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 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) 36 0 Browse Search
Abraham Lincoln 14 0 Browse Search
George W. Lurty 10 0 Browse Search
Tennessee (Tennessee, United States) 10 0 Browse Search
Alexander Craig 9 1 Browse Search
James Kelley 8 0 Browse Search
Lee 6 0 Browse Search
J. W. Lemmon 6 0 Browse Search
Robert E. Placide 6 0 Browse Search
1864 AD 5 5 Browse Search
View all entities in this document...

Browsing named entities in a specific section of The Daily Dispatch: February 17, 1864., [Electronic resource]. Search the whole document.

Found 18 total hits in 11 results.

1 2
Tennessee (Tennessee, United States) (search for this): article 8
unequivocal terms by Gen. Jenkins, who had charge of the attacking force, and by Lieut.-Gen. Longstreet, commanding the army. In reply to the writer's reflection upon the character of the cavalry now under command of Maj.-Gen. Martin in East Tennessee, it is sufficient to say that it is the same which so long served under General Bragg, and which in that distinguished officer's official reports has been styled his "invincible cavalry." In justice to men who have won that compliment from a he army. In reply to the writer's reflection upon the character of the cavalry now under command of Maj.-Gen. Martin in East Tennessee, it is sufficient to say that it is the same which so long served under General Bragg, and which in that distinguished officer's official reports has been styled his "invincible cavalry." In justice to men who have won that compliment from a commander just, but not profligate, in his praises, I ask the publication of the foregoing statement. Tennessee.
as can be desired, but the discipline is wretched, and it is almost in efficient in consequence. A striking instance of this occurred in the present movement. Harrison's brigade was ordered to make a certain movement which promised the successful capture of about one thousand horses from which the enemy had dismounted. The movdesired in, recovered the horses, and scattered our men." The movement referred to was not ordered by the General commanding, or any other officer, but Col, Harrison in following out general instructions, and supposing he would have infancy support judged it proper to be made. It would have been a complete success, if the support relied on had been present. These are the facts: Col. Harrison was ordered with a portion of his brigade of cavalry to protect the right flank of our advancing line of infantry. To do this he moved his command in advance and to the right of our line of infantry skirmishers.--When within two miles of Dandridge he came up
Longstreet (search for this): article 8
for the statement that the horses were lost because "our cavalry became a mob of plunderers." They had no time to plunder. They were the whole time vigorously opposed by superior forces; and although these gallant regiments did no better fighting here than on many other occasions which have made their names famous in the Army of Tennessee, yet the command was complimented for this particular movement in unequivocal terms by Gen. Jenkins, who had charge of the attacking force, and by Lieut.-Gen. Longstreet, commanding the army. In reply to the writer's reflection upon the character of the cavalry now under command of Maj.-Gen. Martin in East Tennessee, it is sufficient to say that it is the same which so long served under General Bragg, and which in that distinguished officer's official reports has been styled his "invincible cavalry." In justice to men who have won that compliment from a commander just, but not profligate, in his praises, I ask the publication of the foregoing st
Dandridge (search for this): article 8
r, but Col, Harrison in following out general instructions, and supposing he would have infancy support judged it proper to be made. It would have been a complete success, if the support relied on had been present. These are the facts: Col. Harrison was ordered with a portion of his brigade of cavalry to protect the right flank of our advancing line of infantry. To do this he moved his command in advance and to the right of our line of infantry skirmishers.--When within two miles of Dandridge he came upon a force of the enemy's mounted infantry, then dismounted and deployed for battle. Col. B. Immediately dismounted the 3d Arkansas, with orders to hold the position in front of the enemy, and with the 8th and 11th Texas cavalry he deflected to the right in order to gain their rear. The horses spoken of belonged to the dismounted line of the enemy, and were a few paces in its rear. Some three hundred paces further to the rear was a strong force of the enemy's cavalry already i
Braxton Bragg (search for this): article 8
e horses were lost because "our cavalry became a mob of plunderers." They had no time to plunder. They were the whole time vigorously opposed by superior forces; and although these gallant regiments did no better fighting here than on many other occasions which have made their names famous in the Army of Tennessee, yet the command was complimented for this particular movement in unequivocal terms by Gen. Jenkins, who had charge of the attacking force, and by Lieut.-Gen. Longstreet, commanding the army. In reply to the writer's reflection upon the character of the cavalry now under command of Maj.-Gen. Martin in East Tennessee, it is sufficient to say that it is the same which so long served under General Bragg, and which in that distinguished officer's official reports has been styled his "invincible cavalry." In justice to men who have won that compliment from a commander just, but not profligate, in his praises, I ask the publication of the foregoing statement. Tennessee.
