HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: cowan@ssrl01.slac.stanford.edu (P.L. Cowan)
Newsgroups: alt.war.civil.usa
Subject: Re: Lincoln Conspiracy movie
Date: 2 Jan 93 09:29:24 -0800
Organization: SSRL, Stanford Synchrotron Radiation Lab
NNTP-Posting-Host: ssrl01.slac.stanford.edu

In article <1992Dec31.163928.1@woods.ulowell.edu>, callahanj@woods.ulowell.edu writes:
> I have a videotape titled "the Lincoln Conspiracy" from a company called Sun
> Video.  It is a movie length story but isn't really of movie house quality nor
> is it really a made for tv movie.
> 
> It is about the assasination of Lincoln, suggests that Booth was part of a
> larger plot to kill the President and that he was not killed by the Union
> troops who did drag a body out of a barn in Virginia.  I notice it was made in
> 1974 (I think).
> 
> Does anyone else know about this movie and is it at all credible or is it part
> of the Watergate era of conspiracy fever??
> 
> JC

Sun Studios (or whatever they were originally called) made their money
producing cheap tabloid-style movies on things like _Chariots_of_the_Gods_
the _Bermuda_Triangle_ etc. I suppose the post-VietNam, Post-Watergate 
distrust of authority ("the Establishment" as we said) is a pretty astute 
hypothesis as to why this was so popular. All of their movies eventually
appeared on the NBC Sunday Night Movie, which has left me with a lasting
distrust of the NBC network.

-- 
Paul Cowan     
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Please send replies, comments etc. (no flames thank you) to COWAN@ANL.GOV   
"If anyone disagrees with anything I say, I am quite prepared not only to
retract it, but also to deny under oath that I ever said it." Tom Lehrer
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: alt.war.civil.usa
From: pdunn@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Patrick L Dunn)
Subject: McCausland/Chambersburg--Thanks for the info
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 22:20:34 GMT



Thanks for the info, everybody.  I will look for that book.

PDunn
From: tecump@sulu.ucsb.edu (Dominic J. Dal bello)
Newsgroups: alt.war.civil.usa
Subject: Re: Three Generals of the "Old Army" (was Re: Grant in the East)
Date: 1 Jan 93 21:13:52 GMT

afallen@lims02.lerc.nasa.gov (E. Allen Arrington) writes:

>In article <tecump.725141333@sulu>, tecump@sulu.ucsb.edu (Dominic J. Dal bello) writes...
>>cowan@ssrl01.slac.stanford.edu (P.L. Cowan) writes:
>>>>> 
>>>>>--------------------- Bulk of message deleted -------------------
>> 
>>Joe Johnston was the Quartermaster Genl. as Paul said.  He needs no
>>introduction.  Most prominent for fighting Sherman on the way to Atlanta,
>>in the Carolina's and surrendering at Appomattox.

>I don't think that Joe Johnston surrendered at Appomatox.  He surrendered 
>his army to Sherman at Durham Station, North Carolina on April 17/18, 1865.

>E. Allen Arrington  
>        Trooper, 1st Kentucky Cavalry, Co. C 
>        Mounted Memorial Unit                 
>and Mason (can't wait for the spring campaign to start)


who is supposed to be checking what i write.  i must be getting old. 

yes, Joe surrendered not only his army but ALL the Confederate forces in
the Carolinas, Georgia, and Florida.  This amounted to about 90,000!!!
troops (well, men with arms).  Yes, 90,000!.  The surrender occured
at the Bennett Place, a much humbler place than McClean's house, in
Durham, NC.   
I visited both places this summer, and, you know, the locations for the 
surrenders are characteristic of the theatres of war they were in.

it is interesting to note that Appomattox and Durham are not too far away
from each other either.

