Herald and tribune. [volume] (Jonesborough, Tenn.) 1869-current, 1886-07-29
COL. A. ]. BROWN.
That Charge Of cowardico.

member Of the sth Tenn. Cavalry to say
a few words in response to the charges
made by the johnson City Comet and its
correspondents, $50 called against the
gentleman whose name heads this com
munication?
They charge in the first place, that Col.
Brown In an engagement with the enemy
at Greeneville, Tenn, October IL. 1864,
was guilty Of cowardice and was respon-
Nble for the defeat of our troops on that
occasion.
In regard to that affair, | have this to
say: Col. Brown was in command Of a
detachment Of the 9Th Tenn. Cavalry
which was sent on a scout to G%reeneyillc,
and met the enemy on that day in over>
whelming force. The command was driy-
en- back to Bulls Gap with the loss Of one
man killed, Seth Rollins, Of Co. X. and
several prisoners taken in the retreat. l
was not with the detachment ct the time,
but on the evening of that day rode out
on the Grceneyille road from Bulls Gap
where the rest OF the command was sta
toned, and met the troops coming in. l
met several squads of men more or less
demoralizcd, who, on inquiring as to the
whereabouts Of Col. Brown, reported that
the last they saw Of him he was trying to
rally his men, somewhere In the neigh-
borhood OF Blue Springs.
Others whom | met farther on, stated
that they believed he was either killed or
captured. / met, as near as / can Judge,
about one-half the men belonging to the
battalion which was engaged but did not
meet Col. Brown and for some time be,
lieved that the report Of lis death or
capture was true. Col. Brown certainly
did not lead in that stampede as charged,
or | Certainly would have met him. All
the men / talked with spoke in high terms
OF Col. Brown, and used many express
ions OF regret at his supposed loss. Not
n of them evcr mentioned the word
coward in connection with his name. So
lar as know, and | was in a situation to
know something about 1t, Col. Brown
was never blamed for that disaster either
by the commanding officer OF the Diyi-
sion, or by the men belonging to the ba-
tallion engaged on that occasion. One
war () correspondent says he was ours.
cd BY Gen. Gillem in general Ordersi
This is certainly news. 1t Is certainly
the first time ], Mt least, ever heard or
read Of an office or soldier being cursed
by his commander in general orders.
1t lis just possible that this sapient cor
respondent docs not know what a general
order in military p~arlauce is. The cx-
preston will certainly provoke a smile on
the part of old army officers who do hap,
pen to know that general orders are not
usually couchcd in profane language.
Gen. Gillem may have cursed Col. Brown
in general terms. He did not lack the
elements of rnffianism and in this respect
offered quite a contrast TO Col. Brown,
but | never heard oft before, and | guess
no one else ever did, The charge of
cowardlce IN the presence of the enemy
is u grave one TO bring against an officer,
49,
and is never overlooked. 1t is always
followed by prompt arrest and court mar
tial.
Was Col. Brown ever arrested or court
martialed? | meyer heard of it. Did
any n else?
tits no unusual thing for a panic to
take possession of the best of troops as
every officer of experience knows, and
how difficult it Is to control men under
such circumstances.
Gen. Gillcm had some experience OF
this on the night of the 18th of Novem-
Der, just one month from the day of Col.
Browns mishap, when, not a single batal-
lion, but the whole brigade made good
time from Russellville to Strawberry
Plains, Gen. Gillcm himself, not un.
mindful OF a whole skin, leading the van.
But no one charges Gen, Gillem with
cowardice. 1t was only a misfortune,
perhaps not unavoidable, but a misfor.
tune all the same, and one which a dozen
General Gillems could not have repaired
this side the Holston river, once the pan
ic took possession of the troops. Good
troops they we're too; better meyer listen
ed to a cavalry bugle, as they proved be.
fore and aftcrward on many a hard.
fought field. So much for the charge OF
cowardicc.
HIS ALLEDaRD oRUELTy AND OPPRESSION.
But Col. Browns defamers have moi
stopped with this groundlcss charge o.
%cowardice, they couple it with one o.
cruelty and tyranical abuse of authority,
According to those INSCRIPTIONS tradu,
GERS, Col. Brown was in the ha3it OF or
dering his men "bucked and gagged 70,
the most TRIVIAL ofrenses and compelled
the sentinels in front of the headquarte,
tents, to walk their beats in their stock
ing feet so as not to disturb his slum
bers, etc.
This statement, | have no hesitation il
saying, has no foundation In fact.
know that from May. 1864, to September
1865, the punishment known as buckin,
and gaging was never resorted to in tina
regiment, and as to sentincls walking il
their stocking feet it never was heard OF
They may tell this yarn to the ''marincs
but need not try TO cram 1t down th
throats OF the old soldiers of the 81
Tenn. Cavalry, for they know better
They know, too, that no such cruelty o