The Bennington banner. [volume] (Bennington, Vt.) 1858-1894, 1892-03-18
General Alger's War Record.

General Alger's War Record.
The allegations of New York news
paper that sought to disgrace General
Russell A. Alger before the American
people by asserting that he had been dis
charged from the United States Army
under a cloud are absolutely disproved
by the publications of the official records
in relation to General Ayers war his
tory. The newspaper in question re-
Gently made partial retraction of its
charges, but it insisted that its original
statement was true and exactly true
That original statement read that Gen
eral Alger had been recommended for
dishOnorable discharge by Generals Mer-
rift and Sheridan for being absent with
out leave, and that the punishment so
recommended was 'sOftened and he was
merely discharged"
The official records, published in full
in the Detroit Tribune and condensed by
the New York Press, show the utter fall
sity of these assertions in respect to Gen.
eral Ayers discharge. The plain story,
as condensed from these records, is that
General-theD Colonel-Alger was on
May %, 1864, ordered to report to Sur
geon r. o. Abbott in Washington for
treatment for the effects of a serious
gunshot wound in the left thigh received
at BoOnsboro, Md, in action on July s,
1868. He had been disabled by the
wound from July until October, when he
returned to duty. Late in May, 1864,
the wound became dangerous, but the
Washington surgeon relieved his all
ment so that he went back with his COM
mand on June 80 1864. On August 81,
1864, he is reported as ''absent, sick since
-.
try on the same day following the one
quoted which reads: Absent without
leave, August, 2S, 1864" The affidavit of
DR.. Samuel r. Wooster, lste surgeon of
the First Michigan cavalry, who was
acting as brigade surgeon at this time,
shows that Colonel Alger had been so
i'll that the surgeon had ordered him to
the hospital and that the surgeon had
reported the facts to General Custer,
making application for leave for Alger,
which he declares he "he supposed was
granted, and never heard the contrary
until the recent partisan defamatory ar
ticles were printed.
1t is certain that on August 80, 1864,
with other sick and wounded, Colonel AL
ger entered the Officers Hospital at An.
napolis, Md, from which he was dis
charged on September 5, 1864, and or
dered to report at Washington by Colonel
A. Il. Root as eft for light duty" The
orders to this effect are all on file. In
Washington he was put on court martial
duty, which was distasteful to. him be-
cause of his previous activity. He asked
to be relieved from it, and was so relieved
on orders of September "a, 1864, but
meanwhile, on September 16, 1864, he
had rendered his resignation. This was
accepted on September 20, 1864, in spe-
cial orders from the War Department
CuriOusly enough, it was on the day that
he rendered his resignation that General
Custer made his report that Colonel AL
ger was absent without leave. This is
the foundation of the absurd charge that
the War Department knew of the charge
against Colonel Alger and "softened"
his punishment. Owing to the red tape
of the army the report did not reach
Washington until after the General had
received his discharge. On September
%, 1864, the Adjutant General notified
General Sheridan that Colonel Alger had
been hOnorably discharged from the SER
vice on September 20.
There are some side lights upon this
record which show that General Custer
had entertained very high opinion of
General Alger up to the period when
they had difference over a relative of
Custer whose advancement that general
sought at the expense of Michigan officers
for whom Colonel Alger stood up man
fully. On October 10, 1863, Custer rec
commended the promotion of Colonel AL
ger to the rank of Brigadier general "for
meritorious conduct in the field, as also
for his thorough discipline in his regi-
ment, both in camp and on the march,
and his untiring efforts for the welfare
of the regiment and the good of the SER
vice." The same letter contained the
declaration that Colonel Alger had
proved himself worthy of the highest
confidence" this statement being fol-
lowed by a long citation of Ayers
great bravery and skill" his 'compe-
tency in every respect for command"
his being severely wounded while gal
lantly leading his regiment in one of the
severest cavalry engagements of the war;"
and his distinction for ''his bravery,
GOODNESS and skill, which particularly
shows his fitness for a cavalry command
err" On June 20, 1864, Custer again
recommended Colonel Alger for promo
ton to brigadier general in equally strong
terms. Both of these recommendation
were duly Endorsed by higher officers in
Guiding General Sheridan. 1t should be
noted that the second recommendation
was only a month and four days previous
to the time of Clusters report that Colo
mel Alger was absent without leave. Gus
ter says in his report that Alger had two
or three times applied for leave of alb
sence when he regarded him fit for duty.
The record shows that General Alger
never applied for leave of absence when
it was not granted as absolutely essen
tial on account of wounds or severe ill
ness.
There is, besides all these records.
still another one, to which tine name Of
Abraham Lincoln is signed. This shows
that on August G, 1854, Colonel Alger ap-
piled to the Secretary of War to be al
lowed to resign because of the condition
of his private business. His resignation
was accepted by order of the President
on August 8, 1854. Although he had
this document in his possession, and |
could have honorably gone home at any |
Colonel Alger fought on until |