l the enemy had removed the horses. There is no excuse whatever for the statement that the horses were lost because "our cavalry became a mob of plunderers." They had no time to plunder. They were the whole time vigorously opposed by superior forces; and although these gallant regiments did no better fighting here than on many other occasions which have made their names famous in the Army of Tennessee, yet the command was complimented for this particular movement in unequivocal terms by Gen. Jenkins, who had charge of the attacking force, and by Lieut.-Gen. Longstreet, commanding the army. In reply to the writer's reflection upon the character of the cavalry now under command of Maj.-Gen. Martin in East Tennessee, it is sufficient to say that it is the same which so long served under General Bragg, and which in that distinguished officer's official reports has been styled his "invincible cavalry." In justice to men who have won that compliment from a commander just, but not prof
B. Immediately (search for this): article 8
it proper to be made. It would have been a complete success, if the support relied on had been present. These are the facts: Col. Harrison was ordered with a portion of his brigade of cavalry to protect the right flank of our advancing line of infantry. To do this he moved his command in advance and to the right of our line of infantry skirmishers.--When within two miles of Dandridge he came upon a force of the enemy's mounted infantry, then dismounted and deployed for battle. Col. B. Immediately dismounted the 3d Arkansas, with orders to hold the position in front of the enemy, and with the 8th and 11th Texas cavalry he deflected to the right in order to gain their rear. The horses spoken of belonged to the dismounted line of the enemy, and were a few paces in its rear. Some three hundred paces further to the rear was a strong force of the enemy's cavalry already in line of battle. To secure the horses it was evidently necessary to dispose of this supporting force. Col. H
he horses were lost because "our cavalry became a mob of plunderers." They had no time to plunder. They were the whole time vigorously opposed by superior forces; and although these gallant regiments did no better fighting here than on many other occasions which have made their names famous in the Army of Tennessee, yet the command was complimented for this particular movement in unequivocal terms by Gen. Jenkins, who had charge of the attacking force, and by Lieut.-Gen. Longstreet, commanding the army. In reply to the writer's reflection upon the character of the cavalry now under command of Maj.-Gen. Martin in East Tennessee, it is sufficient to say that it is the same which so long served under General Bragg, and which in that distinguished officer's official reports has been styled his "invincible cavalry." In justice to men who have won that compliment from a commander just, but not profligate, in his praises, I ask the publication of the foregoing statement. Tennessee.
January 30th (search for this): article 8
Justice to au officer. Richmond, February 15, 1864. To the Editor of the Dispatch: In your issue of January 30, there is an extract from the correspondence of the Petersburg Express, of Jan'y 29, which is so pregnant with injustice to a command which is distinguished in the Army of Tennessee for its courage and discipline, that I cannot let it pass without correction. The entire letter of the correspondent is full of errors, but it is my desire particularity to notice that contained in the following extract: "There is something wrong about the cavalry officers. The material is as good as can be desired, but the discipline is wretched, and it is almost in efficient in consequence. A striking instance of this occurred in the present movement. Harrison's brigade was ordered to make a certain movement which promised the successful capture of about one thousand horses from which the enemy had dismounted. The move was made, the horses were actually captured, the men in c
February 15th, 1864 AD (search for this): article 8
Justice to au officer. Richmond, February 15, 1864. To the Editor of the Dispatch: In your issue of January 30, there is an extract from the correspondence of the Petersburg Express, of Jan'y 29, which is so pregnant with injustice to a command which is distinguished in the Army of Tennessee for its courage and discipline, that I cannot let it pass without correction. The entire letter of the correspondent is full of errors, but it is my desire particularity to notice that contained in the following extract: "There is something wrong about the cavalry officers. The material is as good as can be desired, but the discipline is wretched, and it is almost in efficient in consequence. A striking instance of this occurred in the present movement. Harrison's brigade was ordered to make a certain movement which promised the successful capture of about one thousand horses from which the enemy had dismounted. The move was made, the horses were actually captured, the men in c
1 2