The National tribune. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1877-1917, 1890-04-03
CANNoNEER COMMENTS.
Criticisms from Every Portion of the Country.

| fact that the " field return of Sept. 80 1864"
| as quoted by the Cannoneer, does not give u
fair idea OF the actual strength of the First Di-
| vision at Cedar Creek, Oct 10. Comrado Beck
with says that when the Sixth Corps returned
| from Berryvile, Just before the battle of Cedar
| Creek. the whole Third Brigade of tho First
| Division was left Mt Winchester, and took no
| part in the battle. He says that this brigade,
| then commanded by Col. Edwards. constituted
nearly, if not quite, half of the division being
| composed of seven regiments, rs follows 18th
| Pa. Cav. (dismounted), d9th, SD and 10th Pa,
| Cd r. l., 37th Mass. and the 9Th Wis.
Comrade BeCkwith says that the absence of
| this brigade had serious effect on tho First
| Division that day. He says that the other two
brigades were only the remnants of the Jer-
| seys," then consisting of only three small regi-
| mentS, the whole of which were not equal to
more than one strong regiment, and Upton's
| old brigade, of which tho 95th and 96th Pa.
| were consolidated under command Of a Captain,
while the I2lst aud Goth N. Y. did not muster
| more than 100 muskets each, and the I'd Conn.
| Heavies did not have moro than 300. Hence
| he says the whole of the First Division, Sixth
Corps could not have mustered over 800 or
| 1000 muslSets, if so many, at Cedar Creek.
Comrado Beckwth says he does not wish to
| take away q single leaf from the laurels which
the Second (Getty'sl Division won in holding
their ground on the ridge opposite Middletown,
but he feels called upon to state that the First
| Division, with half its troops absent. was ex-
pected to hold n full division front on ground
| much less tenable than that held by the Sec
ond Division; or, in other words, to keep the
gap closed between the Second aud Third Di-
visions, both of which had their full strength
present. Ho says that after his brigade up
! ton's) led by Gen. Wright in person, had res
cued the Rhode Island battery, mentioned by
the Caunoneer, and had repulsod two charges
of Gordon's Division, they retired slowly Co the
xuondc NJ thar HrSin Huf ne ba
enemy advanced the gap between the Second
| and Third Divisions kept growing wider all
| the time in consequence of those divisions
drawing in their TANKS, until, in what is gen
| orally called the second position of the Sixth
Corps, the First Division could not connect with
the other two by anything more than a Skin
msh line, in consequence of its depleted mum.
bers.
Again, Comrade Beckwith says that the Off
cial statement of losses in the different divis-
ions of the Sixth Corps is misleading, unless
due account is taken of the disparity of num-
bors engaged. He says that the official casualty
lists show that tho Second Division lost 733
and tho Third zoo, all told, while the First lost
569. But no wants the student of history to
bear in mind that the loss of 73s in the
Second Division was out of total pres
ent of about 1000, tho loss of 700 in
the Third Division was out of 5000 to
1850, while the loss of 500 in the First Di-
vision was out of the two skeleton hrigades
before mentioned, which could not muster 1000
muskets between Them aud yet were expected
TO hold division 'front.' and that too, as 10 hap
poned, on the most difficult part of the Incl
Comrade Beckwith says he does not wish to no
understood as criticisng the Cannoneer, who
is q personal friend of his, but he thinks that
such collateral facts as he has stated and which
can easily be verified by consulting the Official
records should be borne in mind whom at
Al. e
particular command. Ile is also OF the opn-
ion that If the Third Brigade OF the First Di-
vision had been present at Cedar Creek at the
time when Gen. Wright attempted TO stay the
rebel advance at tho point where the Rhode
Island battery was taken aud retakeu, the his
tory of the battle would have been materially
modified. And Comrade Beckwth Is also of
the opinion that If the First Divsiou-or
rather the remnants of tho Jerseys aud Up
toms old brigade who were present-had en-
ioyed the natural Notifications OF stone
walls and the rocky ridge that the Second
Division bad in their position west OF Middle
town, they would have made IL quite as inter
estng for the Johnnies even the Vermont
ers" did. Ito says no has no complaint TO
make or criticism TO offer. But when the Cam
nonecr stated that warmers Brigade was
compelled 10 keep refusing its right flank in
consequence Of the retr0graie movement Of tho
First Division (Wheaton's),' etc, IL would have
been proper to state also the reasons why what
there present Of the First Division fonnd
it necessary 10 give ground on our right" rs
he says Comrade Beckwth says he does not
suppose that anybody familiar with the history
OF the Army of the Potomac will believe that
the First Division Of the Sixth Corps ever
gave GROUND" or exposed the flank of any
other troops, all things being eqnal. But no
thinks the Cannoneer was careless, or mt least
not careful, la his general statement that =" the
First Division kept giving ground on our
right" etc, and 1t is TO correct this that lac
comes TO the front now.
Comrade j. II. Locke, Co. -, 25th Mass writes
from Worcester. Mass, 10 correct statement of
C0mradc i. o. Talbot, with regard to the regi-
mental losses. He says. taking the lst Mimi.
as one losing most men at tho battle of Gettys-
burg that il had % per cent. OF its men killed
and wounded the 18th N. J. had 20 per cent
the 25th Mass "a per cent killed. lie takes
ms bis authority Col. Fox and answers the com
rade's letter not for the purpose Of Boosting,
but only that the many old soldiers who may
not have Fox's report may know the truth
through tho columns Of THE NATIONAL TRIB-
UEE.
comrade N. A. Smith. Bainbridge, Pa Co. A,
LIST Nd. l.. A.. says: In the Story Of "a Cannon
Ger think the author does injustice TO some
Of the men who took part In the battle of Get.
tysburg on the second aud third days Hes says
that the Sixth Corps did not take part in any
of the three days fighting. | think he Is
wrong, as belonged 10 tic First Division Of
the Sixth Corps, aud IL our battery did not do
any work ] would like 20 know who did. SO
did Batteries ID, 81 u. s. Art; A, LIST Mass: A,
LIST N. J. We were all together ia the First
Division Of the Sixth Corps.
HIN. Apted, Co. b, 10th Mich. Third Brigade
First Division, Fifth Corps, Grand Rapids,
Mich, writes thus:
EDITOR NATIONAL TRIBUNE: Reading in
tho Story Of Cannoncer Of their battery
being unable TO fire at Picketts men during
the charge at Gettysburg, reminds me of meet
ing comradc of HalZetts Battery ID, 9th IT, s.
Art, last year. at tho position held by them OH
Little Round Top at Gettysburg. who stated to
me Rnd others that their battery, for some
reason which they did not understand had
orders not 20 FIRE at Picketts men during their
charge, aud though the whole of the charge was
In full view from their position, yet they did
not fire shot. If this account be correct, why
were ouch orders given2
IL was because the movement OF STANDARDS
| Vermont Brigade on Picketts flank rendered
10 unsafe to attempt to fire over their heads
| EDITOR.
Comrade Louis Fischer, of Salem, Mass.
Lieutenant, Co. X, 74th Pa, says in a letter to
| the Cannoneer: With sincere qualification have
1 n .f.,t.. I. A Il.