William Howard has provided the bridge, I'll walk across it. In the most famous reference to himself as Harry, Henry V rallies his men for the attack against the French in the below "St. Cripin's Day" speech. Change a few names in the litany of heroes to Armisted, Barksdale, Pettigrew, etc., and Harry's prediction of future generations revering these warriors fits quite nicely what we do here.

      "He that lives out this day and sees old age,
      Will yearly on this vigil feast his neighbours,
      And say, "Tomorrow is Saint Crispian (Day),"...
      Then shall our names, familiar in his mouth as household words,
      Harry the king, Bedford and Exter,
      Warwick and Talbot, Salisbury and Glouchester,
      Be in their flowing cups freshly rememb'red.
      This story should the goodman teach his son;
      And Crispian, St. Crispian shall ne'er go by
      But we in it shall be remembered,
      We few, we happy few, we band of brothers.
      For he who to-day that sheds his blood with me
      Shall be my brother; ...
      And gentlemen in England now a-bed
      Shall think themselves accurs'd they were not here,
      And hold their manhood cheap while any speaks
      That fought with us upon St. Crispin's day."

    Henry V; Act IV, Scene iii, 51-66

    James Rorty says:


    As the immigrant and Sherman & other assorted topics file off into email, it is nonethless interesting to note the words of an Irish-born battery commander who fell on July 3, 1863 -- James McKay Rorty. As you and most other Gettysburg students know, Captain Rorty commanded Battery B, 1st NY Light Artillery -- formerly Pettit's Battery, taking over the guns a day before his death in battle.

    In attempting to explain to his father why he would risk his life in a war that seemed of such little consequence to most Irish immigrants (and half of Rorty's family was still in Donegal), the young officer stated, in part,

    "And still further, dear father, let me reassure you of my firm conviction, that the separation of this Union into North and South would not only be fatal to the progress of constitutional freedom but would open impassable barriers in the way of future immigration. It would close forever the wide portals through which the pilgrims of liberty from every European clime have sought and found it. Why? Because at the North the prejudices springing from the hateful and dominant spirit of Putitanism, and in the South, the haughty exclusiveness of an Oligarchy would be equally repulsive, intolerant and despotic. Our only guarantee is the Constitution, our only safety is in the Union, one, and indivisible."
    Rorty was an Irish revolutionary -- quite active in the Fenian Brotherhood. And as this passage would indicate, he was most eloquent, despite his lack of a formal education. He had no love for abolitionists; but he did, clearly, see a cause worthy giving his life for, though an immigrant; and he gave that promising life beside his guns, on Cemetery Ridge.

    Keep up the good work -- my respects,

    Brian Pohanka

    Parole of Adrian Root (Benedict R Maryniak) says:

    In reply to Steve Florman -
    The Gburg paroles of federals already released were the paroles discounted. It was the rare yankee who went home to wait out his parole. Most eastern theater guys went to Camp Parole in Annapolis MD (still called Parole) and lived in a camp under guard.
    Colonel Adrian Root, 94th NY, was captured July 1 at Gburg and accepted a parole on the field (from none other than AP HIll - it seems Little Powell did get out of bed for a while). On July 11, Root wrote home from Washington DC

    > My dear Mother,
    I am getting along very well indeed. My head troubles me somewhat but I shall in a few days be all right again. I understand that the US Government does not intend to acknowledge my parole and those of other officers as valid and binding and will order us back to duty. I promised sacredly not to take up arms against the Confederate States until duly exchanged. If the US Government refuses to exchange me or to allow me to surrender myself again as a prisoner of war to the Confederates, I shall promptly tender my resignation.

    In fact, it is a matter of conscience with me and I cannot sacrifice my self-respect by violating my parole. I will write again fully shortly.

    In haste,
    Yours, etc.
    AR Root


    Communique from Halleck to Meade on July 9 of 1863:

    "If no arrangement was made between you and General Lee for the exchange and parole of prisoners of war, by designating places of delivery, as provided for in the seventh cartel, no parole given by the troops of either army is valid. Please answer if any such agreement was made."
    Communique from Halleck to Meade, Schenck, and Couch on July 10 of 1863:
    "It has been understood and agreed between Colonel Ludlow and Mr Ould, agents for exchange of prisoners, that paroles not given as prescribed in section seven of the cartel, after May 22, are to be considered as null and void, and that officers and men of the respective parties paroled not in accordance with that section of the cartel will be returned to duty without exchange. They will be so returned to duty."
    Judge Ronald Ould, Confederate Commissioner for Exchange of POWs was appointed July 23, 1862, and remained in this capacity until the end of the war. Major Gen'l Ethan Allen Hitchcock served as Ould's federal counterpart from November of '62 and the above-mentioned "Ludlow" was probably his aide. Major Gen'l Ben Butler assumed Hitchcock's duties after August, 1864. "The Cartel" refers to The Dix-Hill Cartel governing the exchange of POWs which was finalized between the generals with those names during July of 1862.

    Because of the fuss he kicked up, Root was detailed as commander of Camp Parole for the rest of the war.

    James Lane's Command says:

    hello GDGers
    I had a discussion with a friend visiting from NC the other day at friend mentioned Pender's wounding in the early evening of July 2 and wanted to know if that's why Pender's Division failed to attack in support the echelon assault by Longstreet's 2 divisions and Anderson's Division from Hill's Corps.

