Browsing named entities in Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 1. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones). You can also browse the collection for J. E. B. Stuart or search for J. E. B. Stuart in all documents.

Your search returned 17 results in 5 document sections:

Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 1. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones), Editorial Department (search)
rate departments, embracing messages of the President and Heads of Departments, reports of battles, statutes at large of Congress, acts and resolutions of the Senate and House of Representatives; general orders of the Adjutant-General's department, and a large collection of reports of the several State governments. We have in Mss. a full set of reports of Longstreet's corps; all of Ewell's reports from the opening of the campaign of ‘63 to the close of the war; all of the papers of General J. E. B. Stuart; a full set of the papers of General S. D. Lee's corps, and a large number of most valuable reports of other officers of the different armies of the Confederacy. We have a complete set of the reports of the Committee on the Conduct of the War to the United States Congress, which embraces testimony of the leading Federal generals on nearly every one of their campaigns and battles; and we have also a number of other Federal official reports, and are arranging to get the whole of them
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 1. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones), Book notices. (search)
say now that the author seems to have bestowed on it a great deal of labor, and has produced a book of historic value which will be widely read. It was not remarkable, perhaps, that Federal commanders during the war should have so egregiously overestimated our numbers; but it is entirely inexcusable that a historian at this day (with easy access to the official reports of the Confederate generals) should commit the same blunders. Mr. Bates puts Hill's corps at Fredericksburg at 30,000 men, Stuart's cavalry at Brandy Station at 12,000, the force which environed Milroy at Winchester at 60,000, and General Lee's entire force at Gettysburg at 107,000 men. Now the truth is that these figures are most inexcusable exaggerations. General Lee's entire force at Gettysburg was not quite 57,000 men. Ah! if our grand old chieftan had commanded the numbers which Northern generals and Northern writers attribute to him, then the story of Gettysburg and of the war would have been far different.
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 1. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones), chapter 2.12 (search)
autiful tribute to his old commander, General J. E. B. Stuart: Brother Confederates--I hope I mauage of General Johnston, to the Indefatigable Stuart. To-day, comrades, I visited his grave. Heb marks the spot, upon which is inscribed--General Stuart, wounded May 11th, 1864; died May 12th, 1864. And there rests poor J. E. B. Stuart, It was in 1852 I first knew him, the date of my entryof Custis Lee's, Pegram's and Pender's. Beauty Stuart he was then universally called, for however mao senior Captains Van Dorn and Kirby Smith. Stuart served with much distinction as a United Statesession of the engine-house at Harper's Ferry, Stuart was in or near Washington on leave of absence,me at the North delighted to call him. J. E. B. Stuart's duties began in the late war in the Valment upon that expedition, and know that after Stuart found himself in rear of the Federal right, hithat Harry of Navarre was present, except that Stuart's plume was black; for everywhere, like Navarr
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 1. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones), Review of Bates' battle of Gettysburg. (search)
y compared notes every night, and if their counts differed, they were satisfactorily adjusted by compromise. In round numbers, Lee had 91,000 infantry and 280 pieces of artillery; marching with that column were about 6,000 cavalry. He adds that Stuart's cavalry, which crossed the Potomac at Seneca, numbered about 5,000 men. Such information as this may have been useful to a commander before a battle, who was very anxious not to underrate his enemy, but is altogether valueless to the historianhad upon the field in the neighborhood of 76,300. General Lee had crossed the Potomac but ten days before; had marched unopposed and at his leisure through a hostile country into central Pennsylvania; had concentrated his entire force — except Stuart's cavalry (which did not cross the Potomac with the main army) and Imboden's small command — at Gettysburg; and yet under these circumstances was, according to Dr. Bates, able to thinks the Confederate commander lost the use of over 20,000 men in
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 1. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones), Strength of General Lee's army in the Seven days battles around Richmond. (search)
. Hill, 10,000; Magruder, 13,000; Holmes, 6,573; Huger, 8,930; A. P. Hill, 13,000; Whiting, 4,000; Lawton, 3,500; Jackson and Ewell, 8,000. Aggregate, 76,054. Stuart had six regiments of cavalry, two small commands called Legions, and there were five companies of the First North Carolina cavalry. One of the regiments is shown istead gives only a partial statement of his loss — taking it at 450 and we will have the loss in Huger's division 2,129. The loss in Holmes' division was 51, in Stuart's cavalry 71, and in the reserve artillery 44. The whole loss sums up as follows: Longstreet's division, 4,429; A. P. Hill's division, 3,870; Huger's division, 2,129; Jackson's command, 6,727; Magruder's command, 2,236; Holmes' division, 51; Stuart's cavalry, 71; reserve artillery, 44. Total, 19,557. Mr. Swinton, the author of the History of the army of the Potomac, examined the Confederate returns in the Archive Office at Washington, and in June, 1876, published an abstract from them