hide Matching Documents

The documents where this entity occurs most often are shown below. Click on a document to open it.

Document Max. Freq Min. Freq
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 37. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones) 13 1 Browse Search
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 19. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones) 7 1 Browse Search
Comte de Paris, History of the Civil War in America. Vol. 4. (ed. Henry Coppee , LL.D.) 7 1 Browse Search
Rebellion Record: a Diary of American Events: Documents and Narratives, Volume 7. (ed. Frank Moore) 4 0 Browse Search
J. William Jones, Christ in the camp, or religion in Lee's army 1 1 Browse Search
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 18. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones) 1 1 Browse Search
View all matching documents...

Your search returned 33 results in 12 document sections:

1 2
Rebellion Record: a Diary of American Events: Documents and Narratives, Volume 7. (ed. Frank Moore), chapter 125 (search)
neral Granger's corps. Opposed to these was the old army of the Tennessee, which Bragg has so long commanded; Longstreet's formidable corps from Virginia, one half of Johnston's army from Mississippi; Buckner's division from East-Tennessee; Dabney Maury's division from Mobile; Brigadier-General Lee's command from Atlanta, and from twelve to fifteen thousand fresh troops in the service of the State of Georgia--in all, amounting to at least seventy-five thousand men. The Union army confronting gan there was a lull in the fearful storm. An hour passed by, and it became evident that Bragg would not be foiled in his attempt to annihilate our gallant army without another effort. Polk's corps, assisted by the Georgia State troops, by Dabney Maury's division, and by various detached fragments of the rebel army, were to try their hands upon the heroic band who, as the forlorn hope of the army, still held the hill. Our feeble ranks were gathered up. The thinned battalions were brought cl
J. William Jones, Christ in the camp, or religion in Lee's army, Chapter 13: results of the work and proofs of its genuineness (search)
n to the command of an infantry brigade (which General Lee declined to do, on the ground that he could not be spared from the artillery, and made him instead colonel of artillery, which is recognized as really a higher rank than brigadier of infantry), he thus wrote to his mother: Now, my dear mother, you must not think that I am conceited, and that I rely on my own ability, if I get this position and take it. I would not accept the position, but I believe the maxim given me by General Dabney Maury to be the proper one for a soldier to follow: Never to seek promotion, and never to refuse it, but leave it to your superiors to judge of you. . . . . If I felt that it was from my own merit, I should be afraid to go again on the battle-field. I hope sincerely that before I am promoted to that grade, if it is to be done, brother will be made major-general; for, otherwise, I shall not believe that they ever promote according to merit. Do not be disappointed if General Lee refuses to
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 18. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones), chapter 4 (search)
great double act of soldiership and statesmanship, in the battle of Bentonville and the convention with Sherman. But not only did his comprehensive intelligence and his high-souled strength overlap and rise above the broad, high ideal even of the true soldier—if soldier only—but his heart and his affections were so rich and so loving that, even his lion-like masculinity could not banish from his intercourse with his family and his friends a tenderness that was absolutely womanly. General Dabney Maury says he kissed him upon both cheeks and then upon his lips when parting with him for the last time. It was one of his peculiar habits to embrace and kiss men whom he especially loved and trusted. He was not only affectionate and tender—he of the lion-heart and hammer-hand and body battle-scarred—but he was the most affectionate and the most tender of men. We crave the noble body. Let it be added, to complete the picture, and with devout gratitude to Almighty God, that he who,
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 19. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones), chapter 1.28 (search)
The Staunton river fight. [from the Richmond times, November 22, 1891.] Colonel Farinholt replies to General Dabney Maury—Certain alleged Errors Corrected—Another account of that famous Engagement—To whom the honor of the victory is partly Due—Interesting details. [The narrative to which Colonel Farinholt excepts appears in this volume, ante, pp. 51-57. The intent of General Maury is evident. It is just to to him to state that he earnestly endeavored to obtain all the facts attendant upon the remarkable victory before publishing his account. The editor had several conversations with him during its preparation. General Maury states that he was General Maury states that he was anxious to hear from Colonel Farinholt, to whom he wrote, but received no reply from him.] The following is an account of the battle at Staunton river bridge, prepared by Colonel B. L. Farinholt, in reply to the account of that memorable engagement from the pen of General Dabney H. Maury, and which was recently published in the
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 19. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones), General Joseph E. Johnston. (search)
nal victory, wherein he who conquers self is conqueror of death. Faithful son of the Church, he received his death wound, too, in the breast. Before the Universal Conqueror he fell upon his unsurrendered shield. He fell like a soldier, closing his eyes to earth and opening them to Heaven; he gave his soul Unto his Captain, Christ, Under whose colors he had fought so long. To this last Captain, who heareth and absolveth, his last report is handed. There, he said on his death-bed to Dabney Maury, we shall surely meet. Ah, there! In the light of that perfect eye which looks clean through appearance and judges the real only, there is this great appeal! In those upper fields where the venom of this earth is slain, its serpent crushed, where no false balance is and no inadvertency, his clear spirit will join and be felt where the mighty influences of time, purged of their dross, encounter as the stars in their courses fight. On the bosom of the Infinite he, too, is a star. In th
