USA > Ohio > Brief history of the 46th Ohio Volunteers > Part 6
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).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6
6th. Knowing that his order to General Nelson to march up by land would detain him many hours from the field, and in consequence of his promise of the day before he would likely wait, as he did wait several hours, for boats, Grant states (see Badeau, page 80) that "a reason for his delay has never been assigned."
7th. In Badeau, page 78, it is stated, in accordance with the report of General L. Wallace, that he was to march up and connect with Sherman's right. This is contradicted, pages 76 and 80 of Badeau, and April 13 in a disptach to the War Department Grant virtually charges Wallace with the defeat of the army, though plainly kept back by Grant's agency.
8th. In his report of the battle he verbosily but distinctly states that the arrival of Buell's advance prevented the
90
THE BATTLE OF SHILOHI.
capture of the army. This he afterwards contradicts July 26, 1863, by a report in recommendation of Sherman, "that to his personal exertions he owed his success at Shiloh," which success was the imminent capture of his army, pre- vented by Buell according to the above report.
9th. In Badeau, page 93, he contradicts his report by stating that "the rebels were repelled in their last attack without any assistance from Buell that turned the scale."
10th. In his raid "Around the World with Young," at Hamburgh, he contradicts his report by the statement that Buell did not get up till after night of the 6th, and he was so well satisfied with the condition of affairs at night, before Buell came, that he could have beaten Beauregard next day without Buell's aid. (Of course with an army Buell had snatched from ruin.)
11th. By his statements indorsing Sherman's veracity he makes himself responsible for not less than two hundred of Sherman's falsehoods as to Shiloh, fifty or more of which were uttered under oath on Colonel Worthington's trial by court-martial at Memphis, August, 1862.
In Grant's official report are not less than twenty-five (25) false or deceptive statements, and for this and perhaps other reasons his report of Shiloh is not found in a single one of his biographies. According to the plainest rules of war as to marches, battles, and sieges, if he is responsible for his conduct during the civil war, that conduct cost the Republic without any return not less than a million of dollars, and at least 200 men a day for every day of his supposed service from June, 1861, to April, 1865, all of which, and more than is above stated, will be made plain by an inquiry by him, the Shermans, and their adherents, resisted since April, 1862.
FALSEHOOD OF GRANT
- AS TO-
GENERAL JOHNSON'S FALL,
Grant, while Around the World with Young, claims to have been the
VICTOR AT SHILOH,
and that at the time (2.30 P. M.) of
SYDNEY JOHNSON'S DEATH
he was the vanquished commander of a flying army, out of whose power and his own the victory had passed, before he died,
TO GRANT.
TO WHICH FALSE STATEMENT HE IMPUDENTLY CALLS GEN. JOHNSON'S FRIENDS IN EVIDENCE, WHICH IS GIVEN IN DIRECT CONTRADICTION OF GRANT AND YOUNG, UNDER WHOSE TUTELAGE THE ENTIRE LIE WAS TOLD.
The crowning atrocity of these actual or invented "Reminiscences of the Civil War," first emitted from Hamburgh, Germany, 1878, and shifted to Hong Kong in 1879, is the above fiction of this "Duke of the Long Bow."
Thus ruthlessly robbing his tutor, Sherman, of his long-worn laurels in the practice of the LYRE.
J. R. YOUNG AROUND THE WORLD WITH GRANT.
CHAPTER
XL, PAGE 473.
Death of General Albert Sydney Johnson, at Shiloh, 25 P. M., April 6, 1862.
In answer to a question whether the death of General Johnson, at Shiloh, affected the result, General Grant said :
"I never could see that it did. On the contrary, I should think that the circumstances that attended his death, as reported by his friends, show that the battle was against him when wounded.
"That he was rallying his troops at the time, and lost his life because he would not abandon his troops to have his wound dressed. The battle was so pressing (against him) that he would not leave, and so he bled to death.
" All that he could do for the battle of Shiloh was done before he was killed. The battle was out of his hands and out of that of his army." ( Eleven lies in ten lines.)
