hide
Named Entity Searches
hide
Matching Documents
The documents where this entity occurs most often are shown below. Click on a document to open it.
Browsing named entities in The Daily Dispatch: August 12, 1864., [Electronic resource]. You can also browse the collection for August 9th, 1864 AD or search for August 9th, 1864 AD in all documents.
Your search returned 2 results in 2 document sections:
The War News.
We have some further particulars of the naval fight off Mobile, which make it more disastrous to the enemy than represented by the first reports, and show that, on our part, the affair was one of desperate bravery, almost unequalled in the annals of naval warfare.
The following official account of the engagement has been received by the Secretary of the Navy:
"Mobile, August 9, 1864. "Hon. S. R. Mallory, Secretary of the Navy:
"The enemy steamed in through main entrance with four monitors and about sixteen heavy vessels-of-war.
The Tecumseh, Commander T. A. M. Craven, was sunk with nearly all her crew, and also another gunboat — the Philippi, which I subsequently learned.
The Richmond, Hartford and Brooklyn, in line of battle, followed by the remainder of the fleet, pushed by Fort Morgan under full headway, where they were encountered by the Tennessee, Morgan, Gaines and Selma.
"The Tennessee and the other vessels steamed in close range of the a
The Daily Dispatch: August 12, 1864., [Electronic resource], Wright Petersburg . (search)
Wright's battery at Petersburg.
Near Petersburg, August 9, 1864. To the Editor of the Richmond Dispatch:
In the letter of your correspondent, "X," dated Petersburg, Virginia, August 2, and published in your issue of the third instant, occurs the following statement:
"In my report of Saturday I intended to have made mention of the splendid manner in which the artillery firing was directed by Major W. H. Caskie, of your city.
The battery of Wright, of his command, is especially deserving of honorable mention."
I desire to correct the errors into which your correspondent has been misled.
The only connection Major Caskie had with Wright's battery during the fight of July 30 was to deliver a message from Colonel Jones, chief of artillery, to Captain Wright.--Nor is it true that Wright's battery belongs to Major William H. Caskie's command, but to Major J. C. Cutts's battalion, who was in command of his battalion during the whole of the engagement.
It might be infe