Bozeman avant courier. [volume] (Bozeman, Mont.) 1872-1882, 1877-06-21
A Protest.

At the last moment We feceivea pro
test from member Of T Co., I'd Cavalry
stating that our account of the Littl
Muddy Battle contained inaccuracies
calculated tn give too great credit to on
and too little to another company engaged
As the letter is extensively personal, ant
levidenuy calculated TO cause bad feeling
We do not publish it. We should, In tn
interest of it, writer, abstain from an!
reference to It, beyond extracting a. be
low, did he not lnforD 10 that, fearipi
our n fusal to correct our account, he hs<
sent copy to another paper! As tina
upper may publish said letter, We, in self
dcfen> make this slight reference but
|of course. shall be obliged to publish j
In full should it be made public by tina
journal.
The "inaccuracies" go corrected by 1T
writer a. follows: 1st, "0en. Miles die
not refuse 70 ahake hands with the chief.
ii, Gen. Miles did not give instruction.
to spare no.one-his orders were. not t.
shoot women and children, or men who
would surrender"
As to these two corrections-our per.
sonal account of the battle DID make
these statements. which were taken from
our Battle Field Correspondence. How
then, were we to blame D
Third-rhe COURIER stated, "as Cos
F and L advanced, drying tho Indians
they were met by Co. g. which in few
moments Inflicted terrible loss on them
ITO this statement the writer of thu
letter makes angry objections; but we in
form him. AS HE SHOULD HAVE SEEN, thai
this item did NOT form any part of oul
personal account. 1t 10 from the OFFICIAL
REPORT made up from data received al
Fort Ellis and furnished to and published
simultaneously by the COURIER, thu
Times and the Madisonian. How then
were We to blame in tbis?]
The writer demands publication of the
following statement regarding this 3D.
item, which would have been cheerfully
published without his demand or threat
viz:
IF company was long distance to the
right and front Of G company, land con-
tinued the lighting several hours after G
company had returned to the villagc), pur'
Suing the Indians FIVE miles unit halted
by the Battalion commander. ! am MOI
aware that F company 10 under Obliga-
tons to any company for assistance II
caring for the Indians in its front. G
company was nowhere near the Indian!
that F com ANY was driving. Your re
port gave the first intimation We have hat
of the terrible loss inflicted en- the In
dams by G company. That it did it
share l don'l deny, nor do l desire t
claim any unmerited honor for my com
pany, &C." And, II felt keenly thu
neglect on my part to thank G compan,
for meeting and Strengthening the Indians
in front of + company-&c.
The writer of the letter then refers "tt
several other little Affairs entiOned il
oul report, which he does not specify
but which he says we ''intended to b.
funny'-that they are 'laughable" etc.
We call his attention to the facts, the
our report was collated with very grea
|care-that our battle letters we're carefully
compared with al stiainable accounts il
other hands-that We were hundreds Of
miles 3rom the field and had to depend
upon correspondence, and that he does
not make a single point Of any momen
against our personal report or our cores
pondence (for which only VIC can be belt
We had no data whatever
from G company, or its friends, and TIT
personalities of the letter are unjust and
unfounded to the last degree. In these
comments We are far more considcrate
than he has been, and feel that publ,ca
ton OF his letter entire would mortifJ
him for more than it should 10.