dom

sorry for the mixup

:)
From: jthoppers@OCTAVO
Newsgroups: alt.war.civil.usa
Subject: Re: Stonewall and nukes (was Re: Washington captured, not)
Date: 28 Dec 92 15:26:51 GMT
Reply-To: jthoppers@OCTAVO

re: stones at 2nd Manassas
The men under Jackson's command at 2nd Manassas (I believe they were part 
of Stark's brigade) did not throw stones out of any dislike for rifles 
on the part of their officers, or disdain for the attacking Union troops; 
they had simply run out of cartridges. As soon as more rounds were scavenged 
(some from the boxes of Union dead nearest the railroad cut) they resumed their fire.
JTHoppers
JTHoppers@octavo.ucdavis.edu
From: tecump@sulu.ucsb.edu (Dominic J. Dal bello)
Newsgroups: alt.war.civil.usa
Subject: Re: Importance of Vicksburg (was Re: Stonewall at Gettysburg)
Date: 23 Dec 92 22:59:52 GMT

cowan@ssrl01.slac.stanford.edu (P.L. Cowan) writes:

[deleted stuff]

>Let me add more weight to this in connection with a parallel thread.
>Europe was suffering a famine (due to drought I believe) and needed to buy
>grain from the Union. Grain exports were not as lucrative for the US (or
>Europeans) as the anti-bellum cotton trade, but one still has to eat.
>The need for US grain was one factor preventing European intervention, 
>and the Mississippi was the best pipeline.

>- Paul - 

good.
You know, this also shows how "powerful" the U.S. was becoming in the
world - a coming of age. - the strongest navy (on paper - sizewize -
total ships and ironclads), exporting wheat, etc.etc.  the United states
has been quite lucky in its natural resources.

d
Newsgroups: alt.war.civil.usa
From: m1b@rayssd.ssd.ray.com (Barone)
Subject: Re: Original Union Generals
Organization: Raytheon Submarine Signal Division
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 17:34:38 GMT

In article <spencer.724707267@cwis> spencer@cwis.unomaha.edu (Tom Spencer)
writes:
> 
> I read somewhere that Twiggs' second in command was a certian R. E. Lee.
> This source also claims that there is no way that Lee would have
> surrendered to the confederates.  Makes for an interesting alternate
> history if you assume that Twiggs is absent Texas demands the surrender
> of the Federal forts in Texas.
> 					-Tom Spencer

	A short story was written about this what-if.  The premise was
that a black time traveler (from the 1930s) went back in time and killed
Twiggs.  Lee assumed command and refused to surrender the forts.  He then
accepted the offer to command the Union troops and the Confederacy was
crushed within a year.  As a result, the Emanicipation Proclamation was
never issued, leading to aparteid in the South upon the time traveler's
return to his own time.  The outcome of what passed as the alternate
history's Great War was also very different.  (The details of the story
may be garbled since I read the story a while ago.)

	Unfortunately, I cannot recall the author's name or the title.
I will research it if there is interest.
-- 
Joe Barone
m1b@rayssd.ssd.ray.com
Has it really sunk in yet that as of January 20th, Mick Jagger
will be older than the President of the United States?
From: agwing@picasso.ocis.temple.edu (Andrew Wing)
Newsgroups: alt.war.civil.usa
Subject: Re: Senior Union Officers at Start of War
Date: 27 Dec 92 04:43:39 GMT
Organization: Temple University
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8]

Stephen Schmidt (whale@leland.Stanford.EDU) wrote:
: In article <1992Dec24.170803.9928@rayssd.ssd.ray.com> cwa@sgfb.ssd.ray.com (Carlton W. Andrews) writes:

: >         2. John Ellis Wool               age 72

: Had command around Newport News for the Union Army in 1862 as part of
: McCLlellan's Peninsular Campaign. I don't know where he went after that...

: >        13. Edmund Brooke Alexander        55-60; West Point graduate

: Not the same Alexander who commanded Longstreet's artillery; that was E.
: Porter Alexander. Much younger fellow.

: >        18. Philip St. George Cooke        50-60; West Point graduate

: Commanded a Confederate brigade at 1st Bull Run, I believe he retired in
: the winter of 1861 (?).

