The National tribune. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1877-1917, 1893-01-19
AT GETTYSBURG.

! h3lL4
AT GETTYSBURG.
Lieut.. Rankin Replies to the Few Facts of
Comrade Jones.
| desire to reply briefly to the &c few facts"
contributed to our Gettysburg controversy
| by Comrade A. Sheridan Jones. l agree
with the comrade that many contributors to
THE NATIONAL TRIBUNE "are sometimes
liable to write about as they feel. rather than
| as they KNOW and to assert quite positively
some things which are only guessed at. J"
In the first part of his article CoDrade Jones
says: II have not seen the report of the Adju-
tant- General of the State of Massachusetts,, and
| do not know what there is charged prejudIcial
to the courage and good record of the 9th
Ind" a
The first article that was published concern
ing this matter and which contained the map
that Comrade Jones critcises. contained all that
| was said in the Adjutant- Generals report on
the subject. If he is ignorant of its purport he
has no one to blame but himself. None are so
blind as those who will not see. In regard to
the position of the Sd Wis., Comrade Jones
says: When in q former issue he (Rankin)
charged that the Sd Wis. was $50 yards to the
rear ut the time this affair took place, did it
| require any particular ability? And did lie
know it. or did he only guess at ite And at
the close of his last letter. where he again rele-
gated the same regiment to the rear with a
little touch of sarcasm, did it require any par
| ticular abiity?"
No / have not guessed at the position of
| the Sd Wis. / know it as well as know any
| thing. have the evidence of my own men,
DRY, and my memory is supported by evidence
| that neither Comrade Jones nor anyone else
| can controvert On page 779, VOL 81, Part l.
| of the Rebellion Records, in Gen. Ruger's Off
| cial report, there is map in which the posi-
OF M hfIO oHa iS DIV md n
| that map the position of the Sd Wis., is about
| $50 yards in the rear. Despite such evidence
| as this. Comrade Jones says: 1.-THE Sd Wis was
| in line with the Cd Mass, and to the left Of
| that regiment"
| Some of the comrades questions are veritable
conundrums. He appears to think that it is
| smirching the good name of a regiment to
| say it occupied position where it was placed
| by the General in command. If his language
| has any other meaning. l cannot tell what it is.
Ignote further: The comrades (Rankin's)
| innocence in all this correspondence is quite
| apparent when he says: There was probably
| not one man in hundred of the 9th Ind.
| who knew what had become of the I'd Mass.
after they had left their works at c."
! Well, that is easily explained. When the Cd
| Mass. started from c, it was soon lost to our
| view in the woods, and we could not tell what
direction it took, and when it reached the open
| ground it was so remote from the 9th that it
! 9th would see tho Cd Mass, and then, il he
did see the regiment he had no means of know
| ing at the time whether it was the I'd Mass. or
| some other regiment. This seems to me
reasonable, but Comrade Jones says it is in
nocent."
| / quote again: According to Comrade Ran
| kin's statements. the Cd Mass. might have moved
directly across the meadow at c, and been driven
back again. and he and his regiment remain
| ignorant of the fact for many years. He admits
| this, yet he says: When | opened this discus
sion knew exactly what was talking about"
Thi3s not innocent u" it is unfair Because
! / was ignorant of the exact movements Of the
| I'd Mass. at the time of the battle, it does not
| follow that l was ignorant Of them at the
opening of this controversy. The statement
refers to the time Of the battle, and Comrade
Jones unwarrantedly applies it to the opening
| OF this controversy.
| Shortly after this affair of the two regiments
| / left the field on account of wound If l
| had remained on the field until the battle was
over. perhaps / would have known that the
regiment l saw at + was the Cd Mass. Very
| likely other members of the 9th who remained
| on the field knew all about the movements of
the Cd Mass, but having never seen the SANDER
referred to, never gave them any particular
| consideration
/ have now answered the moro important
| points in Comrade Jones's article. He intro
duces a great many details that have no bear
| ing on the main question. In some parts his
| ideas badly squabbled, but if he will try
| again, and put them into Ineligible English,
l will answer them if can.
| The position of the 81 Wis. is only incidental
| to this controversy. The real question is, did
| the 9th Ind and Cd Mass. enter the meadow
in line together. and did the 9th give way
and leave the Cd Mass. to fight alone? ?
| This was affirmed by the Adjntant- General Of
| Massachusetts Comrade Hinckley substanti-
ally Endorses the Adjutant- General. I have
proved the statement villainous SANDER.
| Comrade Jones himself, in the following extract
sustans what | have been contendng for all
the tme-that the two regiments fought at
| different places and under different conditions:
| T." saw the I'd Mass. go over their works and
| start across the little meadow in our 'front.'
taking a direction which brought them be-
| tween us and the enemy. Our boys cried out:
| See there goes the 3D. Col Hawley COM
manded US to be ready and we expected orders
to 20 in :oo but they did not come In another
| minute the Cd Mass was being cut down in
| our front like grass before a prairie fire. At
about this time" latter the Cd has become en-.
gagged remember g saw the 9th enter the
meadow array TO the right" [italics the subscrib-
ersl land in the narrow part of the meadow or
swale."
This does not read like the two regiments
moved to the attack in line together.
| have pursued this controversy in the in.
terest of truth alone, and l believe every I'M
| preiudiced reader will bear me out in this claim
In what interest is Comrade A. Sheridan Jones
writing? He enters with flourish. supports
me on the main question: criticizes my STYLE
deliberately goes into the minor details and
furnishes besides lot of words signifying
nothing. After his astounding misstatements
of the position of his own regiment it is fair to
presume that if he has anything right it is by
| accident.
No man has a right to receive benefit from
| stolen goods. No regiment has right to
receive credit as result of SANDER The
earnestness with which the Sd Wis. comrades
have come to the defense of the Cd Mass. in its
occupancy of the latter position indicates the
holy ties by which some comrades are bound
together.-JoHN r. RANKIN, Co. A. 9th Ind,
Washington, ID. C.. ai,
Want to Get Married.
The following desire correspondence with a
view to matrimony. References must be ex-
changed in all cases. Unsatisfactory letters will