Now, in reply to this fiction of Sherman's Washington, Duke of the Long Bow, &c., here follows what General Johnson's friends have always said :
Extract from Colonel William Preston Johnson's History of General Albert Sydney Johnson, page 612.
"The crest was gained; the enemy were in flight, &c. At this moment Governor Harris rode up from the right. After a few words, General Johnson sent him with an or- der to Colonel Statham, which having delivered, he speed- ily returned.
" Meantime groups of Federal soldiers kept up an angry discharge of firearms as they retreated.
" By the chance of war, a minie-ball from one of them did its fatal work. It came in the moment of victory from a flying foe," &c.
1
Governor Harris makes an equivalent statement, as fol- lows :
"The charge of General Johnson had been successful. I approached him and asked eagerly, 'Are you wounded ?' He said no, and then sent me with an order to Colonel Statham, 200 yards off. I galloped to Colonel Statham, delivered the order, galloped back to the General, and said, ' Your order is delivered.'
" As I was uttering this sentence the General reeled from me. I put my left arm around his neck and said, . Gen- eral, are you wounded ?' In a deliberate and emphatic tone he answered, 'Yes; and I fear severely.'
"He answered nothing further, and did not live more than 30 or 40 minutes after he was wounded."
So much for Washington Grant, the Duke, as to Shiloh.
Here, now, is what Colonel Geddes, Sth Iowa volunteers, reports as to General Johnson's " falling back," when wound- ed, about 23 p. M., April 6, 1862:
" About 3 P. M. all communication with the river (land- ing) ceased, and it became evident to me that the enemy was turning the right and left flanks of our army," &c.
About 2 p. M. the whole Union right, comprising the 46th Ohio, which had held that flank 2 hours or more, was driven back in disorder, and the Confederate flanking force cut the centre off from the landing, as stated by Colonel Geddes, soon after General Johnson's fall.
Here also is what the Duke himself says about the falling back of the Confederates about 5 P. M., or a little sooner, on the 6th:
Grant's admission of General Johnson's victory April 6. 1862. which. he claims now he had won himself when Johnson feil.
"The enemy having forced the centre line to fall back nearly half-way from their camps to the landing at a late hour in the afternoon, a desperate effort was made by the enemy to turn our left and get possession of the landing, transports, &c. (i. e., remnant of the army).
"Just at this moment General Buell's advance, ander command of Generals Nelson and Ammen, arrived, and the enemy was soon driven back."
T. WORTHINGTON,
Late Colonel 46th Ohio Vol. Int.
--
Facts Developed as to the Battle of Shiloh by Colonel Worthington's Court - Martial. August, 1502.
Colonel Worthington's court-martial, provoked by him as the only means of obtaining official evidence of the criminalities of two or more Union commanders at Shiloh, developed the following facts as to the condition of the army before the battle, all evidence as to facts during the battle being ruled out by the court in accordance with General Sherman's private order.
1st. It was proven that no clothing or intrenching tools could be had while the army was at Shiloh for sixteen or eighteen days before the battle.
2d. That Colonel Worthington insisted about a week before the battle that we would be attacked, and com- plained of the want of tools (to fortify his front.) (See McDowell's evidence.)
3d. That Colonel Worthington warned the division com- mander repeatedly of an impending attack. (Sherman's evidence.)
4th. That General Sherman refused to supply intrench- ing tools on a requisition made by Colonel Worthington a week before the battle and till after the same had occurred.
5th. That it was General Sherman's opinion under oath that the construction of defensive works would have been an indication of weakness, inviting an attack.
6th. That General Sherman, on his own evidence, had reason to expect an attack on the 3d of April, three days before the battle.
7th. Sherman testified that Buell's troops had been right- fully expected for two weeks, in face of the fact, to him known, that Buell's subordinate commanders had had
2
notice not to reach Savannah before the 7th or 8th, two or three days after the intended and expected attack.
8th. After swearing that there was no gap in the Union front, he testified that a gap of a mile had been left for Buell's 40,000 men, requiring eight miles, and that Buell's troops were nevertheless to be sent to Hamburgh, on the river two miles above Shiloh.