    My thought was that 1)Hill and Anderson both failed in their jobs to coordinate the attack properly with Pender and his successor. 2) Pender's wounding, although serious, should not have completely impacted on whether his division went into the attack..that it was more the problem with Hill's unclear orders and failure to properly supervise the assault, 3) It was starting to get dark by the time the assault had rolled north to the position where Pender's division was located and that might have also mitigated against the assault and 4) Ewell sent a messenger to Pender and found Lane in command. Ewell wanted Pender's division to support his attack on Cemetery Hill. Lane responded that he was supposed to attack if there was a"favorable opportunity." Again it sounds like Hill's instructions were not clear or Lane wasn't clear about what to do. Any opinions on the impact of Pender's wounding?

    also is there some confusion about the command of the division after Pender was shot??....James Robertson in his bio on Hill has Trimble being put in command on the evening of 7/2...Pfanz and Coddington have Lane in command on 7/2 .... I am assuming that Robertson is incorrect on this one. (Dennis Lawrence) says:

    Lane said he received command on July 2 and relinquished command on July 3

    Report of Brigadier General James H. Lane, C. S. Army, commanding brigade.

    With the exception of the gallantry displayed by our skirmishers, nothing of interest occurred in my command on the 2d. After a portion of the army on our right (I supposed they were some of Anderson's troops) had driven the enemy some distance, General Pender rode from the left of my line to the right of his division. About sunset, I was informed by Captain [William] Norwood, of General Thomas' staff, that General Pender had been wounded and that I must take command of the division, and advance, if I saw a good opportunity for doing so.

    Next morning, ... I was ordered by General Hill, through Captain [F. T. ] Hill, to move in person to the right, with the two brigades forming my second line, and to report to General Longstreet as a support to Pettigrew. General Longstreet ordered me to form in rear of the right of Heth's division, commanded by General Pettigrew. Soon after I had executed this order, putting Lowrance on the right, I was relieved of the command of the division by Major-General Trimble, who acted under the same orders that I had received. Heth's division was much larger than Lowrance's brigade and my own, which were its only support, and there was consequently no second line in rear of its left. Now in command of my own brigade, I moved forward to the support of Pettigrew's right.


    Fighting Quakers

    From: (Benedict R Maryniak)

    In reply to Angel's question about the "Fighting Quakers" - this is going to sound certifiable - I even have their CDvs. And this IS relevant to Gettysburg! They were brothers - Edward H Ketcham, 120th NY Infantry, and John T Ketcham, 4th NY Cavalry.

    Augustine Joseph Hickey Duganne was a Long Islander who served as Lieutenant Colonel of the 176th New York Volunteers through 1863 and 1864. He spent half of that time as a Confederate prisoner after being captured, along with a sizeable part of his Ironsides Regiment, in June of '63 near Brashear City, Louisiana. Paroled and discharged for disability, Duganne immediately set down his story in writing and published "Camps and Prisons: Twenty Months in the Department of the Gulf" before the War had ended. Evidently motivated by the reception of his book, he wrote up the story of Edward and John Ketcham - young Quakers who had not returned home to Milton, Ulster County, New York - in "The Quaker Soldiers: A True Story of the War for the Union," which was published in 1866 and again in 1869. Duganne provided numerous excerpts from letters written by both boys in which they describe their wartime experiences. In spite of Duganne's mawkishness, his slim volume affords interesting glimpses of soldier life that have the interesting twist of the Ketchams' Quakerism. As the author rightly pointed out, the Ketchams "were representatives of a Society which for two centuries has opposed war, strife and bloodshed - the Society of Friends."

    I'll dispense with an explanation of Quaker beliefs. If anyone's interested, let me off the GDG line. The Quakers on principle were opposed to war, but many had become such earnest anti-slavery evangelists that, when the North and the South came to blows, they had to accept the combat as a part of the inscrutable designs of God.

    In addition to all this, the Ketcham boys were likely to have been influenced by role models of Quakers who had gained notoriety for not only accepting combat but participating in it. During the Revolutionary War, Gen'l Nathaniel Greene - a Quaker blacksmith from Rhode Island - had commanded in the Carolina Campaign. During 1861, Rhode Island legislator, banker, & Quaker Isaac Peace Rodman had unhesitatingly accepted a captaincy in the Second Rhode Island Volunteers and seen action at First Manassas. Assuming the Fourth Rhode Island's colonelcy, he was made a brigadier general by April of 1862 for gallantry on the coast of North Carolina. As a IX Corps division commander at Antietam, Gen'l Rodman was mortally wounded while trying to bring up reinforcements to meet AP Hill's attack during the late afternoon of September 17, 1862.


    Although they gave their occupations as "farmers," the Ketcham brothers were well-educated & well-read sons who happened to be working their recently-widowed mother's farm when the Civil War began. Their father, David, had gone to his reward in the spring of 1860 and left the boys to their rural occupations on the family homestead at Milton, New York, just across the Hudson from then-bustling Poughkeepsie. Edward Hallock Ketcham had been born December 27, 1835, and John Townsend Ketcham came along two years later on January 12, 1838.