: For the curious, Lee's Lieutenant's gives a pretty complete listing of
: where the US Army's officers wound up, and a complete list for those
: from Virginia. I believe it's in an appendix to Volume 1.
: -- 
: Steve Schmidt			<><		   whale@leland.stanford.edu
: I can no longer sit back and allow Communist infiltration, Communist
: indoctrination, Communist subversion, and the international Communist
: conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids!

--
v2002a@vm.temple.edu     (preferred)
v2002a%templevm.bitnet@pucc.princeton.edu
agwing@picasso.ocis.temple.edu    (last resort)
From: cowan@ssrl01.slac.stanford.edu (P.L. Cowan)
Newsgroups: alt.war.civil.usa
Subject: Re: Senior Union Officers at Start of War
Date: 28 Dec 92 11:11:12 -0800
Organization: SSRL, Stanford Synchrotron Radiation Lab
NNTP-Posting-Host: ssrl01.slac.stanford.edu

In article <28DEC199212040954@lims01.lerc.nasa.gov>, afallen@lims01.lerc.nasa.gov (E. Allen Arrington) writes:
> In article <1992Dec24.230153.29839@leland.Stanford.EDU>, whale@leland.Stanford.EDU (Stephen Schmidt) writes...
>>In article <1992Dec24.170803.9928@rayssd.ssd.ray.com> cwa@sgfb.ssd.ray.com (Carlton W. Andrews) writes:
>> 
>>>        18. Philip St. George Cooke        50-60; West Point graduate
>> 
>>Commanded a Confederate brigade at 1st Bull Run, I believe he retired in
>>the winter of 1861 (?).
>> 
> Possible confusion here; I think that Philip St. George Cooke was a Union
>                                                           ^ 
> Cavalry officer during the war (and father-in-law to Jeb Stuart); Philip St
>  George Cocke was a Confederate general. (I'm working from memory, so this
>            ^
> may very well be all wrong; I may have the two reversed)
> 
> E. Allen Arrington  

I can confirm that Philip St.George Cooke served as a Union Cavalry commander
although he was a Virginian and Stuart's father-in-law. I don't have easy
access to any references to a CSA Gen Cocke.

-- 
Paul Cowan     
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Please send replies, comments etc. (no flames thank you) to COWAN@ANL.GOV   
"If anyone disagrees with anything I say, I am quite prepared not only to
retract it, but also to deny under oath that I ever said it." Tom Lehrer
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: rrw@sunset.cse.nau.edu (Bob Wier)
Newsgroups: alt.war.civil.usa
Subject: Re: Banks and Trains
Date: 28 Dec 92 23:53:38 GMT
Originator: rrw@sunset.cse.nau.edu

> In article <1h8dqnINNfqn@mirror.digex.com> dzik@access.digex.com (Joseph Dzikiewicz) writes:
> 
> 
>    There was also a Disney live-action movie based on the raid that I recall
>    seeing in my childhood.  I don't remember the name, but I was rather
>    impressed with it at the time.  This one was serious and definitely
>    pro-Andrews.
> 
> Yup, I remember this too; and Fess Parker played Andrews.
> --
  That was, I believe, "The Great Locomotive Chase" - not a bad
  movie, all in all.

- Bob Wier

  ---------- insert favorite standard disclaimers here ----------
                   College of Engineering
      Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff Arizona
  Internet: rrw@naucse.cse.nau.edu | WB5KXH | fax:602 523 2300
Newsgroups: alt.war.civil.usa
From: tbarnes@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (thomas wrentmore barnes)
Subject: Re: Questions relating to ACW-era artillery.
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 17:41:00 GMT

In article <1993Jan3.051647.29322@cronkite.ocis.temple.edu> agwing@picasso.ocis.temple.edu (Andrew Wing) writes:
>: 2) How did a lanyard work?
>
>	A lanyard could either trip the lock like pulling a handgun trigger
>or activate the friction primer.  There are several good photos and diagrams
>of locks, primers, etc in Ripleys book.
>

It looked like a long rope with a handle on one end, with the apparatus
for firing the fuse on the other. It allowed the cannoneer to stand
behind the gun, out of recoil range of the carriage. The recoil of a
heavy gun could easily crush a man's limb.
    
