The National tribune., 1885-12-10
GETTYSBURG.
The Adjatant of the 18th Mass Replies to the Cap
tain of the 9th n \.

To THE EDITOR: Under date of June 26,
1881, appeared an article in THE NATIONAL
TRIBUNE by one Isaac Hall, late Captain in
the eth n. Y. claiming the sole credit of cap
turing 1verson's Brigade at Gettysburg, July
| 1, 1863, and denying that the 18th Mass. partl-
| cipated therein.
The article was sent me from Massachusetts,
| by comrades oil the 18th, who had participated
| in the charge, with request that reply did
| SO promptly, rs near as my recollections served
me, for | well remember the very active part
| our regiment took in the action of that memo
| rablc first day at Gettysburg, and my article
| appeared in your valuable columns under date
| OF Aug. 81, 1854, briefly narrating the part our
| regiment took in that now famous (?) charge,
| taking credit from 10 other regiment, but stat
| ing facts concerning our work performed that
cannot be successfully disputed. Under date
of Sept. 10, 1885. appeared in The NATIONAL
TRIBUNE a scurriOus attack upon me person
| ally, over the signature of Capt. Hail. styled a
| reply to my article, which, to say the least, is
| perverted in every particular. 1t took the fer
| tile and inventive brain of Capt. Hall one year
| and some 20 days to manufacture response,
| and, like all fellows who have bad case in
| hand, he replies by abuse and slurs, and under
| takes to play upon the unknowing by such re-
marks as 1T is little singular that this Adju-
| tant, who ran away with the regiment of so
| gallant an officer as Col. Bates, leaving him."
| etc.
Now, as regards running away, would have
| Capt. Hall understand that the 10Th Mass.
| never ran away or shirked a single duty in
camp or on any battlefield; and this he (HalD
we'll knows Or if by running away Hall
means my leading the regiment, or a portion
of it, forward, without first consulting Col Bates,
l hereby inform him that that officer always
placed the strictest reliance upon my judgment,
| and frequently told NE that in case l saw any
thing that needed to be done to do it imme-
diately, and to issue any order thought neces-
sary, reporting to him afterward, as often a
moments time was all important. And as re-
CARDS Col. Bates he needs no eulogist in the
person of Capt. Hail. Col. Bates's reputation
US a man at home and as soldier in the field
was made without the assistance of Capt. Hail.
AS for my humble opinion Of Col. Bates, / have
ever held him in the very highest esteem for he
was whole man and soldier in every sense
of the word; second to none that l have ever
met in the field or in civil life; always equal
| to any emergency he was called upon to meet
or any duty he was assigned to perform.
Now to rciterate the facts rs to the part the
18th Mass. performed, confirmed by a visit to
the scene of action Oct. 6, 1885: In going into
| action that morning, when VIC had arrived on
top of Oak Hill, in rear of the little stone wall
(remaining now, our regiment was formed in
the shape Of the letter L, part of it facing
nearly west, into large wheatfeld, where a
part of 1verson's Brigade was captured while
the other part faced nearly north parallel
to the Mummasburg road. Directly opposite
our right companies stood large red barn
there at this day., which was not over $50
yards from our position, from within and
around which we received heavy firing, coming
from O'Neal's Brigade, Rodes's Division.
Up to this time, and until after the now IA
nous charge, our regiment formed the extreme
right of our brigade and the First Corps; part
of the Eleventh Corps about this time form
SfnrY Of IAncf half s1o 30 hf
Col. Bates's most active attention, and rightly
SO, was directed toward the movements of the
enemy in front of his and the First Corps
right wing, not desiring to be outfanked. This
accounts for his not participating in the charge.
do not claim, nor have 1 done so heretofore,
as Capt Hall has done in respect to the 9th,
that the men of our regiment were the only
original Jacobs; but distinctly stated in the
conclusion of my first article that the whole
charge was spontaneous movement of the
brigade, more or less, at least four regi-
ments participating" no general order hav
ing been given, and l in my humble capacity
only claiming to have repeated the order and
to have acted thereon.
Capt. Hall further says: at is easy from his
own language to determine that Wehrum never
participated in the capture of Iverson's Br-
gade. Had he gone forward to that ditch"
This must be Halls last ditch, for in my visit
to the field Oct. 6, 1885, failed to find it'll land
he would have known, as every one who did
60 knows, that we were not attacked in front
during that charge; that no line advanced upon
us and rushed through our ranks and that we
suffered only from the Confederate fire in an ad
joining field upon our right flank in advancing,
and upon our left turned around same di-
rectlonI IN returning to our former position"
This perfectly supports my previous assertion
g. e., that there was no fire in front at this
tIme-only stray shots from brave men who
did not propose to surrender. Because the
enemy had given signals of surrender, We
merely advanced to bring them in, and the fire
on our right flank from which I'VE suffered :" was
from ONeal's Brigade, with which the detach-
ment under Col. Bates was engaged, and, l re-
peat, to which attack Col. Batess whole atten- |
tion was at this time given. The whole charge
and capture took but few minutes, and on |
returning / found Col. Bates wounded in the |
neck. tied my handkerchief over his wound |
and noticed that the Goth Pa. were deploying |
on our right. facing the Mummasburg road, |
having been sent to Bates's assistance.
The fight was Immediately resumed on our |
left front, sufficient of Iverson's Brigade re- |
naming, REINFORCED by Ramseur's Brigade, |
while ONeal's Brigade attacked us from the |
north, which in turn caused our brigade to yieI |
until re-enforced by Gen. Pauls Brigade of O,
division. That brigade became most active |
engaged In rear of our former position, who @ |
the 18th Mass. SO gallantly fought and where |
they have lately erected an elegant monument |
on the spot where their brave color bearer was
killed, and near which Gen. Paul lost both of |
his eyes by shot through his head.
Now as to the record of our regiment Our
record in this case was made by the officer who
commanded the regiment after the fight, Col.
Bates being absent on leave, owing to his
wound. While at home he was detailed on
recruiting service, and was away six or seven
months. 1, being wounded, was absent two
months. Returning, did not examine the
records; nor had l the least idea then that the
mere performance Of our duties at Gettysburg
and the capture of q few hundred prisoners by
the brigade would be exclusively claimed to
the credit of Capt. Hall in particular and the
9th N. Y. in general 21 years later on.
Our records then made do state that "the
enemy in our front, receiving our fire at short
range" with most deadly result Showed the
white flag and ceased their fire, and rapid /"
lust what 1 have always claimed and still
claim "charge of part Of the brigade with
due regard to Others not particularizing our
own reg lmentl resulted in the capture of some
400 prisoners"
Our regimental history, published before this
controversy was thought of, says (see also
Adjutant- Generals Rep, Mass, 1868 page, 6O3):
The enemy making a demonstration on our
left flank, the brigade rapidly changed front
forward on its left, occupied the crest of the
hill, and, each regiment opening fire as soon as
in position, the whole line was soon engaged |