    War news and the increasing intensity of recruitment drives being conducted by various local military organizations finally brought the brothers to an "amicable dispute" over which of them would go off to the fight. Though opposed to war, they were also opposed to slavery, and they were soon convinced about the righteousness of a war that "was from God, for the extermination of slavery." They were also convinced that one of them should stay with their mother but neither would volunteer for that role. The question was finally settled by casting lots and Edward "won." He enlisted July 15, 1862, in the "Ulster County Regiment" which was being raised just then.


    Mustered August 19 as Second Lieutenant, Company "A," 120th New York Volunteers, because he had proved to be an active & successful recruiter, Edward steamed away from Ulster County aboard the ferry Manhattan five days later. The regiment was encamped near Arlington, Virginia, by August 28, and the men listened to the noises of battle at Second Manassas over the next few days. Fall found them moving toward Fredericksburg with the Army of the Potomac, in Gen'l Dan Sickles' division of the Third Corps. Edward's letters home during November describe a bout with what he termed "jaundice" from which he had to recover while on the march. Writing from Falmouth on November 29, 1862, he summarized his experiences up 'til then with the observation that "it is not battles and bullets that kill the most men; it is exposure, improvidence, and hard marching. I cannot seem to realize that we are so near actual fighting, and, in fact, now think a good deal more about where our dinner is to come from, than about Stonewall Jackson."


    Edward's letters warning John about army life only succeeded in keeping his brother from joining the 120th NYV. In early February, 1863, John T Ketcham was enrolled in Manhattan as Second Lieutenant of Company "M" in the Fourth New York Cavalry under colorful Colonel Luigi Palma di Cesnola. About the tenth of September, the regiment's eight companies were ordered to Washington, where they did duty mounted but without arms. The 4th was assigned to Blenker's Division in the fall of 1861 and did duty far up in the mountains of West Virginia. The Fourth chased after Jackson in the Valley for a time and they took part in "the only cavalry charge at Second Manassas" on August 30 under Colonel Thornton F Broadhead. During the Antietam campaign, the regiment was stationed near Fairfax Court House, protecting Washington with Sigel's Corps, when a new colonel and chaplain reported for duty along with two new companies - Colonel di Cesnola and Chaplain John C Jacobi (a crusty 61-year-old Episcopal minister who had emigrated from Poland).

    Through the spring and summer of 1863, the 4th NY was engaged in constant scouting and skirmishing between the Rapidan & Rappahannock as part of Averell's cavalry division. John's letters home are laced with lines from Whittier's poems and also mention a number of visits with Edward. June of '63 brought heavy action for the Fourth New York troopers. The regiment was engaged all day at Aldie on June 17, with the loss of many men along with Colonel di Cesnola, who was wounded and captured.


    The 120th New York Volunteers shared fierce action and heavy losses with the rest of Sickles' III Corps on July 2 at Gettysburg. As part of Carr's brigade, the regiment went into the fight with 383 and lost 53% of that number - 32 killed, 154 wounded, and 17 missing. Lt Edward Ketcham was the first to die, just after the 120th had deployed along the Emmitsburg Road, south of the Klingel farm.

    "While we were lying down, before the infantry engagement, Captain Abram Lockwood, of Company 'A,' had just warned Lieutenant Ketcham, not to expose himself more than was necessary, the latter replying, 'a dead man is better than a living coward,' when, just as the words passed his lips, he was instantly killed." In a letter dated July 12, John added that it was "a sharpshooter's bullet" which had probably struck him "in the temple, and went through his head. He must have been conscious an instant, for he spoke in his natural voice and said 'Oh!' (not an involuntary groan) put his hand to his forehead and fell on his elbow dead."

    John had been on guard duty with one of the supply trains when he heard about his brother's death and was not able to get to the battlefield until early on July 3. Although the body had been "carried back a couple of hundred yards (on July 2) and left under a tree," enemy fire kept John from reaching it until the morning of July 4.

    "There, on his back, his hands peacefully on his breast, lay all that was left of the brother I have lived so closely with, all my life . . . On this earth I will never meet him again . . . Mother, I telegraphed to thee as soon as I could, and wrote about Edward. I cannot realize that he is dead. Don't let it kill thee, mother! Thee and I are all that is left of us . . . Have his picture, in his soldier's uniform, copied like thine and father's, and, under the glass, fold his commission and the ragged shoulder-strap I cut from him; hang under it his broken sword, and write: 'A SOLDIER IN THE ARMY OF THE LORD' . . ."

    By the end of July, John was judged to be too run-down for duty and sent to the Seminary Hospital in Georgetown. He spent four weeks there under the care of Martha Ketcham, who came all the way from Milton to personally nurse her only living son. The 4th NY Cavalry was now in Devin's brigade of Gen'l Buford's cavalry division, and John was ordered to report for duty during the last week in August of 1863. "Sad was the separation; ominous the farewell" between mother and son.

    After Gettysburg, the armies had returned from Pennsylvania to positions long familiar to them - the Union army on the east/north bank of the Rappahannock, Confederate infantry to the west/south of the Rapidan, and gray cavalry between the two rivers. This situation meant no rest for Yankee horse soldiers, however. With watercourses at late-summer lows, pickets & reserve posts were extremely vulnerable to sudden attacks by small squads of Johnnies, guided by local inhabitants. There were nightly losses. In one such incident, a picket post of the Fourth NY Cavalry was surprised at Raccoon Ford. Captain William Hart of Company "C" was killed and twenty-four blue troopers were captured with their horses, weapons, and all their equipment. Among the prisoners were Captain William H Williams of Company "G," Second Lt Charles B Smith of Company "F," and Second Lt John T Ketcham.

