hide Sorting

You can sort these results in two ways:

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

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

hide Most Frequent Entities

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

Entity Max. Freq Min. Freq
United States (United States) 278 0 Browse Search
Stonewall Jackson 264 2 Browse Search
Braxton Bragg 185 1 Browse Search
North Carolina (North Carolina, United States) 180 0 Browse Search
W. M. Polk 178 2 Browse Search
J. B. Hood 174 0 Browse Search
Daniel Ruggles 165 1 Browse Search
N. H. Harris 143 3 Browse Search
B. F. Cheatham 143 5 Browse Search
Jackson (Mississippi, United States) 132 0 Browse Search
View all entities in this document...

Browsing named entities in a specific section of Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 9. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones). Search the whole document.

Found 324 total hits in 103 results.

... 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Ricketts (search for this): chapter 9.80
the Red River Expedition. After describing the garrisons in Baltimore and Washington and my movement across the Potomac, he proceeds: On the 6th the enemy occupied Hagerstown, moving a strong column toward Frederick City. General Wallace, with Ricketts's division and his own command, the latter mostly new and undisciplined troops, pushed out from Baltimore with great promptness and met the enemy in force on the Monocacy, near the crossing of the railroad bridge. His force was not sufficient ton before I did. General Barnard, after stating the inability of Hunter to move up the Ohio and over the Baltimore and Ohio railroad in time to oppose me, says: Hence it became necessary to find other troops to oppose Early. One division (Ricketts's) was, as has been seen, detached on the 5th of July from the lines before Petersburg and sent to Baltimore, where it arrived in time to bear the brunt of the battle at the Monocacy. The other two divisions did not receive their orders till
Rodes (search for this): chapter 9.80
ions had suffered very heavy losses, and there had been no accessions to the corps, except in the return of a small brigade of my own division and two regiments of Rodes's, which had been detached. When I was detached from General Lee's army the whole corps did not amount to 9,000 effectives. At Lynchburg I found Breckinridge wit. This, I presume, is the earliest return on file in the Archive Office after I was detached, and is as follows: Breckinridge's division (total effective)2,104 Rodes's division (total effective)3,013 Gordon's division (total effective)2,544 Ramseur's division (total effective)1,909   Aggregate9,570 The strength of the t house also, and it was not burned by my orders, but was fired after my guard had been withdrawn. I have never been able to ascertain who did the burning. General Rodes, whose division occupied my front line, and furnished the guard for the house, was of opinion that it was burned by some resident of the neighborhood, who took
P. H. Sheridan (search for this): chapter 9.80
e when I was in front of Washington in July, 1864, I here give an abstract of the return of General Sheridan's force in the Valley in August, 1864. This is taken from the Adjutant General's Office in as to which I am not informed. It is as follows: Return of Middle Military Department, General P. H. Sheridan commanding: The latest August return, 1864, shows in the field-- General Crook's comm0 men was in my rear at Harper's Ferry. I may say here that I endeavored to get the returns of Sheridan's forces for September and October, when occurred the principal engagements between our forces,, not only when I was in front of Washington, but in the subsequent campaign in the Valley. General Sheridan in his report says that his loss in that campaign was in killed, 1,938; wounded, 11,893; mirant which had never been returned. If that was the fact it may be that the missing returns of Sheridan's forces were among them; and as Grant's biography has now been completed it is not improbable
Peter Snyder (search for this): chapter 9.80
nt, and to report to McCook on the 10th and 11th. Quartermaster-General Meigs reported with 2,000 men on the night of the 10th, and Colonel Rice, with 2,800 convalescents and artillerymen reported to the same officer on Monday, thus giving a force of 14,916 effectives for duty on the front against which my advance was made, to which should be added several commands the strength of which is not given, as the Second District of Columbia Volunteers, Captains Gibbs's and Bradley's batteries, and Snyder's battalion of the Ninth New York Heavy Artillery. (See pages 113-116). There were, then, over fifteen thousand men available for duty in the trenches and in connection therewith on the front against which my advance was made before I got within reach of the works. The character of those works is thus described by General Barnard: Thus from a few isolated works, covering bridges or commanding a few especially important points, was developed a connected system of fortification by whic
Thaddeus Stevens (search for this): chapter 9.80
n from Hagerstown, in which I stated that if the house had been burned by some of my men, the act would have been fully justified by the burning in their own counties of many private residences by General Hunter, whose ruins they had seen when marching down the Valley. This expression seems to have been misconstrued into an admission that the act was my own. I have no disposition to evade the responsibility for any of my acts during the war, and I certainly did have the iron works of Mr. Thaddeus Stevens burned in 1863, and the town of Chambersburg was burned by my orders in 1864 as an act of retaliation, after a refusal to comply with a demand upon the town for compensation for some burning that General Hunter had done within the limits of my command. I also levied contributions on the towns of York, Pa., in 1863, and Frederick, Md., in 1864. All these acts were in accordance with the laws of war, and if I had ordered the burning of Blair's house I would not now seek to evade the