>: 3) What is meant by "spiking a piece"? I have always assumed this meant 
>: driving a spike into the fuse-hole.
>
>	This is the most common method of disabling a cannon.  Also one could
>drive a cold chisel into the breech, just ahead of the cascabel, in order to
>weaken the piece and make it unsafe to fire.
>

Or, if you were in a hurry when your infantry regiment was falling back
after defendind, or overrunning a battery, you could drive a bayonet
into th vent and then snap off the socket. Not as good as a cold chisel,
but pretty effective. Most vent holes are pretty small. Any other thing
you could jam into the barrel to keep the fire from the primer or lock
from getting to the powder would work as well. Artillerymen were
sometimes provided with special spikes that did a better job (so I have
heard). One end was broken off on the outside of the barrel, the other
end was bend over inside the tube with a rammer. This took a lot of time
with a brace and bit to get out. And, in combat, the man with the drill
was probably a favorite target for any enemy marksman or sharpshoooter.
It effectively destroyed the gun for the duration of the battle.
  
Tom.
From: cowan@ssrl01.slac.stanford.edu (P.L. Cowan)
Newsgroups: alt.war.civil.usa
Subject: Questions relating to ACW-era artillery.
Date: 2 Jan 93 09:41:35 -0800
Organization: SSRL, Stanford Synchrotron Radiation Lab
NNTP-Posting-Host: ssrl01.slac.stanford.edu

I have a series of dumb questions about ACW-era artillery. I suspect
some re-enactors will know a lot of answers.

1) Did any (many, most) artillery pieces still use lighted fuses, or did
all (most, some) use lanyards?

2) How did a lanyard work?

3) What is meant by "spiking a piece"? I have always assumed this meant 
driving a spike into the fuse-hole.

4) Was an artillery piece perminantly disabled by a proper job of spiking 
it?

-- 
Paul Cowan     
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Please send replies, comments etc. (no flames thank you) to COWAN@ANL.GOV   
"If anyone disagrees with anything I say, I am quite prepared not only to
retract it, but also to deny under oath that I ever said it." Tom Lehrer
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: alt.war.civil.usa
From: dunger@lamar.ColoState.EDU (Dallace Unger)
Subject: Re: Antietam
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 16:28:58 GMT
Organization: Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO  80523
Keywords: none

In article <29DEC199200392458@zeus.tamu.edu> tjb5107@zeus.tamu.edu writes:
>Howdy, Could someone please recommend any good books written on the Battle
>of Antietam.  Thanks.  
>
>Tom

The Landscape Turned Red by Stephan Sears.  Also Gleam of Bayonets, I
forget the authors name.

Dallace Unger
From: cowan@ssrl01.slac.stanford.edu (P.L. Cowan)
Newsgroups: alt.war.civil.usa
Subject: Cooke/Cocke (was Re: Senior Union Officers at Start of War)
Date: 30 Dec 92 13:24:12 -0800
Organization: SSRL, Stanford Synchrotron Radiation Lab
NNTP-Posting-Host: ssrl01.slac.stanford.edu

In article <1992Dec28.111112.1@ssrl01.slac.stanford.edu>, cowan@ssrl01.slac.stanford.edu (P.L. Cowan) writes:
> In article <28DEC199212040954@lims01.lerc.nasa.gov>, afallen@lims01.lerc.nasa.gov (E. Allen Arrington) writes:
>> In article <1992Dec24.230153.29839@leland.Stanford.EDU>, whale@leland.Stanford.EDU (Stephen Schmidt) writes...
>>>In article <1992Dec24.170803.9928@rayssd.ssd.ray.com> cwa@sgfb.ssd.ray.com (Carlton W. Andrews) writes:
>>> 
>>>>        18. Philip St. George Cooke        50-60; West Point graduate
>>> 
>>>Commanded a Confederate brigade at 1st Bull Run, I believe he retired in
>>>the winter of 1861 (?).
>>> 
>> Possible confusion here; I think that Philip St. George Cooke was a Union
>>                                                           ^ 
>> Cavalry officer during the war (and father-in-law to Jeb Stuart); Philip St
>>  George Cocke was a Confederate general. (I'm working from memory, so this
>>            ^
>> E. Allen Arrington  
> 

