Captain John A. Rawlins to Congressman Elihu B. Washburne, December 30, 1861

Headquarters, District of Cairo,        

December 30, 1861.

DEAR WASHBURNE:

Yours of the 21st is at hand. I was no less astounded at the contents of your note than you must have been at the information reported to you.

I thank you for the confidence manifested by you in the frank manner of your inquiry. I feel that you of all other men had the right, as you would feel it your duty, to investigate the charge. I know how much you have done for General Grant and how jealous you are of his good name, and assure you it is appreciated not only by General Grant but by all his friends.

I will answer your inquiry fully and frankly, but first I would say unequivocally and emphatically that the statement that General Grant is drinking very hard is utterly untrue and could have originated only in malice.

When I came to Cairo, General Grant was as he is to-day, a strictly total abstinence man, and I have been informed by those who knew him well, that such has been his habit for the last five or six years.

A few days after I came here a gentleman made him a present of a box of champagne. On one or two occasions he drank a glass of this with his friends, but on neither occasion did he drink enough to in any manner affect him. About this time General Grant was somewhat dyspeptic and his physician advised him to drink two glasses of ale or beer a day. He followed this prescription for about one or two weeks (never exceeding the two glasses per day) and then being satisfied it did him no good, he resumed his total abstinence habits, until some three or four weeks after the Battle of Belmont, while he was rooming at the St. Charles Hotel, Colonel Taylor of Chicago, Mr. Dubois, Auditor of State, and other friends, were visiting Cairo, and he was induced out of compliment to them to drink with them on several occasions but in no instance did he drink enough to manifest it to any one who did not see him drink. About this time Mr. Osborne, President of the Illinois Central Railroad Company, our mutual friend J. M. Douglas, and several of their friends made a visit to Cairo, and gave a dinner (or lunch) on the cars, to which the General and I were invited with others; champagne was part of the fare. Sitting near the General I noticed that he did not drink more than half a glass. The fact of his drinking at all was remarked simply because of his usual total abstinence.

But no man can say that at any time since I have been with him has he drunk liquor enough to in the slightest unfit him for business, or make it manifest in his words or actions. At the time I have referred to, continuing probably a week or ten days, he may have taken an occasional drink with those gentlemen and others visiting Cairo at that time, but never in a single instance to excess, and at the end of that period he voluntarily stated he should not during the continuance of the war again taste liquor of any kind, and for the past three or four weeks, though to my knowledge frequently importuned on visits of friends, he has not tasted any kind of liquor. Ever since I have been with General Grant he has sent his reports in his own handwriting to Saint Louis, daily when there was matter to report, and never less than three times a week, and during the period above referred to he did not at all relax this habit.

If there is any man in the service who has discharged his duties faithfully and fearlessly, who has ever been at his post and guarded the interest confided to him with the utmost vigilance, General Grant has done it. Not only his reports, but all his orders of an important character are written by himself, and I venture here the statement there is not an officer in the Army who discharges the duties of his command so nearly without the intervention of aides, or assistants, as does General Grant.

Some ten or twelve days ago an article was published in the Chicago Tribune, charging frauds on the Quartermaster's Department here, in the purchase of lumber at Chicago. General Grant immediately sent Captain W. S. Hillyer, a member of his staff, to Chicago, with instructions to thoroughly investigate and report the facts. That report and a large mass of testimony substantiating the charge had been forwarded to St. Louis when orders came from Washington to investigate the charge. The investigation had already been made. Thus time and again has he been able to send back the same answer when orders were received from St. Louis in reference to the affairs of this District.

