The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1901-10-06

left brigades were discovered, and Gen.
pettigrew instructed me to go for them
with all speed, but ] had scarcely turned
n do so when out came Davis with a
, rush but not Brockenbrough's Virginia
brigade, and / asked Gen. Pettigrew if
should go for it. He replied No, that
Il might follow, and if it failed to do so
!, would not matter. This was a small
brigade that had suffered from frequent
change of commanders, and had been
so badly handled that it was in a choatic
state of generalization, and was not to
he relied upon it was virtually of no
value in a fight Aftcrward it advanced
10 the protection of some rifle pits in
front of Seminary Ridge, but it took no
part in the charge
From the evidence produced here of
soldiers-aye, heroes-from Tennessee,
Mississippi, Alabama and North Carolina,
who not only participated in, but adj
vanced to the front as far, some farther,
than any of Pickett's, Ger. Longstreet
must either have been extremely biased
or in total ignorance of the part taken
and the heroic fighting by the troops from
these States as his report to Gen. Lee
in the war records is very misleading. He
extols Pickett and condemns Pettigrew
and Trimble's division. Years afterward
in his memoirs something came over the
spirit of his dream, for this official report
must have been dream of his or his ia
vorite, Gen. Pickett, which caused him
to come nearer the facts, though he still
evinced very great Partially for Pickett
He says after Gen. Pickett received his
affirmative bow as an order for him to
advance his division, Gen. Pickett ac-
cepted the duty with seeming confidence
of success, leaped on his horse and rode
gayly to his command Gen. Pickett, a
graceful horseman, sat lightly in the sad
die his brown locks flowing over his
shoulders, also, that Gen. Pickett, find
ing the battle broken, while the enemy
was still reinforcing, called the troops
off
Now as to the facts: Capt. Lewis G.
Young of Charleston, S. c., at the time
aide de- camp on Gen. ]. j. Pettigrew
staff, says that Gen. Pickett did not lead
his men. Capt. VIM. H. Bond of Scotland
Neck, n. c., in his historical essay,
pickett or Pettigrew," says, repeat
ing Gen. Humphreys invitation to his
staff, ETC.: Gentlemen, l shall lead this
charge. | presume, of course, you will
want to ride with me- Now compare
that to Pickett, who was not within a
mile of his column when they charged
at Gettysburg Pettigrew and Armistead
led Pickett's division there;
Neither Pickett nor any member of his
staff. nor even one of his horses was
touched. Why? Because, dismounted
and on the farther side Of a hill that
protected them from the enemy's fire.
Pettigrew led his division. Pettigrew
his hand, and no member of his staff
came out of the fight without being
wounded or having his horse shot under
him. Gen Trimble, commanding his di-
vision, was severely wounded. Here is
further corroborative evidence from one
Of Gen. Lees staff, a Virgnian, Col. Chas
S. Venable, Charlottesville Va.
Wilmington, N. c., March q, 1899. 4
Dear Sir--A few days ago DR.. Isaac
Manning suggested that you would prob
ably give me your account of Longstreet's
commonly but enormously called Pick
ett's charge at Gettysburg | am COL
lectiDg data to counteract the falsehoods
in regard to that charge, and DR.. Man
ming thinks your description will be of
material assistance. think he said that
Pickett did not lead his men.
Respectfully
JAMES 1. METTS. +.
n nj Orln