Please forgive me for FOLLOWing my own post, but while at the library
I checked in Davis's _Battle_at_Bull_Run_ and E. Allen is exactly correct. 
There was a near degeneracy in the names of these two Philip St.George Co*kes
Furthermore, the CSA version is a rather interesting charater, himself.
He was orignally a Brig.Gen, of the Va. Militia in charge of the defense of
North East Virginia (Alexandria).  He was also a West Point graduate 
(Class of '32 vs. Cooke, Class of '27)

Davis's book credits him as the original author of the (ultimately) 
successful CSA plan for defending Manassas. He was "demoted" to Col. in 
the CSA forces when there was an attempt to reverse rampant rank inflation, 
but re-earned his "star" (actually 3 wrethed stars for the CSA). After the 
battle of Manassas he left the army disabled, because his nerves were shot.
In December of 1861 he died by his own hand.

-- 
Paul Cowan     
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Please send replies, comments etc. (no flames thank you) to COWAN@ANL.GOV   
"If anyone disagrees with anything I say, I am quite prepared not only to
retract it, but also to deny under oath that I ever said it." Tom Lehrer
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Newsgroups: alt.war.civil.usa
From: spencer@panix.com (David Spencer)
Subject: Re: Antietam
Date: Fri, 1 Jan 1993 17:56:39 GMT
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC
Keywords: none

tjb5107@zeus.tamu.edu writes:

>Howdy, Could someone please recommend any good books written on the Battle
>of Antietam.  Thanks.  

Stephen Sears, Landscape Turned Red
  Pretty good popular history. Is quite good on South Mountain.

Luvaas and Nelson, eds., The US Army War College Guide to the Battle
of Antietam
  Excellent, especially if used as a guide to the battlefield.
Consists of exerpts from reports, orders, memoirs by participants.
Shows the chaos and fog of battle.

And the standards:
Freeman, Lee
Freeman, Lee's Lieutenants
  Essential for an understanding of the maneuver and concentration for
the battle

Williams, Lincoln Finds a General

dhs   spencer@panix.com
From: tjb5107@zeus.tamu.edu
Newsgroups: alt.war.civil.usa
Subject: Antietam
Date: 29 Dec 1992 00:39 CST
Organization: Texas A&M University, Academic Computing Services
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: zeus.tamu.edu
Keywords: none
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    

Howdy, Could someone please recommend any good books written on the Battle
of Antietam.  Thanks.  

Tom

 #4 Texas A & M Aggies
 1991 & 1992 SWC Champs!
 12-0	                   
 GiG Em Aggies!!  Whoop!

	    		  

Newsgroups: alt.war.civil.usa
From: charbonn@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (gary charbonneau)
Subject: Burning of Chambersburg: another citation
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 14:30:24 GMT

You might also want to look at: Smith, Everard H.  "Chambersburg: Anatomy
of a Confederate Reprisal", in American Historical Review, vol. 96, no.
2 (Apr. 1, 1991), pp. 432-455.

- Gary Charbonneau
  charbonn@silver.indiana.edu
From: tecump@sulu.ucsb.edu (Dominic J. Dal bello)
Newsgroups: alt.war.civil.usa
Subject: Re: Washington captured, not
Date: 23 Dec 92 23:08:12 GMT

cjt1@ellis.uchicago.edu (Charles Ten Brink) writes:

[stuff deleted]

>divisions sent from Petersburg.  I'm willing to admit that these divisions
>were required to *hold* the forts, but it seems to me that, given the
>quality of the fortifications, a bunch of postal and patent clerks could
>still have given Early a hell of a battle.
>--Chuck

the deleted stuff makes some good points.
however, "a bunch of postal and patent clerks could still have given
Early a hell of a battle" does not.  Early`s veteran`s would be no match
for the "Clerk Brigade" (my own nominclature).  It is very difficult
to stand up to fire, even in forts and fight effectively when you have not
done so (at least the majority hadnt).