    This incident is documented in the Official Records, because Cavalry Corps commander Major Gen'l Pleasonton interpreted it as a neglect of duty on the part of the regiment. On September 17, 1863, Pleasonton issued General Order Number 28 which stated that, "Because the Fourth NY Cavalry allowed a squadron of their number to be taken without any effort to prevent it, they shall not carry a color or guidon until division commander Buford reports their conduct to have entitled them to such a distinction." The regiment petitioned for a formal inquiry, which was authorized but never convened. Eventually, a full statement of the circumstances sent to the War Department resulted in having the order rescinded on January 6, 1864.

    Confined at Richmond in Libby Prison with many of his fellow officers, including Colonel di Cesnola, John nevertheless succumbed to a combination of his already-weakened health with severe prison conditions. He was transferred to the prison hospital but died there on October 8, 1863.

    Duganne's book states that the Ketcham brothers were reinterred at Milton sometime prior to 1869, and "two white monuments, side by side, raised" over their graves in the village's Friends cemetery.


    Duganne, Augustine JH. The Quaker Soldiers - A True Story of the War for the Union. New York, 1869.

    New York Monuments Commission for the Battlefields of Gettysburg & Chattanooga. New York at Gettysburg. Albany: JB Lyon Company, 1900.

    Van Santvoord, C. The One Hundred and Twentieth Regiment New York State Volunteers. 1894.

    From: (MR CRAIG L DUNN)

    I would suggest the title of "king of the fighting quakers" be given to Brig. Gen. Solomon Meredith of the 19th Indiana Volunteers and commander of the Iron Brigade at Gettysburg. In the spring of 1863, at a grand review, Gen. Hooker went to introduce Meredith to President Lincoln. Lincoln stated, "I know General Meredith, he is my only quaker general." Indiana sent over 300 quakers to the Civil War.

    From: (Benedict R Maryniak)

    Isaac Peace Rodman isn't in the ground for year and Lincoln's already schmoozing Meredith (the tallest fighting Quaker, for sure). Though it's off-topic, I don't think I mentioned a great resource in "Indiana Quakers Confront The CW" by Jacquelyn S Nelson (1991).


    Ain't politics fun! Meredith had two things that poor Rodman didn't - he was alive, and more importantly, politically connected to Oliver Morton, the Governor of Indiana. Given the political worries about copperheadism in the midwest, I can see Lincoln schmoozing any Midwestern General quite a bit...

    Slocum - Slow Come?

    July 1, Goats and Slocum From: Norman Levitt

    In our discussions of July 1 and the collapse of XI Corps' position, we haven't yet looked at the possibility that XII Corps, under Slocum, might have been in a position to come up in time to soldify Howard's line, or at least to cover his withdrawal and that of I Corps, preventing it from turing into a rout. From what I've read, Slocum was peculiarly dilatory that day. When this is put together with he strange wanderings of most of XII Corps on July 2, it constitutes a case that Slocum might outshine even Sickles as the #1 goata on the Federal side at Gettysburg.


    Good point. Slocum halted the 12th Corps around Noon at Two Taverns, which is about 2 miles from Culps Hill. He proceeded to sit there until almost 4:00 p.m., because he didn't hear the firing that afternoon. Several of his staff officers did hear it, however.

    The 12 Corps could easily have been on the field by 2 or 3 PM, maybe even in time to go into line alongside 11 Corps. Another five Brigades on that line might well have secured the position.

    From: Susan & Eric Wittenberg

    Another thought crosses my mind. Slocum is one of those generals that seems to embody the Peter Principle. He seems to have reached his level of incompetence and remained there. Slocum was not an especially good battlefield commander, and did not have the guts to assume command of the battlefield in a crisis situation. He is, in my opinion, a good illustration of the problems associated with a seniority based command system. He's sort of an infantry version of George Stoneman--in high command due to seniority, regardless of whether that high command was earned through success on the battlefield. If Slocum had had the guts to take command of the situation on day one, promptly brought his corps onto the field in time to make a difference in the fighting, the outcome of the first day might have been very different indeed.

    On the other hand, as passive as he was, perhaps it's a good thing that he didn't take command of the field....

    Eric Wittenberg

    From: Susan & Eric Wittenberg

    Subject: Slocum

    To Norm Levitt:

    To some extent I agree with you about Slocum. He actually arrived on the field personally during the afternoon of the first day. He was without question the most senior officer on the field, ranking even Howard. Nevertheless, he categorically refused to assume field command of the Union forces, even though he should have done so. He also did not timely bring his command onto the field in time to make a difference. I think I agree with the assessment that he was a goat.

    Eric Wittenberg


    I have always been mystified by Henry Slocum's refusal to take command of the field on July 1, even though he was the senior officer there once he arrived. I have previously likened it to Gideon Pillow's similar refusal to take command of the field at Fort Donelson. There are a lot of similarities there.

