Friday, September 14, 2012

The Battle of Sugar Creek


Terrible Fighting against Rebels and Indians – the Savages Scalping their Friends – Heroism of our Troops – 12,000 Whip 28,000.

SUGAR CREEK BATTLE FIELD, via Rolla, March 11. – The battle of Sugar Creek Field was the most brilliant achievement of the war.  The enemy approached our forces with double our number, and in consequence of this difference were enabled to attack us on all sides.  The fighting was in some instances desperate, but the superior valor of our troops, and the superior generalship of the Federal army, triumphed over the immense odds.

The Federal force was not over 12,000 while that of the rebels is acknowledged to have been 25,000 including 7,000 Indian savages under command of Albert Pike, of Ark.  Sigel added fresh laurels to his already bright fame.  With two regiments he twice cut his way through seven regiments of the enemy.  His men all fought like heroes, and he escaped unhurt.

The Federal loss in killed and wounded will amount to 1,500.  The enemy’s loss is, beyond doubt, at least 2,400.  McCulloch and McIntosh are undoubtedly dead, and many other Confederate officers were killed and wounded.  Our sharp-shooters picked them off with an unerring arm.  The number of prisoners now in our possession amount to 1,600, and they are still coming in.  Many of them are taking the oath of allegiance and receiving their discharge, satisfied that their cause is a bad one and hopeless.

The Indians fought with a savage fury, and in their frenzy and demoniacal thirst for white blood, killed and scalped friend and foe alike.  Many of the Arkansas troops, scalped and disemboweled by their savage allies, have been found on the battle field.  Their atrocities are frightful.  The remnant of the rebel army has fled to Boston mountain, whither they are being pursued.  They can be pursued no further with our present force and supplies.

JUNIUS.
{Cor. Cincinnati Times.

– Published in The Burlington Weekly Hawk-Eye, Burlington, Iowa, Saturday, March 22, 1862, p. 4

No comments: