hide Sorting

You can sort these results in two ways:

By entity
Chronological order for dates, alphabetical order for places and people.
By position (current method)
As the entities appear in the document.

You are currently sorting in descending order. Sort in ascending order.

hide Most Frequent Entities

The entities that appear most frequently in this document are shown below.

Entity Max. Freq Min. Freq
George B. McClellan 1,246 6 Browse Search
Stonewall Jackson 888 4 Browse Search
James Longstreet 773 5 Browse Search
Jackson (Tennessee, United States) 446 10 Browse Search
Irvin McDowell 422 4 Browse Search
Washington (United States) 410 4 Browse Search
Fitz Lee 376 6 Browse Search
John Pope 355 5 Browse Search
Harper's Ferry (West Virginia, United States) 349 1 Browse Search
Fitz John Porter 346 18 Browse Search
View all entities in this document...

Browsing named entities in a specific section of Robert Underwood Johnson, Clarence Clough Buell, Battles and Leaders of the Civil War: Volume 2.. Search the whole document.

Found 56 total hits in 21 results.

1 2 3
Williamsburg (Virginia, United States) (search for this): chapter 5.23
water, in the shade of trees, at the foot of telegraph poles, and, lastly, quite within the defenses of the place — in the very streets. On the march from Williamsburg toward Richmond General Longstreet wrote to General G. J. Rains, whose brigade was on duty as rear-guard: It is the desire of the major-general commanding pons alluded to, to destroy assailants and prevent escalade. Subsequently, with a similar view, they were placed at spots I never saw. . . . And again when, at Williamsburg, we were ordered to turn upon our assailants and combat them, . . . some 6 or 7 miles this side of Williamsburg, my command forming the rear-guard of the army,Williamsburg, my command forming the rear-guard of the army, . . . some 4 small shells, found abandoned by our artillery, were hastily prepared by my efforts, and put in the road near a tree felled across, mainly to have a moral effect in checking the advance of the enemy (for they were too small to do more). . . . [Compare p. 205.] Editor
Yorktown (Virginia, United States) (search for this): chapter 5.23
stating that they witnessed the explosion of concealed shells or torpedoes at Yorktown — among them Fred T. Locke, assistant adjutant-general to Fitz John Porter, dis near the works. . . . A cavalry detachment passing along the road leading to Yorktown had some of its men and horses killed and wounded by these shells. Our telegraph operator was sent into Yorktown soon after our troops had got possession of the place. He trod upon one of the buried shells, which burst and terribly mangled bot 25th, 1863. Porter's statement is that when the advance detachments entered Yorktown the command on the left was fired upon from the Red Fort. Those on the ri New York Herald, containing General McClellan's report on buried torpedoes at Yorktown, reached General Johnston, who, in a letter dated May 12th, requested General tter to Rains, who on May 14th reported in part as follows: I commanded at Yorktown for the last seven months, and when General McClellan approached with his army
William F. Barry (search for this): chapter 5.23
ons I saw a number of large shells, placed so that they could easily be fired by persons unaware of their presence. The Official Records show that General Fitz John Porter referred to the buried shells in his report of the siege, and General William F. Barry, Inspector of Artillery, made a statement in detail, in a communication to army headquarters, August 25th, 1863. Porter's statement is that when the advance detachments entered Yorktown the command on the left was fired upon from thsses from shells planted in the ground, which exploded when trod upon. Many of these shells were concealed in the streets and houses of the town, and arranged to explode by treading on the caps or pulling a wire attached to the doors. General W. F. Barry wrote that buried shells were encountered when they were about to enter the abandoned Confederate lines: Before reaching the glacis of the main work, and at the distance of more than one hundred yards from it, several of our men were i
G. J. Rains (search for this): chapter 5.23
street] that you put no shells or torpedoes behind you, as he does not recognize it as a proper or effective method of war. In an indorsement on the above, General Rains advocated the use of buried shells in retreat and for the defense of works. He forwarded Longstreet's letter and his own comments to General D. H. Hill. The latter approvingly indorsed Rains's suggestion. This correspondence went to the Secretary of War, G. W. Randolph, whose decision, favorable to Longstreet's views, was as follows: It is not admissible in civilized warfare to take life with no other object than the destruction of life. . . . It is admissible to plant shells in ached General Johnston, who, in a letter dated May 12th, requested General D. H. Hill to ascertain if there was any truth in it. General Hill referred the matter to Rains, who on May 14th reported in part as follows: I commanded at Yorktown for the last seven months, and when General McClellan approached with his army of 100,000