Walter H. Taylor (search for this): chapter 9.80
m the Wilderness to James River, the Second Corps (Ewell's) had present for duty 1,374 officers and 15,705 enlisted men, making an aggregate of 17,079, as shown by a statement copied from the returns in the Archive Office at Washington by Col. Walter H. Taylor, and given in his Four years with Gen. Lee, page 176. That corps had been engaged in the heaviest of the fighting from the Wilderness to James river, and on the 12th of May nearly one entire division (Johnson's) had been captured. The othreatened Baltimore and cut the railroads and telegraph between that city and Washington and Philadelphia. Some idea of my strength at the time of the advance on Washington may be formed from the return for the 31st of August, 1864, given by Colonel Taylor in his book, page 178. This, I presume, is the earliest return on file in the Archive Office after I was detached, and is as follows: Breckinridge's division (total effective)2,104 Rodes's division (total effective)3,013 Gordon's divisio
Fauquier (Virginia, United States) (search for this): chapter 9.80
tained that I had ninety-nine regiments of infantry and thirty-six of cavalry, I defy the production of any such record. If such record exists, then it shows at least twenty-five more regiments of infantry, and twelve of cavalry, than I had. It is possible that men claiming to belong to so many regiments, may have been captured, as I afterward ascertained that there were a very large number of deserters from our army who had taken refuge in the mountains between the counties of Loudoun and Fauquier, and the Valley, who claimed to belong to Mosby's command whenever questioned by any of our officers. I have thus noticed especially the estimate of my force given by General Barnard, or rather the officer from whom he quotes, because that is the only one professing to be based on any data, the others being mere conjectural estimates, without any foundation to rest upon. It is a little singular that writers on the other side will persist in estimating our numbers upon the crude conjecture
Kanawha (West Virginia, United States) (search for this): chapter 9.80
e with considerable vigor for some time thereafter. Here is what the Silent man himself says in his report dated the 22d of July, 1865: Immediately upon the enemy's ascertaining that General Hunter was retreating from Lynchburg by the way of Kanawha river, thus laying the Shenandoah Valley open for raids into Maryland and Pennsylvania, he returned [turned?] northward and moved down that valley. As soon as this movement of the enemy was ascertained General Hunter, who had reached the Kanawha rKanawha river, was directed to move his troops without delay, by river and railroad, to Harper's Ferry; but owing to the difficulty of navigation, by reason of low water and breaks in the railroad, great delay was experienced in getting there. It became necessary, therefore, to find other troops to check this movement of the enemy. For this purpose the Sixth Corps was taken from the armies operating against Richmond, to which was added the Nineteenth Corps, then fortunately beginning to arrive in Hamp
Frederick (Virginia, United States) (search for this): chapter 9.80
The force of infantry with which I moved on Washington did not, therefore, exceed eight thousand muskets, if it reached that number. In the three battalions of artillery I had nine batteries, neither of which had more than four field-pieces, and some of them not that many. Besides these there were one or two batteries of horse artillery, with the cavalry, the entire number of field-pieces in all the artillery not exceeding forty. Much the largest brigade of cavalry had been detached at Frederick on the expedition that threatened Baltimore and cut the railroads and telegraph between that city and Washington and Philadelphia. Some idea of my strength at the time of the advance on Washington may be formed from the return for the 31st of August, 1864, given by Colonel Taylor in his book, page 178. This, I presume, is the earliest return on file in the Archive Office after I was detached, and is as follows: Breckinridge's division (total effective)2,104 Rodes's division (total eff
Bladensburg (Maryland, United States) (search for this): chapter 9.80
itating to attack when it was desired to develop the enemy's forces. （Page 107.) He adds in a note on same page: Besides the cavalry brigade of Colonel Lowell, there was a nominal cavalry division of dismounted men, awaiting equipment and organization, at Camp Stoneman, under Colonel W. Gamble (Eighth Illinois Cavalry), amounting in all to about 1,200 effectives. Portions of the Eighth Illinois, armed and mounted, were sent during the 10th and 11th in the direction of Rockville, Laurel, Bladensburg, and Fort Mahan to observe the enemy. The rest (dismounted) were sent, with their cavalry arms, to General McCook for service in the lines. By effectives, it must be understood, are meant only enlisted men for duty who bear arms, and the term does not include commissioned officers. The foregoing statement shows that there were within the defenses and in adjacent camps 20,530 effectives on the 10th of July, while I was on the march from Monocacy, the authorities in Washington being full
... 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11