Browsing named entities in Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 2. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones). You can also browse the collection for J. F. Gilmer or search for J. F. Gilmer in all documents.

Your search returned 2 results in 2 document sections:

Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 2. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones), chapter 3.16 (search)
engineer service. In addition to the foregoing, the details of about (1,700) seventeen hundred able-bodied men (400 being for the Trans-Mississippi Department) is required. A large proportion of these necessary details has already been made by local commanders, and the men are constantly and fully employed. It is hoped that the foregoing statement furnishes approximately, at least, the information desired. I have the honor to be, With great respect, Your obedient servant, J. F. Gilmer, Major-General and Chief of Bureau. Confederate States of America, Surgeon-General's Office, Richmond, Virginia, February 9th, 1865. Sir — In reply to the circular of the 7th instant, from your office, I have the honor to submit the following report: By recent instructions, the Superintendent of Conscription has (on the authority of the War Department) directed that all disabled men detailed from the Army of Northern Virginia, should be returned for such duty as they may be able t
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 2. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones), Letter from General A. L. Long. (search)
ly render this unnecessary. I will, however, in this connection, venture the assertion that the article of General Jordan would have been more valuable as an historical production, if he had more clearly stated in what important points General Lee's plan of seacoast defence was changed by his successor. It is well known that after being battered down during a protracted seige, Fort Sumter was remodeled, and rendered vastly stronger than it had previously been, by the skillful hand of General Gilmer, Chief of the Confederate Engineer Corps, and that various points were powerfully strengthened to resist the formidable forces that threatened them. Doubtless in those instances the original lines were more or less modified to meet the varying phases of war, but I am yet to learn in what material particular General Lee's original system of seacoast defence was departed from. In conclusion, I regret that my article should have been construed into an act of injustice to General Beaureg