I am satisfied from the confidence and consideration you have manifested in me that my statement is sufficient for you, but should the subject be mooted by other parties, you can refer them to Colonel J. D. Webster, of the 1st Illinois Artillery, General Grant's Chief of Staff, who is well known in Chicago as a man of unquestionable habits. He has been counsellor of the General through this campaign, was with him at and all through the Battle of Belmont, has seen him daily and has had every opportunity to know his habits. I would further refer them to General Van Renssalaer, who was specially sent to inspect the troops and investigate the condition of the District by Major General McClellan, and Generals Sturgiss and Sweeny, who were sent here by Major General Halleck for the same purpose. These gentlemen after a full and thorough investigation returned to St. Louis some two weeks ago. I know not what report they made; but this I do know, that a few days after their return an order arrived from St. Louis creating the District of Cairo, a District including Southeast Missouri, Southern Illinois, and all of Kentucky west of the Cumberland, a District nearly twice as large as General Grant's former command. I would refer them to Flag Officer A. H. Foote of the U. S. Mississippi Naval Fleet, a man whose actions and judgments are regulated by the strictest New England standard, a strict and faithful member of the Congregational Church who for months has had personal as well as official intercourse with the General.

If you could look into General Grant's countenance at this moment you would want no other assurance of his sobriety. He is in perfect health, and his eye and intellect are as clear and active as can be.

That General Grant has enemies no one could doubt, who knows how much effort he has made to guard against and ferret out frauds in his district, but I do not believe there is a single colonel or brigadier general in his command who does not desire his promotion, or at least to see him the commanding general of a large division of the army, in its advance down the Mississippi when that movement is made.

Some weeks ago one of those irresponsible rumors was set afloat, that General Grant was to be removed from the command of the District, and there was a universal protest expressed against it by both officers and men.

I have one thing more to say, and I have done, this already long letter.

None can feel a greater interest in General Grant than I do; I regard his interest as my interest, all that concerns his reputation concerns me; I love him as a father; I respect him because I have studied him well, and the more I know him the more I respect and love him.

Knowing the truth I am willing to trust my hopes of the future upon his bravery and temperate habits. Have no fears; General Grant by bad habits or conduct will never disgrace himself or you, whom he knows and feels to be his best and warmest friend (whose unexpected kindness toward him he will never forget and hopes some time to be able to repay). But I say to you frankly, and I pledge you my word for it, that should General Grant at any time become an intemperate man or an habitual drunkard, I will notify you immediately, will ask to be removed from duty on his staff (kind as he has been to me), or resign my commission. For while there are times when I would gladly throw the mantle of charity over the faults of friends, at this time and from a man in his position I would rather tear the mantle off and expose the deformity.

Having made a full statement of all the facts within my knowledge, and being in a position to know them all and I trust done justice to the character of him whom you and I are equally interested in,

I remain, your friend,

John A. Rawlins.

SOURCE: James Harrison Wilson, The Life of John A. Rawlins, p. 68-71

William Bross* to Simon Cameron, December 30, 1861

Tribune Office,

Chicago, Ill., Dec. 30, 1861

Hon. SIMON CAMERON

Sec. of War

Dear Sir

Evidence entirely satisfactory to myself and Associate Editors of the Tribune has become so convincing that Gen U. S. Grant commanding at Cairo is an inebriate, that I deem it my duty to call your attention to the matter. The inclosed anonymous letter would not deserve a moment's attention, were not facts abundant from other sources that what the writer says is true. His treatment to myself refered to in the first paragraph I care nothing about, but I was satisfied that he would not have acted as he did, had he been sober. The names on the second page of the letter may assist you to get at the facts. We think it best to call your attention to this painful matter, rather than to attack Gen. Grant in the Tribune. As you may not know me personally I refer to Dr Chas V. Dyer & His Excellency President Lincoln

Your Obt. Servt.

WM. BROSS

Respectfully referred to the President.

SIMON CAMERON.

War Dept.
January 4, 1861.

_______________

On Jan. 4, 1862, Cameron forwarded the letter to President Abraham Lincoln. The anonymous letter is no longer available, but was once the subject of a newspaper article which quoted excerpts. “Your Mr. Bross who was so badly treated here by General Grant and by Captain Lagow ought not to influence you against others of General Grant's staff officers.” The writer went on to accuse Grant of frequently being too drunk to fill his station and of “being perfectly inebriate under a flag of truce with rebels.” The letter continued: “All these things are facts which the world ought to know. Until we can secure pure men in habits and men without secesh wives with their own little slaves to wait upon them, which is a fact here in this camp with Mrs. Grant, our country is lost.” — Robert Anderson, "A New Lincoln Letter," Chicago Sunday Tribune Magazine, Jan. 14, 1962, p. 45.