    Does anyone out there have any insight into this? Why he would have refused to take command when duty should have required that he do so? Was this an act of cowardice, or was he aware of his own limitations? Is Slocum living, breathing proof of the Peter Principle? (for those who aren't familiar with the Peter Principle, it states that in any heirarchy, every member will rise to his or her own level of incompetence and remain there)

    I haven't studied this issue much, but am very interested in it. What does the rest of the group think about it? I've always thought that the 12th Corps could have made a very significant difference on July 1 under the right commander. Again, what does the group think about this angle?

    Any and all input is greatly appreciated.

    Eric Wittenberg

    Black Citizens and Abolitionists


    In Days of Darknes_ William G. Williams places the black population of Gettysburg between 50 and 300. (By the way one was a SHOEMAKER!). He places the "black" section of town in the southwest portion behind Salome Meyer's house. A recent document I read said there were four homes of black families on the battlefield. The first is easy - The Bryan farm by the angle. I wonder if anybody has any idea who/where the other three might be located? Or underground Railroad documentation for McCallister Mill or Thadeus Steven's Iron Works.


    From: (Nikki Roth-Skiles)


    Glenn Banner wrote a "fiction" book called _Flames Across the Susquehanna_ which was about the burning of the Wrightsville bridge. The book goes somewhat into detail about the Underground Railroad in Lancaster County - including the Wright Mansion and the Wright family's involvement. One of his sources was: Smedley, R.C.; _History of the Underground Railroad_; Lancaster, Pennsylvania: Office of the Journal; 1883. I assume this is a history of the Underground Railroad in Lancaster County. He also uses sources such as the histories of Lancaster and York Counties. Maybe the History of Adams County - if it exists - would contain the info on Gettysburg. Also, since he seems to have delved into the history of it, maybe he would know the sources you are asking about. You can probably contact him through the publisher or the Columbia Historical Preservation Society, P.O. Box 578, Columbia PA 17512. I didn't look in the phone book since I doubt he is listed - the reason he had time to write and research is he won one of the biggest lottery jackpots ever won in Pennsylvania.

    Quick question - I never heard that Thaddeus Steven's Iron Works was used as part of the Underground Railroad. I had always assumed since he was so vocal in his abolitionist views it would not have been a logical place to use. Do you know for a fact that it was?

    ---Nikki ( TERRY MOYER) says:


    In answer to your other question regarding black families living on the Gettysburg battlefield; Frass once again comes to the rescue in 'Early Photography' with his description of 'The Former Bryan house and Barn' (view number 83 - see esp page 234) when he says:

    "As a matter of cultural demographics, it is relevant to note that according to the 1860 census, at least five black families (including Bryan's) resided in this immediate area on the southern outskirts of town, or in the vicinity of the neck of land bounded by the Emmitsburg and Taneytown Roads. One of these families, believed to have been living in 1860 in a small one-story tenant house (then owned by Bryan) on the Emmitsburg Road, was that of Alfred Palm, a brickmaker, aged 25. Residing with Palm was a 24-year old 'mulatto' woman named Margaret Divit and, presumably their son, a one-year-old 'mulatto' boy named Joseph F Palm. Whether for racial or moral reasons, or perhaps a combination of the two, the census taker who visited the Palm household in June 1860 did not approve of their living arrangements, and boldly described Margaret Divit's occupation as a 'Mistress-Harlot' in the official census.
    Another of Bryan's neighbors on the Emmitsburg Road was J.Worley Jones, a black man whose name appears on the 1858 map of Adams County as 'W. Jones.'... Both Palm and Jones apparently lived in different houses on the Emmitsburg Road. While the tenant house was noted in Bryan's damage clain, and shows up (unnambed) west of the Bryan house on Bachelder's map of 1863 as well as on the warren map of 1868-1869, it was never specifically photographed..." I believe Tom Desjardin mentioned to me during a recent visit to the library that the park had just recently discovered the site of the well belonging to this tenant building on the park land.

    . Terry Moyer says:

    In a message dated 96-05-11 03:47:47 EDT, you write:

    >In answer to your other question regarding black families living on the >Gettysburg battlefield;

    there was also another black family..the Swisher's...they lived on the taneytown rd just south of the granite school house lane.......check the warren map for the location of the house...this house was mentioned in Richard Moe's book on the 1st of the 1st Minn soldiers was buried by his brother not far from the Swisher place.

    jim martin (Dennis Lawrence) says:


    I asked about whether or _Days of Darkness_ placed Carrie Sheads in a school house separate from her home. Terry Moyer is right in his assumption that the sentence stating the 'brick house her father, Elias, built just for that purpose.' does not preclude that the brick house was also Carrie's residence. Later Williams has the whole sword hiding episode take place in this school/house, lending credence to Terry's reading and disemboweling mine.

    Nikki asks if I had any proof that Thadeus Stevens' iron works was a part of the underground railroad.

    I have seen it referenced as such in a book not concerned with Gettysburg, but with abolitionism in general. Hence my question about whther any one had any documentation.

    "The Historical Portrait Collection" pamphlet put out by Gettysburg College has some info on white and black Gettysburg abolitionists. I find it very interesting reading. I assume there is a portrait collection at the college to go with this pamphlet?

