The National tribune., 1885-03-26
FRY TO THE FRONT.
lie Replies Pleasantly TO The Comrades Who Hav'
Criticised Him.

Criticised Him.
To THE EDITOR: We are not accustomed to
apologize for anything contained in our Ma
TIoNAL TRIBUNE articles or to retort to strict
ures upon our campaign history by the COM
| rades. Upon the contrary, we rather en- oy
| those criticisms. as they tend to evoke discus
sion and arouse the slumbering interest of the
comrades in the great campaigns and battles
through which we passed years ago. never fully
realizing their magnitude 1t is but natural
for soldiers to dilcr-and very widely at times
in regard to the details and particulars of q
battle. The soldiers of a great army do not all
witness the fighting from the same position :;
they do not all advance upon the scene of
action by the same route; they do not all wit
ness the same incidents: hence the honest diff
fercnces of opinion between comrades relating
to the same event.
We adopted the policy of stating our history
clearly and truthiully, as we understand it,
aided by memoranda made at the time of the
occurrence of the events we are narrating, and
whatever of other data we have at hand, and
let the comrades blaze" away at us to their
hearts content, we deigning no reply. We de-
liver our shot and retire in good order. The
amount of discussion elected by our papers on
"Chickasaw Bluffs" Arkansas Post" "The
VickSburg Campaign" and "On the Teche E"
has been, indeed, gratifying Many of the
comrades have related their stories, aud much
NATIONAL TRIBUNE in relation to those cam
Paigns since those papers appeared than had
been written in years before While many of
the writer's differed widely as to minor details,
they generally agreed in the main. We did
not get as much criticism as did several abler
contributors to your columns nor as much as
we anticipated, but we succeeded in calling out
very much from the comrades that is of special
interest to the Thirteenth, Fifteenth and Sew
enteenth Corps.
We do not wish to criticise our critics, rs we
have said, but we do most earnestly desire to
correct an erroneous impression entertained by
Comrade Evan II. Mitchell, of Co. A, 54th Ind,
of De Courceys famous brigade, that we re-
tlected upon the conduct of his regiment on
that terrible 2Sth of December at Chckasaw.
Far be it from us to attempt to rob that gallant
regiment of single laurel. Richly it earned
its honors on that bloody field De Courcey's
Brigade had DO better soldiers than the com
rades of the 5lth We well remember the sol
dierly bearing of their Col. Mansfield, then y
boy of but little more than 21 years of age.
What we said of the 5ith in our account of
Chickasaw Bayou was not derogatOry to their
character as soldiers, nor was it so intended.
They were model soldiers, if they were year
lmgs." Their conduct upon that Sunday
morning was entirely eXcusable in the face of
the murderous fire we met Older troops than
they might have been excused for like conduct
uHuer ike ClTCullStdHCeS w nat we Sdiu III
that connection was substantially as follows:
After describing the charge of our brigade
upon the rebel line in the face of most gall
ing and terrific fire, "the 54th Ind broke, and
the wonder is that more did not, so fearful was
the fire which we were required to face" There
is here no imputation of unsoldierly conduct;
it was matter of wonder and remark that the
other regiments did not do likewise.
The decentralization of that regiment by the
bursting of a shell, alleged by Comrade Lea
sure, of the 10th Ohio, is news TO us. We are
not inclined to credit the statement 1t is
possible that Comrade Lcasure has been draw
ing upon his imagination, just as he did re-
Gently in writing THE TRIBUNE about the fatal
charge of De Courcey's and Blairs Brigades on
the 29th of December, 1862, when he alleged
that my regiment (42d Ohio was not at the
causcway when his regiment fell back to it, and
that we did not cover the retreat Of the ere
pulsed brigade in good order" The facts, borne
cut by history, and conceded to us, since his
communication was written, by members of
his own regiment, are that the AID was beyond
the causeway, between it and the rebel outer
line of works, when the 10th Ohio, 22d KY. and
54th Ind. retreatcd past us, and we did cover the
retreat in good order. We give Comrade Lei
sure credit for very fertile Imagination
Comrade Mitchell complains that We 42d
Ohio boys used to call them Green HOOsiers."
Now, comrade, there was no malice in that; only
a little camp humor, in which soldiers who had
seen year or two of service were wont to in
duge at the expense of some person or persons
In this instance, the butt of our innocent fun
was the 54th. NJ. NJ. Lacey. of 622 22d street,
Washington, takes Comrade Morris to task on
some of the details of the fatal charge against
the defenses of Vicksburg May %, 1863, here
tofore described by US. In the course of his
"lampoonng" he says: If Comrada Morris
belonged to the 42d Ohio he ought to have a
vivid recollection of the position of Gen. Ostcr-
hau5s Division on that day" We will state
here, for the benefit of Comrade Lacey, that
Comrade Morris was not member of the AID
Ohio, but belonged. we think, to an Indiana
regiment, either in Carr's or Hovey's Division
No harm done however. Let the fight go on,
comrades. These fights are not SO bloody as
those of 1862 '63.-JoHN w. Fry, 42d Ohio
Ashland, Ohio.