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 37. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones), Fighting that was close by us. (search)
tline may answer for immediate requirements. (Vol. 36, Part 2, War Records, p. 213). General Ranson adds on a postscript that on taking the breastworks, five stand of colors, one brigadier-general and about 400 prisoners were captured. As the official reports of the battle at Drewry's Bluff, of May 16, 1864, do not state what particular part was taken by the brigades of Ransom's Division, other than a few references of the major-general commanding, the differences between Gracie's men and those of Colonel Terry cannot be settled by these reports. Captain Sumpter's account is from a soldier of worthy service, and from a man whose testimony is known by all who knew him to be reliable. There are doubtless officers and men still living who were participants in the action of Kemper's brigate at Drewry's Bluff, and one of them, Colonel Maury, of the twenty-fourth Virginia, is now living in Richmond, where he is well known. A statement from him would be welcomed. John W. Daniel.
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 37. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones), Who captured Heckman's Brigade? (search)
lead in the ground, thinking we were on a level. Colonel Terry, finding that their line was weak on their right, ordered the First and Seventh forward. We charged them, doubled them up, and came sweeping up the line. As we were only about thirty steps from the enemy's line, we could plainly hear the enemy yelling out to stop shooting, that they were friends, but they soon found that the boys in gray had them, and right then and there Buck Terry's boys captured Heckman's Brigade. Colonel Maury was in command of the Twenty-fourth Virginia in that fight, and he and the gallant Richmond boys of the old First Virginia, I think, will corroborate my statement. I do not know what became of the Alabamians, but suppose they were somewhere on the line doing their duty and fighting as Alabamians know how and always did. But they did not capture Heckman's Brigade. Terry's Brigade did that—the First, Seventh, Eleventh and Twenty-fourth Virginia—and on the 17th marched through Richmond wi
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 37. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones), chapter 1.33 (search)
tock, then so important for us to hold at all hazards. There was some criticism of my conduct of this battle by General Dabney Maury many years afterwards in the Richmond Tines, based, I think, upon information furnished him by a man whose name I ly elsewhere at the moment, I did not place him under arrest, as I should have done. I should never have replied to General Maury's article and should have passed it by in silence, for General Maury had no just foundations for his criticisms, but General Maury had no just foundations for his criticisms, but meeting with General Fitzhugh Lee, who was a warm friend of mine, he, knowing all the circumstances of the engagement at the bridge, advised me not to let Gen. Maury's article go unnoticed, and I replied, though then as now, I think we had enough toGen. Maury's article go unnoticed, and I replied, though then as now, I think we had enough to do to fight the enemy. Having been wounded and captured nearby the intrepid Armistead in the heroic charge where he led the remnant of Pickett's Division over the stone wall at Gettysburg; having been honored with this independant command after e
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 37. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones), Index. (search)
08. Lee, Gen. Fitz., 35. Lee, Gen R. E. 21, 31. Lee Gen. W. H. F., 35, 69. Lincoln dejected at Lee's escape, 75; course of, inconsistent, 362. McAlwee, G. W. 354. McAnerny, Capt. John, 200. McBirney, Major, 19. McCabe, Capt. W. Gordon, 61. McLaws, Gen. L., 108. Mallet Lt. Col. J. W., 1. Malvern Hill, Battle of, 357. Manassas 8th Virginia at Second, 313. Marshall, Col. Charles 34, 323. Marylanders in the C. S. Army, 235. Massey, Col. E. C., 164. Maury, Gen. D. H., 324. Meade, General, 104. Memorial Day, Origin of. 368. Memorial Sermon in Old St. John's Church, 338. Minor, Lieut. R. D., 50. Morrison. Col. E. M., 319. Mosby Col. John S., 21, 34, 210; Unjust strictures by, 230, 269. Munford's Marylauders never surrendered 309. Murdaugh, John D. 39. Murdaugh, Capt. Wm. H., 39. Nitre and Mining Bureau, 11. Oates, Col., of the 50th Ala., 128. O'Conor Chas., the first to lead for defence of Jefferson Davis, 245
Comte de Paris, History of the Civil War in America. Vol. 4. (ed. Henry Coppee , LL.D.), Book I:—eastern Tennessee. (search)
ston to transport all his forces into the State of Mississippi and to combine them with Johnston's to crush Grant. Johnston, who had just evacuated Jackson, had answered him, with good reason, that it was too late: a part of his small army had been brought back to Mobile. This important port, which would have furnished for a campaign in Georgia a base of operations as good as Chattanooga, appeared to be greatly threatened by the fleet. If a landing was effected to attack the place, General Dabney Maury would be able to oppose only two thousand men to the besiegers. But the completion of the most important works of defence, the arrival of a certain number of recruits, and the news that the Federal expedition had been abandoned allowed Johnston to remove troops from Mobile. He was preparing to return to Bragg most of the troops which the latter had sent him at the end of May: these troops were, on the one hand, Liddell's, Ector's, and Gist's brigades, besides Walthall's, all placed
1 2