    Stevens was one of the most radical of the abolitionists. He lived with his common law wife, Lydia Hamilton Smith, a mulatto born in Gettysburg. She was an active member of the Lancaster Underground Railroad. It would seem that the common interest these two shared in abolition might make the use of the iron works as a safe haven possible. But again, I have no documentation.

    Probably the most famous civil war era black citizen lived in Chambersburg - just down the pike - until he was 19. He was active in the underground railroad with Frederick Douglass before the war. He became Major Martin Delaney in the Civil war, the first "Negro Field Oficer" in the Civil War. (Claims of "first" always scare me.)

    The Martin Delany Post, G.A.R. was established in Chambersburg in 1885 as a tribute to him.

    One other claim made in the pamphlet concerns Samuel Schmucker founder of both the Lutheran Seminary and today's Getysburg College. He too was of an abolitionist bent and the pamphlet claims that Confederate soldiers ransacked the seminary looking for him during the Battle of Gettysburg.

    Is there any documentation that ANY Confederates were looking for ANY specific Gettysburg civillians during the battle?


    Schimmelfennig's Fate

    Alexander Schimmelfennig (ENCYCLOPEDIA OF THE CIVIL WAR lists him as "Schimmelfenning", but I have always seen it without the 3rd "n") hid out in the backyard of the Garlach house on Washington Street just past Breckinridge apparently not in a pigsty, but between a wood pile and two slop barrels from which pigs were fed. There is a sign on the sidewalk near the original Garlach house (only a couple of blocks from the Farnsworth House, as I recall) which tells the story of the unfortunate general. Schimmelfennig developed malaria in late 1863, returned to the army to take part in operations against Charleston SC in early 1865, then died of tuberculosis in Sept. 1865. He apparently suffered no military problems from his stay behind the Garlach's swill barrels, although I am sure that he was the butt of many a joke later in the war.


    Jack Kelly says:

    Re: Schimmelfennig

    I won't even guess at the ultimate source(s) of the story, but I will mention what Warner has to say about his post-Gettysburg career:

    "After this battle he sought transfer to South Carolina, since he no longer wished to serve in the XI Corps, but an attack of malaria took him out of action again for an extended period. He recovered in time to be present at the capitulation of Charleston on February 18, 1965, and for some time thereafter was in command of the city. On April 8, 1865, he was granted sick leave for thirty days after becoming a victim of a most virulent type of tuberculosis. He sought relief at Dr. Aaron Smith's Living Springs Water Cure Establishment near Warnersville, Pennsylvania, but died there suddenly on September 5, 1865...." [Generals in Blue, p.424]

    Hmmm. Sounds like that "pigsty" was a real environmental hazard! Don Troiani

    TERRY MOYER) says:


    Generals in Blue has the same information I have seen re: the ultimate demise of the General. However, the town where he went to 'take the cure' is actually named 'Wernersville' and is only a mile or two away from here (Sinking Spring, Pa - a suburb of Reading).

    Schimmelfennig is buried in Reading, in Charles Evans Cemetery, within walking distance of another Gettysburg alumnus: General David McMurtrie Gregg. Dennis showed pictures of Schimmelfennigs grave at last year's slide show.

    By the way Eric, the statue of Gregg really has been taken down from the Pedestal for refurbishing, I drove by about 3 weeks ago to check. Gregg has been riding that horse since the early 1920's (he died here in, I believe, 1916). It is a once in a lifetime event to see his pededstal standing empty (Greggs statue is an equestrian which sits on a beautiful block of Pink Granite standing about 6' high x 12' long, carved into an elongated ellipse) don't expect to ever see it again.


    Whatever Happened to...?

    "John A. Leo" says:

    Hi Folks,

    Does anyone recall an instance (on either side) of anyone other than Doubleday who was in really deep trouble because of their performace at GB. I'm wondering if anyone was demoted or deliberately pushed completely out of the army for poor performace. I suspect the timeframe of intrest would be from July 1, 63 to the reorganization of the AOP in March '64.


    John Leo (Kerry Webb) says:

    One that I know of is E A O'Neal who was recommended for promotion to Brigadier General before Gettysburg by Lee, but this was withdrawn after his poor performance on July 1. He did go on to serve in the West.

    Kerry Webb

    Eric Wittenberg says:


    What about Alfred Iverson? His head rolled, thanks to his wretched performance on Oak Hill.


    Well, John,

    Sickles never held a command again, of course. Butterfield was sent west with Hooker in 1864, and commanded a division in XX corps for awhile there. Sykes and Pleasonton were both sent west about the end of the year, mostly for stuff that followed GB, not the battle directly. Sykes earned Meade's ire at Mine Run and Bristoe, I think, while the last spike in Pleasonton's coffin was the Dalhgren raid on Richmond in Feb of 1864.

    Add Alfred Iverson to that list - another CSA brigadier in Rodes' division. After the battle he was relieved of duty with the ANV, and sent back to Georgia to command state forces. He ended up commanding a brigade of Cavalry in the Atlanta Campaign.

    Dave Powell (Dennis Lawrence) says:


    There is a little town in southeast Kansas called Pleasanton. It honors the man locals feel tipped the scales to victory in the battle they call the "Gettysburg of the West," The Battle of Mine Creek.