It would be nice to know how many troops were actually in the fortifications
after they had been stripped.  I seem to remember a number like 7,000, but
that seems very low.  I think the garrison was supposed to be somewhere
like 35,000.

I have this strange feeling that the garrison troops were on average, worse
armed than the confederates.  Why?  I think they were mostly armed with
.69 cal smoothbores, or rifle conversions.  The Vet.Res.Corps. was given
such things (See Belliard's _Gone for a Soldier_).  Even front line troops
enlisting in '64 were given them (see _Daniel Chisolms CW Notebook_).  The
rifled muskets were for field soldiers with experience.
Early's men had by then no doubt
been almost all supplied with .58 rifles (thanks to the Yankee Ord.Dept.)

This does not mean that they could not have held the forts.

I think Grant knew the importance of holding Washington, but was not going
to be overly protective of it. As ive posted before, it is interesting
to read Elish Hunt Rhodes`_All for the Union_ on what he says about moving
up from Petersburg to Washington to fight in front of the President.


dom

  
Newsgroups: alt.war.civil.usa
From: cwa@sgfb.ssd.ray.com (Carlton W. Andrews)
Subject: Senior Union Officers at Start of War
Organization: Raytheon Company
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 17:08:03 GMT



   The talk about offering R. E. Lee command of the Union forces caused me
to look up the senior U.S. Army officers at the start of the war. Since there
are some interesting names on the list, I am posting it. The following list
are the top officers of the U.S. Army on 4/15/1861 with their 1861 ages, in
order of seniority. It does not include positions such as General-Q.M.;
Colonel-I.G.; Colonel-Engineers, etc.

Generals:
         1. Winfield Scott                age 75
         2. John Ellis Wool               age 72
         3. William Selby Harney          age 61
         4. Edwin Vose Sumner             age 64

Colonels (infantry, artillery, cavalry regiments):
         5. William Whistler               75-85
         6. William Gates                 age 73; West Point graduate
         7. John Garland                   65-75
         8. Thomas Turner Fauntleroy      age 66
         9. Gustavus Loomis               age 72; West Point graduate
        10. Benjamin L. E. Bonneville     age 68; West Point graduate
        11. Albert Sidney Johnston        age 58; West Point graduate
                                                     [see note 1]
        12. George Wright                 age 58; West Point graduate
        13. Edmund Brooke Alexander        55-60; West Point graduate
        14. Mathew Mountjoy Payne          60-70
        15. William Wing Loring           age 43     [see note 2]
        16. Francis Smith Belton           70-80
        17. John Erving                    70-80
        18. Philip St. George Cooke        50-60; West Point graduate
        19. Dixon Stansbury Miles          60-70; West Point graduate
        20. Carlos Adolphus Waite          60-70
        21. Washington Seawell            apx 59; West Point graduate
        22. John Joseph Abercrombie       age 63; West Point graduate
        23. Robert E. Lee                 age 54; West Point graduate

NOTES:
     1. A.S. Johnston resigned on April 10, but remained at his post until
        May 3, 1861; when his replacement arrived. At that point Lincoln
        offered him the position of second-in-command to Scott to try to get
        him to stay.
     2. If this age is correct, Loring joined a Florida regiment as Major
        at age 18; and became a Colonel in the army at age 37 (all other
        colonels were over 50 at the time of their appointment). He resigned
        in May to join the C.S.A as a B.G.; but was not on the promotion
        list to full General in August. At the same time, he had enough
        influence to override T.J. Jackson's orders during the winter of
        1861-62 and almost cause Jackson to resign. There must be a story
        in here somewhere.

                                                     Carlton Andrews



Newsgroups: alt.war.civil.usa