USA > Massachusetts > Thirteenth Massachusetts Regiment [circular no. 16] > Part 3
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
But many an old campaigner of the Army of the Potomac still cherishes, and will continue to cherish till "taps" sound the final " lights out," the unalterable belief that, after all, since it was his plan of marching on a parallel line with Lee, his skilful interposition of our army between that of the enemy and Washington, and his march- ing orders that Meade practically endorsed and followed, it was " Fighting Joe " Hooker who really was the conqueror of Lee at Gettysburg.
(27)
-
REFLECTIONS OF A PRIVATE.
BY C. E. DAVIS, JR.
For a veteran of the Civil War to cast any reflection on the cam- paigns of men who served in any other war would be the most exe- crable taste, besides betokening a jealous and conceited mind. In whatever capacity a soldier serves his country he is entitled to approbation, provided he fulfils the contract he made when he en- listed, whether it is fighting or digging, on the march or on picket, in danger or out of danger ; and the Thirteenth would be the last to disparage such service. Indeed, there were men in the Civil War who manifested traits as disagreeable and out of tune with patriotism as could be found in any promiscuous gathering of men enlisted for war. Tom Berry, of Company B, who was a walking delegate in embryo, used to balk when his nostrils caught the odor of battle. At Cedar Mountain he called a strike, but it missed fire so far as anybody but himself was concerned. Two days after the battle the strike was declared off. His next strike - the long strike - was just before Thoroughfare Gap. This strike is still on. Since the close of the war some of these men have made themselves conspicuous at every military demonstration, and good soldiers have been disgusted with the efforts they have made to be classed as heroes of a war in which they did nothing but shirk their duty. Heroism is not confined to soldiering. It may be seen in many walks of life. Physical courage, so much extolled, is as common as are fleas, and much more common than moral courage. There were thousands upon thousands of men who gave good service to their country who would scorn to draw at- tention to the fact by vainglorious talk, and it has been annoying, these many years, to witness the persistence with which some men have shouted themselves hoarse about heroic deeds they never per- formed, that the public might be impressed with the idea they were the only heroes of the Civil War, and but for them the rebellion would never have been crushed. When we recall the slender foun- dation on which their claims to merit is supported, it makes one weary. Notoriety and boasting do not generally accompany brave deeds. According to our experience, the men who did the best work
(2S)
have made the least noise about it. Having fulfilled the obligation they undertook upon enlistinent, good soldiers have not felt inclined to speak about their service any more than they would about any other contract they had made. But shirks, fearing that others may learn what their consciences tell them is true, take every opportunity to shine up their military halos so as to appear well with the general public, if not with their comrades. Having reached the autumn of life, they are prompted by that instinct of self-preservation, which is common to animal life, to look after their good name, and venture to plant a few of the seeds of glory which they have stolen, hoping to harvest in the future some of the reputation for courage which they never possessed.
But all this is aside from what we started to write and which goes to show that the Civil War had its weeds as well as its flowers, and we hope the acknowledgment we have here made will prevent any veteran of the Spanish War from thinking we claim any patent on courage or fortitude. This moralizing was prompted by an inquiry made by a young man fresh from the pious influences of Sunday school where he had been pondering over the parable of the " widow's mite," until he thought the Spanish War exceeded in magnitude all other wars. He asked, in all seriousness, if Gettys- burg was not the San Juan of the Rebellion. Ye gods ! What a question from the mouth of a boy fresh from school where history is taught. The Holy Writ advises us to " answer a fool according to his folly lest he be wise in his own conceit." Following out this sacred admonition, we asked him if he did not think Dam No. 5 was more likely the San Juan of the Rebellion. Our attempt to be facetious failed, because he had never read about this battle, though he had often heard his father mention Dam, but not in con- nection with No. 5.
" A father said unto his hopeful son,
' Who was Leonidas, my cherished one?' The boy replied, with words of ardent nature,
' He was a member of the Legislature.'
'How?' asked the parent; then the youngster saith :
' He got a pass, and held it like grim death.'
' Whose pass? What pass?' the anxious father cried ;
"'Twas the'r monopoly,' the boy replied.
(29)
" In deference to the public, we must state, That boy has been an orphan since that date."
He was equally ignorant about the capture of Martinsburg.
To teach in our public schools a history of the Civil War and omit these two important episodes seems strange and unaccountable. We advised him to study both these events, particularly the taking of Martinsburg, inasmuch as the glory of its capture is still a vexed question and continues to be a subject of discussion at our gatherings.
Dam No. 5 was a great battle, differing with other great battles only in the number engaged and the amount of ammunition used. It was one of the battles of the Civil War where the number of killed could not be counted, though it was our custom to leave the burial of the killed and the number thereof to the undertaker and the mathematician. We urged him to take a course of reading on this famous engagement, as it possessed those elements of scientific war- fare that always interested the military student. In reply to his inquiry why, if so important, it had never been written up, we felt obliged to say the neglect was probably due to the suggestion of profanity unfortunately associated with its name which, heretofore, had prevented a discussion of its merits for fear of offending the fastidious ears of young scholars. Hence it followed that military critics, not wishing to have their feelings lacerated by unfriendly criticisms, avoided a path so strewn with thorns. But the time had arrived when it might be written up without fear of giving offence, the supreme court having decided that " Dam " was not a profane word.
