The National tribune., 1907-03-28
BATTLE OF FRANKLIN.

BATTLE OF FRANKLIN.
The Loss Of the Brieades Wa. Mainly 1,
the Last Line Of Battle.
Editor National Tribune: A year ag,
I read with intense interest the account
in The National Tribune of the hatti.
of Franklin. 1t was my intention a
that time to make correction in ons
particular, but the pressure of bushes.
prevented. ! desire now to make tha
correction. but not in a spirit of con.
troversy; ] only desire to have the exact
facts preserved for future historians
1 want to say in the first place thai
the spirit of those articles was mos
admirable. The writer evidently de.
justice to ALL Even when he speaks OF
Gen. Wagner's blunder he does it in d
spirit of charity. Still he does not dc
justice to Wagner's two brigades, which
had been left in front, tho he plainly
does not mean to do them an injustice
The writer of the article says he was
with Gen. Wagner on the left OF the
pike when the battle began; therefore
he is competent to speak of the things
which came under his eye; but in the
very nature of things he could not see
the battle as a whole. I wish to give
those facts that came under my eye
and not evidently under the observa-
ton Of the writer of the aforesaid arti-
Gle. want the truth Of history to
stand. The implication in the article
is that Wagner's two brigades had little
or nothing to do in defending the
works; this is certainly not the case.
I was a member of the 26th Ohio
hf oiy, liant h. - v,
Brigade in front. We could plainly see
Hoods army forming in battle array.
The sight was dramatically impressive.
was in the whirl of battle that soon
broke upon us, and saw as much as
anyone could see. We all realized that
some one had made blunder, and the
moments Of suspense, as we faced that
magnificent battle line. were something
awful. Nothing worthy the name of a
fight or even skirmish took place in
front. Our line broke when the rebs
were close to US. and they followed us
at full speed. We could not shoot, and
they did not take time TO do So In
going back 1 past thru the edge of the
famous locust grove, and reached the
works near the Carter House. My rec
objection is that the works were prac-
tically deserted at the place where we
crost. We stopt and began to fire rap
idly, and soon the smoke of battle COW
cred everything. In few minutes our
line gave way. as did the line at the
pike, and I went behind the Carter
Of Opdycke's Brigade except so far as
was part Of 1t. I never heard any
statement to the effect that Wagner's
Brigades went back to the river until
nearly 20 years after the fight.
We should keep clearly in mind the
situation at the critical moment of the
fight. When Wagner's Brigades fell
back to the works their lines naturally
and the men crowded to-
wards the pike. What was the situa.
ton one minute after the Confederate
line broke our center? The two bri-
gades that had held the works and
Wagner's two brigades had fallen back
from Is to so yards within the works.
and Opdycke's Brigade was charging
up the pike to restore the line. Now,
does anyone who ever saw a battle be-
lieve that two brigades retired without
orders from that disorganized crowd to
the river, while the other three bri.
gades restored the line? Is it not more
to suppose that parts Of the
i've brigades restored the line, while all
FIVE brigades had their representatives
In the disorgan,zed crowd at the river?
II the honor Of re-establishing the line
does not belong to all five brigades,
would we not naturally suppose that the
brigades which lost most heavily played
the most important part in it? Let us
glance at the official records. Col. Fox
doubtless wrote his book with the off,
cial reports before him. He says that
the loss on the Union side at the battle
that more than 1000 Of this loss was in
the tHo brigades Of Wagner. "unnec-
essarily compromised at the front" I
was absolutely certain that Col. Fox
was mistaken as to the place where the
two brigades suffered this loss, and I
made q most careful examination of
the facts. AS one who participated in
the retreat, was sure that the loss in
front Of the works was Insignificant. i
also knew that the testimony Of promi-
nent Confederates would be valuab BILE
therefore, I addressed a letter to Gov
James D. Porter, Of Tennessee, who
was Gen. Cheatham's Chief Of Staff IN
the fight. In my letter I asked the
whether in following our line
The COnfederates saw many dead Union
and whether they had taken
many prisoners. He replied by saying
there was no Federal deed at any dis
lance in front of the works. He said
perhaps 15 or 20 of Wagner's men
Threw uO"H anu SuTEeuueT-
ed; that the loss In Wagner's Brigad.s
IN front was Insignificant. A few DAYS
later he wrote me a second letter, In
which he stated that he had had a con-
versation with Gen. Cheathanl. who put
the loss even smaller than he had made
1t. Gen. Cheatham said that his COM
mand hardly lost a man until within
SO yards of our works.
Gen. Wagner's Brgiades did not lose
a score of men in front of our intrench-
ments; they could not have lost any
back at the river. Where. then, did
they sustain the loss that amounted to
about one-half that of the entire army?
They must have lost these men in the
vortex of battle, near the pike, Carter
House and grove.
During the fight that ragged for two
or three hours near the center we
fought without organization. The COM
mands were all mixed up. The officers
brought us ammunition. spread 1t he
fore u.s. and we fired as rapidly as pos
w. Gist. Cedar Falls, Iowa.
Wauhafchie.
Editor National Tribune: desire
to correct some statements made by
Comrade M. L. Olmsted on the battle