The National tribune. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1877-1917, 1885-08-27
FIGHTING THEM OVER,
What Our Veterans Have to Say About
Their Old Campaigns.
MORE LAST BATTLES.
A Long DELAYED Reply.

To THE EDITOR: NV attention has been
called TO your issue of March q, 1854, contain
ing an article from 3 \. Stewart III answer 10
one from A. T. Carr, published i'll THE Ma
TIoSAL TRIBUNE of Sept. 10. 1888, in regard to
the last battle of the The last battle OF
the war was fought between a detachment OF
the Saith Ind. and the 62d u. 5. c. l., and a
considerable force of Confederates part o!
whom were mounted. 1t is in compliance with
a resolution adopted at our last re"l1ncntal
Reunion authorizing the appointment OF conf
mittee to answer the article by :. n. Stewart
that we desire space in the columns of The
NATIONAL TRIBUNE.
Mr. $ SAYS: THE histories of the war and the
records of the War Department will prove that
Mr.. Carr even denies the commander oil his
own regiment; for his Lieutenant-C Colonel who
was afterward court martialed for cowardlce),
and not the gallant Maj. Haddington, was
in command of the 3ith Ind. that day" The
above quotation is miSStatement OF the true
facts AS they did exist, and is calculated TO 90
great injustice to gallant officer; for while 1t
is true that Lieut.. Col. Morrison did command
the 54th Ind. on that day, and was aftcrward,
at the request of a cowardly and inefficient
superior officer placed under arrest and tried by
a military commission, it is not correct that
Col Morrison was contaminated or received
sentence, as Mr.. Stewart doubtless well knows.
Col. Morrison was honorably acquitted by the
commission investigating his case, and the next
day was placed i'll command of five regiments,
a far mere responsible position than that held
by Col Barrett.
Again, Mr.. S. states that ait was the 62d u.
S. G. /. list Mo- which bore the brunt of the
last battle of the war, and through whose ran ks
rushed frantcaily that portion of the 3fth Ind.
which broke and fled with their cowardly
Lieut. Col Morrison" The above quotation,
so far as it relates to the 34th Ind. and Col.
Morrison rushing through the ranks of the
cd U. S. c. l., is gross misstatement without
foundation.
Again, Mr. S. declares that the 62d U. s. c.
]. bore the brunt of the battle. This also is
incorrect, as we shall presently show.
Early Oh the morning of May ID, 1865, Col.
Barrett with his command took up his line OF
march from Boca- Chico Pass toward Browns
vile, following closely the Rio Grande River,
the 34th Ind. in advance. Soon the enemy's
scouts began disputing the line of march, and
a line of baths was formed at right angles to
the river, the 34th still in the advance, sup
ported by the colored troops. After considera-
be delay a second line of battle was formed
some distance in advance Of the first and par
allel to the river, the Saith in the advance and
the 62d U. S. c. /. still in the rear. The regi-
ment remained in the second line OF battle
long time; made coffee and ate dinner; saw
the enemy manuvering-his mounted troopers
galioping to and fro; and all this time our COM
mander (Col. Barrett) remained apparently
unconcerned, not even taking the precaution
to throw out skirmish-line. Soldiers, docs
such generalship display military ability? At
length the Lieutenant acting as Adj utant OF the
34th Ind. remarked TO Col. Morrison: d" don't
like the looks of things over there" and ap-
preaching Col. Barrett said: Colonel, do you
not think they have had time to send to
Brownsville for re-enforcements?" NO." said
Col. Barrett: they have a couple of little can
non over there; We'll go over and get them
after awhile, and 60 back to camp by the Point
Isabel road" Reader, does such an answer
indicate much vim or military foresight? At
length Col. Morrison directed Lieut.. G.. B.
Shadle acting Adjutant. to inquire of Col. Bar
rett, Shall We hold our present position, or
shall We occupy the first line of battle?" The
answer was: Occupy first line" Col. Morri-
son then, upon his own responsibility, threw out
line of skirmishers in order to cover his
movements. Reader, please remember that the
first line of battle at right angles to the
river, and in reoccEpying this position, which
in many respects was much inferior to the sec
ond. it exposed the right flank of the 34th Ind.
to the enemy's front and to the fire of his artil-
lery. Well, while reoccupying first line Of bat
tie the enemy opened fire upon our right flank,
and before said line was fully established Col.
Barrett in person ordered Col. Morrison, with
his command, to retreat and follow the ambu-
lances, and keep up with them )" and before the
regiment had time to take up the line of march
he (Col. Barrett) gave the command double
quick" thus abandoning the position without
firing gun, without calling in the skirmish-
line, allowing Col Morrison to do So 1t was
not defeat, from the fact that we, as command,
were not given the opportunity to measure
strength, valor, or prowess with the enemy.
Shame upon the individual who would thus
attempt to obscure the fair name and fame of
either commander or members of as valiant an
organization as ever marched to our country's
rescue.-JAs. B. SHADLE, Co. b, Saith Ind, Mt.
Zion, Ind.