    Pleasanton was assigned to the dust bin of the war after Gettysburg.

    Another Kansas conection - Geary was Territorial Governor for awhile during the days of Bleeding Kansas.


    Susan & Eric Wittenberg says:


    Good point. And the fact that the name of the town is misspelled says something to me....


    At regimental level, Colonel Norval Welch of 16th Michigan [3d Brigade of Sykes Fifth Division] went on sick leave almost immediately ("fever and diarrhea" officially but likely some kind of nervous exhaustion]. He returned for winter camp of '64, went back to Michigan for recruiting for most of spring and only rejoined regiment when acting commander was killed at Totopotomy at the end of May. He was killed crossing over a fortification at Peeble's Farm / Poplar Grove Church near Petersburg in August 1864.

    Welch had distinguished himself and risen to command during Seven Days. Prior to Gettysburg, he and the unit had a decent enough fighting record, but (as you all know) at GB they were at low strength and on 2 July were unable to hold the far right of Vincent's line on the LRT; they had to be 'bailled out' by O'Rorke et. al. Details are cloudy, but Oliver Norton places Welch and the regimental colors "at the roadside nearly a mile from the battlefield" and contends that Welch's (new) brigade commander Rice rejected elements of his post-battle reports. The OR is cloudy regarding what really happened (and we know Norton is fallible) but it is perhaps the single blemish on the 16th's performance and didn't do much for Welch's professional standing.

    See John Michael Gibney's "A Shadow Passing" in GETTYSBURG #6 for fairly comprehensive retelling and citations.

    Regards - rdw says:

    hey group

    how about brig general rowley arrested and cashiered for drunkenness on July 1, 1863...good article in g-burgmagazine on this incident.

    jim martin

    Good heavens - how could we forget good old Rowley! He was court-martialed for drunkeness, and found Guilty. Edwin Stanton intervened, had him restored to duty, but he commanded the Monongahela - his home town of Pittsburg. He was never given field command again. He resigned in '64.

    Dave Powell

    historians have been kinder to Caldwell than his peers after g-burg....both scott hartwig and eric campbell have written excellent articles about the peformance of caldwell and his division in the wheatfield on 7/2.....his division did very well in driving kershaws's, semmes's and anderson's brigades from the wheatfield

    ....according to hartwig, caldwell managed his division very well....pfanz also said that if caldwell's division had not arrived in time at the wheatfield, sickles line would have been at risk an hour earlier than it did before barkesdale's charge at the peach orchard finally broke the line and outflanked caldwell's division. some of the 3rd and 5th corps officers said that caldwell and his division "performed badly"..but history has shown otherwise.

    barnes's (one of the oldest union generals on the field) performance is open to question....he ordered tilton's and sweitzer's brigades to retreat in the face of kershaw's attacks because he feared being outflanked on the stony hill just to west of the wheatfield..although sweitzer later said that he could have held his position.

    once Barnes's men retreated to trostles' woods...some of Zook's men remarked that they had to step over Tilton's men as they went into the wheatfield to fill the gap left by Detrobriand's brigade and winslow's battery that were retreating.

    tilton's men also did not support bigelow's battery at the trostle farm when they had an opportunity to do so...the question on this issue is ..."where was barnes?''....he did not seem to be exercising effective control over the two brigades at his disposal.

    jim martin

    Barnes, for one, was wounded, and upon his return to duty only given garrison commands. I'm not sure wether or not this was for physical reasons or for the apparent loss of control over his division on July 2nd.

    Dave Powell

    wittenberg says:

    Here's another one...what about Joe Davis? I don't think he ever commanded much of anything at all after Gettysburg.

    Eric Wittenberg

    > > Was Porter Alexander ever penalized for not supporting the flanks of >Longstreet's second assault? How about Mahone who didn't advance to attack >the Federal center on the 2nd? I've never heard of an explanation for that >inaction.

    > Niether Porter Alexander nor Mahone were ever censured. Alexander was blameless in any case, I believe. Mahone's failure on Juy 2nd was less excusable, but it never seemed to earn any superior's wrath. He ended up as a Division commander and Major General with the ANV, and was regarded as one of the rising stars of the later period of the war. It was his command that counterattacked so fiercely at the Crater.

    Dave Powell

    Archer's Capture

    sholarm@TEN-NASH.TEN.K12.TN.US says:

    Can anyone shed light on where in the area would have General Archer (CSA) be detained as a prisioner. I have been unable to put my finger on the location of field grade officer prisoner detention. As you are aware he was caputured on the first day by some slick flanking move on the part of the Union, thus leaving his Brigade with the XO for third day advance on the center.



    Archer was started south fairly quickly after capture. Ultimately he was moved to Point Lookout, MD. Likely he was moved back to either Taneytown or Union Mills, and thence to the RR to Baltimore or DC. The Union had the luxury of being able to get rid of it's prisoners easily and quickly in this campaign.

    Dave Powell

    Kyd Douglas (Dave Eicher) says:

    >>Esteemed member James Epperson wrote:

    One of the more highly regarded Confederate memoirs is that by Henry Kyd Douglas (I RODE WITH STONEWALL), and it is here that we find one of the more compelling "we wish Jackson were here" anecdotes. According to Douglas, on the night of July 1st, his good friend Sandie Pendleton -- also a former staff officer to Jackson, now Ewell's chief of staff -- stated "with much feeling" the now oft-quoted line, "Oh, for the presence and inspiration of Old Jack for just one hour." Douglas places this as occuring after Ewell had determined not to advance on the Federal positions south of the town.