9th. Sherman testified that on Friday, the 4th of April, there were hostile cavalry, artillery, and infantry cousti- tuting an army in his front; yet he did not know its destina- tion, and had to guess its purpose, and there was no danger of an immediate attack.
10th. It was proven that the pickets of three brigades of the 5th division were driven back on the 5th, the day be- fore the battle, which he on oath denied, having stated that there was no prospect of an immediate attack. (See Badeau's appendix.)
11th. It was proven that a picket post three-quarters of a mile from his centre was all day occupied by the enemy, and with artillery in the afternoon, which he repeatedly swears was not the fact (on the 5th).
12th. He admitted that a position proven to be a picket post of the 1st brigade was but three-quarters of a mile from his centre, while swearing that Colonel Worthington's diary entry was false, that the pickets were scarce a mile out from the camp.
13th. It was proven that there was but one battery of artillery in line, and that on the extreme right, on the 5th, and the day of the intended attack, and on the 6th the second brigade next the river had no artillery during the battle, he having four batteries and but two in action.
14th. It was proven that the pickets of the 46th Ohio, driven back on the 5th at 7 A. M., were but half a mile from the camp the balance of the day.
15th. It was proven that there were no cavalry scouts in front of the fifth (Sherman's) division during the day and
3
night before the battle, while, as known to Sherman, tho Confederate line of battle was but one and a half miles from his front at Shiloh Church.
16th. It was proven that before the battle neither the brigade nor division commander had visited the pickets, though the attack had been for three days expected.
17th. It was proven that Colonel Worthington had vis- ited his pickets; had regularly visited his hospital, in camp and on the march; had exercised the regiment in the firings for two weeks before the battle, and had kept two com- panies lying on their arms two or more nights before the battle, in view of an attack.
18th. That on the evidence of General Sherman, Col- onel Worthington knew his duties well and had never neglected them; and on the evidence of the brigade com- mander, McDowell, he had warned him that we would be attacked Monday or Tuesday before the battle.
19th. The charge that the " diary extracts," for printing which he was arrested, were written after the battle, was disproven by both Sherman and McDowell, as also was proven the truth of the same, and far more criminality than he had charged was proven also.
20th. It was proven that he was not in command of the post at Lafayette, Tennessee, July 18, 1862, when charged by Sherman as drunk in command of the same; McDowell and Sherman being above him in command, and there at the time.
21st. Sherman having charged that he was drunk in presence of the regiment, it was proved that the regiment had evacuated the post two hours before the time charged, and four witnesses testified against his being drunk at all, Yet on this evidence he was "cashiered for being drunk on duty in command of the post" and " for conduct unbe- coming an officer and a gentleman," for printing the diary.
The sentence was approved and executed by Sherman September 16, 1862, and by Grant the 1st of October fol-
-
4
lowing. The proceedings were not referred to the Judge Advocate-General till the 4th of November, 1862, and were pronounced null and void on the 19th following. Yet Col- onel Worthington, through the emnity of Grant and the Shermans, was not returned to his command, but repeat- edly recommended to be dismissed by the President as an officer of "well-known incompetency," in face of Senator John Sherman's statement and other evidence, as follows:
WASHINGTON, April 21, 1862.
SIR: Colonel Thomas Worthington, of 46th Ohio regiment, was authorized by General Cameron on the 29th of August, 1861, to raise a regiment, but it was not completed and sworn into service until December. He is a graduate at West Point, showed great ability at the battle of Shiloh, and is believed to be far superior to several officers who, by filling their regiments sooner, outrank him. It is the desire. I am informed. of all his superior officers that he rank from the date of his appointment, Angust, 1861. Cannot that order be made? If so, it will, in my opinion, promote the public service. I inclose a copy of a note from General Sherman upon the subject.
Very respectfully yours, JOHN SHERMAN.
L. THOMAS, Adjutant-General.
(For evidence as to Sherman's conduct, see " Grant at Shiloh," Part 2.)
3784
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.