ed warfare to take life with no other object than the destruction of life. . . . It is admissible to plant shells in a parapet to repel an assault, or in a wood to check pursuit, because the object is to save the work in one case and the army in the other A copy of the New York Herald, containing General McClellan's report on buried torpedoes at Yorktown, reached General Johnston, who, in a letter dated May 12th, requested General D. H. Hill to ascertain if there was any truth in it. General Hill referred the matter to Rains, who on May 14th reported in part as follows: I commanded at Yorktown for the last seven months, and when General McClellan approached with his army of 100,000 men and opened his cannons upon us, I had but 2500 in garrison, and our whole Army of the Peninsula, under Major-General Magruder, amounted to but 9300 effective men; then at a salient angle, an accessible point of our works, as part of the defenses thereof, I had the land mined with the weapons all
Daniel H. Hill (search for this): chapter 5.23
not recognize it as a proper or effective method of war. In an indorsement on the above, General Rains advocated the use of buried shells in retreat and for the defense of works. He forwarded Longstreet's letter and his own comments to General D. H. Hill. The latter approvingly indorsed Rains's suggestion. This correspondence went to the Secretary of War, G. W. Randolph, whose decision, favorable to Longstreet's views, was as follows: It is not admissible in civilized warfare to take object is to save the work in one case and the army in the other A copy of the New York Herald, containing General McClellan's report on buried torpedoes at Yorktown, reached General Johnston, who, in a letter dated May 12th, requested General D. H. Hill to ascertain if there was any truth in it. General Hill referred the matter to Rains, who on May 14th reported in part as follows: I commanded at Yorktown for the last seven months, and when General McClellan approached with his army of
John Bankhead Magruder (search for this): chapter 5.23
an's report on buried torpedoes at Yorktown, reached General Johnston, who, in a letter dated May 12th, requested General D. H. Hill to ascertain if there was any truth in it. General Hill referred the matter to Rains, who on May 14th reported in part as follows: I commanded at Yorktown for the last seven months, and when General McClellan approached with his army of 100,000 men and opened his cannons upon us, I had but 2500 in garrison, and our whole Army of the Peninsula, under Major-General Magruder, amounted to but 9300 effective men; then at a salient angle, an accessible point of our works, as part of the defenses thereof, I had the land mined with the weapons alluded to, to destroy assailants and prevent escalade. Subsequently, with a similar view, they were placed at spots I never saw. . . . And again when, at Williamsburg, we were ordered to turn upon our assailants and combat them, . . . some 6 or 7 miles this side of Williamsburg, my command forming the rear-guard of the
Fitz John Porter (search for this): chapter 5.23
the editors, stating that they witnessed the explosion of concealed shells or torpedoes at Yorktown — among them Fred T. Locke, assistant adjutant-general to Fitz John Porter, director of the siege, and Colonel Edward C. James, of the engineer corps. General Locke wrote in May, 1885: On the morning of May 4th, 1862, our picketations I saw a number of large shells, placed so that they could easily be fired by persons unaware of their presence. The Official Records show that General Fitz John Porter referred to the buried shells in his report of the siege, and General William F. Barry, Inspector of Artillery, made a statement in detail, in a communication to army headquarters, August 25th, 1863. Porter's statement is that when the advance detachments entered Yorktown the command on the left was fired upon from the Red Fort. Those on the right experienced some losses from shells planted in the ground, which exploded when trod upon. Many of these shells were concealed in
Official Records (search for this): chapter 5.23
had some of its men and horses killed and wounded by these shells. Our telegraph operator was sent into Yorktown soon after our troops had got possession of the place. He trod upon one of the buried shells, which burst and terribly mangled both of his legs, from which he died soon after in great agony. . . . In the casemates and covered ways about the fortifications I saw a number of large shells, placed so that they could easily be fired by persons unaware of their presence. The Official Records show that General Fitz John Porter referred to the buried shells in his report of the siege, and General William F. Barry, Inspector of Artillery, made a statement in detail, in a communication to army headquarters, August 25th, 1863. Porter's statement is that when the advance detachments entered Yorktown the command on the left was fired upon from the Red Fort. Those on the right experienced some losses from shells planted in the ground, which exploded when trod upon. Many of t
Joseph E. Johnston (search for this): chapter 5.23
War, G. W. Randolph, whose decision, favorable to Longstreet's views, was as follows: It is not admissible in civilized warfare to take life with no other object than the destruction of life. . . . It is admissible to plant shells in a parapet to repel an assault, or in a wood to check pursuit, because the object is to save the work in one case and the army in the other A copy of the New York Herald, containing General McClellan's report on buried torpedoes at Yorktown, reached General Johnston, who, in a letter dated May 12th, requested General D. H. Hill to ascertain if there was any truth in it. General Hill referred the matter to Rains, who on May 14th reported in part as follows: I commanded at Yorktown for the last seven months, and when General McClellan approached with his army of 100,000 men and opened his cannons upon us, I had but 2500 in garrison, and our whole Army of the Peninsula, under Major-General Magruder, amounted to but 9300 effective men; then at a sa
1 2 3