    Warning - Douglas's memoir is highly unreliable, embellished with stories contradicted by many other sources, and should be used only with great caution!

    - Dave

    Robert Bohanan says:

    I was wondering if anyone was going to pick up on the Douglas memoirs and his lack of veracity. I have heard at least two well-know Civil War researchers say that instead of I RODE WITH STONEWALL, Douglas should have titled his book, STONEWALL RODE WITH ME.

    Robert Bohanan

    Let me add my _Amen_ here. Living in the shadow of HKD, it is hard to speak ill of the man, but his memoirs are just too trite sometimes. There is a war-time journal that is still around here, but unfortunately sealed in a plexiglass case which belongs to someone who knows what he has and isn't sharing it. Too bad.

    Many old-timers recall HKD in his later years walking the streets of Hagerstown with a rose in his teeth so that everyone would know that he was an aristocrat.

    I've also heard the Stonewall Rode with Me line, and I agree whole-heartedly. Dennis Frye did a nice expose' on his _Jackson was almost captured at Boonsboro" story a few years ago.

    Tom Clemens

    Citizens Welcome AoP

    Susan & Eric Wittenberg says:

    Citizens response to AoP arrival

    Diary of Jasper Cheney, Co. A, 8th New York Cavalry, Civil War Times Illustrated Collection, U.S. Army Military History Institute, Carlisle, Pennsylvania, entry for June 30, 1863:

    The people of this town welcomed us with the cordiality of true patriots. The ladies in groups would sing and through [sic] us bouquets while the sound of carbines told us that our advance were engaged with the enemy.

    Capt. William L. Heermance, "The Cavalry at Gettysburg", Commander of the State of New York, Military Order of the Loyal Legion of the United States, read December 5, 1900, p. 199:

    …About a mile from the town we were met by the young girls of that place, who, dressed in white with red and blue ribbons, formed along the road; and as we rode by they sang their patriotic songs, that made the blood flow quicker in our veins, as we thought of those at home, and that we were there to defend Northern soil from the desolation that we had seen so much of in the homes of our Southern brothers, who had forced us to fight against them….

    Lt. Col. Theodore H. Bean, "Who Fired the Opening Shots!", Philadelphia Weekly Times, February 2, 1878:

    …The people of the town, seemingly, were all on the streets, and a warm reception was given to the command. Groups of young and old men, women and children, stood on the corners, and at the churches and public buildings, singing patriotic songs and indulging in demonstrations of joy that left no doubt of the painful anxiety felt by them and the sense of relief our presence afforded…

    Diary of Lt. John E. Hoffman, Co. C, 3rd West Virginia Cavalry, Robert L. Brake Collection, Federal Units, United States Military History Institute, Carlisle, Pennsylvania, entry of June 30:

    …We were received with enthusiasm by the people…

    Capt. William C. Hazelton, 8th Illinois Cavalry, "The People of Gettysburg", Gettysburg Star and Sentinel, Sept. 1, 1891:

    …when our Cavalry advance reached that city and passed on through its streets, men, women, and children crowded the sidewalks and vied with each other in demonstrations of joyous welcome. Hands were reaching up eagerly to clasp the hands of our bronzed and dusty troopers Cake, beer, milk, and wine were passed up to the moving column; as we marched slowly along the crowded streets, doors, windows and balconies were filled with ladies waving their handkerchiefs; bright eyes and smiling faces looked down from open windows upon the troopers; with now and then a matron trying to smile through her fast falling tears as she remembers her own boy in the army….

    Eric Wittenberg (David Clark) says:


    Thanks for the great stuff on the citizen reception. This group has several times discussed the advantage the ANV had when fighting on southern soil, your post makes very clear the advantage in morale enjoyed by the AOP at Gettysburg.

    Capt. Heermance makes it very plain;

    About a mile from the town we were met by the young girls of that place, who, dressed in white with red and blue ribbons, formed along the road; and as we rode by they sang their patriotic songs, that made the blood flow quicker in our veins, as we thought of those at home, and that we were there to defend Northern soil from the desolation that we had seen so much of in the homes of our Southern brothers, who had forced us to fight against them….

    We spend a lot of time talking about what errors Lee, Longstreet and the rest of the gray clad commanders commited to lose the battle of Gettysburg, but the biggest "error" may have been to fight the Union army on its' home ground, where they were the ones fighting for hearth and home for a change.

    David Clark

    Susan and Eric Wittenberg says:

    : I have to echo Dave Clark's sentiments regarding the Gettysburg citizens and their reactions to the arrival of Buford's troopers on June 30. This sort of "home field advantage" had to impact upon the morale and spirit of these men. Further, I found another account last night by a captain of the 8th Illinois Cavalry which indicates that the locals not only invited the troopers into their homes for meals that evening, but they also came out to visit the troopers at their picket posts in an effort to brighten their evening on the night of June 30.

    Therefore, I agree with Dave that perhaps the greatest mistake was to invade Pennsylvania in the first place.

    Eric Wittenberg