We also told him that Dam No. 5 possessed all the characteristics of the greatest battles known to history ; land and water, trees, grass, and sky. As a scientific problem showing how to conduct a great battle without casualties, it was immense. The energy, clear- sightedness, and skill exhibited at Dam No. 5 made a deep impres- sion on our youthful mind because it was our first battle, and our being there happened under circumstances somewhat peculiar as well as advantageous. We were not a member of the company detailed to go there and stop Stonewall Jackson from crossing the Potomac
(30)
river at that point, and our going was a risk we took in being absent without leave. We were anxious to test our mettle by actual contact with the enemy. At the time of our enlistment we had an enormous appreciation of our capacity for war, and as we walked down Washington street in April, 1861, our blood boiled for active and sanguinary service. It seemed hard to be restrained by the government from taking our gun and going forth at once to crush our country's foes. Somehow, tramping over the highways of Mary- land had reduced the blood-thirsty spirit that possessed us and we were beginning to argue with ourselves as to whether home was not a better place than Virginia, and the fear was taking hold of us that we might show the white feather and be forever after a subject of ridicule, like the ass that put on the lion's skin. So this opportunity of taking part in a fight and quitting in case we could not stand the pressure was not to be lost, as nobody cared a Dam No. 5 whether we were present or not and our disappearance would excite no comment. We were stationed at Williamsport, Md., and, with another comrade, took our gun and walked to this battle- field, arriving in time to participate. This is how we came to be in this great battle. The most noticeable feature of this fight to our then inexperienced mind was the masterly plan and the tactical simplicity with which it was carried out. The fight was opened by the rebel fire, and in order that they might waste as much ammu- nition as possible, we retired behind trees which, by the way, were not of equal thickness, and some of the men were obliged to stand sideways in order to be absolutely safe. In the end we were victo- rious and the attempt of Stonewall Jackson to march on to Eastport, Me., was frustrated. Had this battle been advertised as well as San Juan, we remarked to our young friend, the world would not have remained so long in ignorance of its merits. This appeared to dis- please him, so we asked him if he was familiar with the capture of Martinsburg, but he was in utter darkness on that subject. We assured him that the taking of Martinsburg was not only a thrilling event, but showed in a very complete way how to capture a town or city without loss of life. We assured him the subject was worthy of careful study, inasmuch as the glory of its capture is still a matter in
(31)
dispute, and at military gatherings the question is often asked, " Who took Martinsburg?" It was an achievement in the first class of scientific warfare and a masterpiece of strategic skill - and preceded the capture of Vicksburg. The best thing that can be said of this splendid performance was the fact that not a soldier on either side was hurt. As the inhabitants were all in bed and the enemy had retired, we were at some trouble to rouse the people from their slumber to an appreciation that a great military success had been accomplished. It is a rare as well as an exquisite pleasure to take part in a great battle, or the capture of a city, where there are no casualties. On this occasion we felt as Joshua did at the taking of Jericho, when he said unto the people, "Shout ; for the Lord hath given you a city."
In reply to our inquiries about the customs prevailing in the army during the Spanish War, we were much surprised to learn how many changes had taken place. The rank and file were not allowed to call on a commander and make suggestions or to point out the mistakes he had made during the day's conflict. The free and easy custom of using the general's tent as a loafing place for the private soldier, as prevailed during the Civil War, was not in vogue. This was a loss to the commanding officer and made it necessary for him to rely upon his own judgment -- a difficult thing for him to do.
General Grant was always glad to have a private soldier drop in upon him during the evening and make suggestions about conducting a campaign, though occasions did occur when even his impassive nature became alarmed at the superior intelligence exhibited, showing that some of the cogs of his mental machinery needed lubricating. General Meade, whose pious thoughts usually found utterance in ornate and vigorous language that charmed his delighted listeners, was ex- tremely fond of talking with the " boys," from whom he gathered much information about running his campaigns. His free and easy manners made him very popular with the army, and his tent was a general loafing place for the rank and file. "Joe" Hooker was always attractive and companionable with the " boys," and many an evening we spent in his tent playing " Authors " - cards not being allowed in the army. We always left his tent full - of pleasant
(32)
memories of his hospitable nature. It is useless to prolong these illustrations which were common enough and which added so much to the enjoyment of a soldier's life. In the Spanish War how different ! None of the amenities of life were observed. Everything was " strenuous."
Furthermore, they complain of irregularity in serving meals, and that the food was not of the best. In this matter the Spanish War was way behind the Civil War. One of the pleasures we en- joyed was the regularity of meals. In this respect General Grant was very particular. He insisted that the men should be called to breakfast at 7, lunch at 12, and dinner at 6 P.M., and the cooks were sent forward after each meal to prepare for the next, as it was an axiom that men would fight better on a full stomach. During the Wilderness campaign, and thereafter, particular attention was paid to this matter, and the hours mentioned were adopted to conform to the long-established custom of General Lee who was a punctilious man in matters relating to the feeding of his army. Irregularity in meals produces indigestion, which is another word for anarchy, and, besides, leads to profanity, a habit that was unknown in the Civil War.
We love to recall how much consideration was given to the comfort and pleasure of the private soldier during the Civil War. We cannot forget the pleasant stroll we took with Burnside, which some droll " wag " called the " Mud March " (ha ! ha !) because it happened to rain before we reached camp. Nor shall we soon forget the gunning trip we took with Grant through that primeval forest called the Wilderness, where there was plenty of good shooting, and where we met the friends of General Lee who pointed out localities where game was most abundant. Yes, the Civil War was a great picnic.
(33)
5628
المساء
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.