On Jan. 4, Lincoln endorsed the anonymous letter. “Bross would not knowingly misrepresent. Gen. Grant was appointed chiefly on the recommendation of Hon. E. B. Washburne—Perhaps we should consult him”

On Jan. 6, Cameron added his endorsement. “Respectfully referred to Hon. E. B. Washburne, with the request that he will return these papers to the Dept.”

_______________

* Of the Chicago Tribune.

SOURCES: John Y. Simon, Editor, The Papers of Ulysses S. Grant: Volume 4: January 8-March 31, 1862, p. 118-9; Washburne, E. B. E. B. Washburne Papers: Bound volumes, letters received; ; Dec. 6-31, undated. 1861. Manuscript/Mixed Material. https://www.loc.gov/item/mss44651.020/. Image #'s 296, 297, 298.

Major-General Henry W. Halleck to Major-General George B. McClellan, February 7, 1862

HEADQUARTERS DEPARTMENT OF THE MISSOURI,         

Saint Louis, February 7, 1862.

Fort Henry was taken yesterday, with seventeen heavy guns, General Lloyd Tilghman and staff, and 60 men, after a bombardment of one hour and a quarter by gunboats. General Grant's cavalry and gunboats in pursuit of the remainder of the garrison, who have abandoned artillery on the road. Our loss, killed, wounded, and scalded by destruction of boiler of the Essex, 44. Captain Porter is badly but not dangerously scalded. General C. F. Smith has possession of the enemy's redan on the western bank of the Tennessee. General Grant's infantry and artillery have gone to attack Fort Donelson at Dover, on the Cumberland. The gunboats not disabled are moving up the Tennessee. Commodore Foote, with disabled gunboats, has returned to Cairo—gunboats for repairs; will soon return to the field. Enemy's loss not known.

H. W. HALLECK,    

Major-General, Commanding.

Major-General MCCLELLAN.

SOURCE: The War of the Rebellion: A Compilation of the Official Records of the Union and Confederate Armies, Series I, Volume 7 (Serial No. 7), p. 120

Major-General Henry W. Halleck to Brigadier-General Lorenzo Thomas, February 11, 1862

HEADQUARTERS DEPARTMENT OF THE MISSOURI,         

Saint Louis, February 11, 1862.

GENERAL: Inclosed herewith I have the honor to forward to the Commander-in-Chief official copies of the reports of Brig. Gen. U.S. Grant and Flag-Officer A. H. Foote in regard to the capture of Fort Henry.

I am, sir, very respectfully, your obedient servant,

H. W. HALLECK,    

Major-General, Commanding.

General LORENZO THOMAS,

Adjutant-General U.S. Army, Washington, D.C.

SOURCE: The War of the Rebellion: A Compilation of the Official Records of the Union and Confederate Armies, Series I, Volume 7 (Serial No. 7), p. 120

Flag-Officer Andrew H. Foote to Major-General Henry W. Halleck, January 28, 1862

CAIRO, January 28, 1862.

Maj. Gen. HENRY W. HALLECK,

Saint Louis, Mo.:

Commanding General Grant and myself are of opinion that Fort Henry, on the Tennessee River, can be carried with four iron-clad gunboats and troops to permanently occupy. Have we your authority to move for that purpose when ready?

A. H. FOOTE,                       

Flag-Officer.

SOURCE: The War of the Rebellion: A Compilation of the Official Records of the Union and Confederate Armies, Series I, Volume 7 (Serial No. 7), p. 120

Brigadier-General Ulysses S. Grant to Major-General Henry W. Halleck, January 28, 1862

CAIRO, January 28, 1862.

Maj. Gen. H. W. HALLECK.

Saint Louis Mo.:

With permission, I will take Fort Henry, on the Tennessee, and establish and hold a large camp there.

U.S. GRANT,            

Brigadier General.

SOURCE: The War of the Rebellion: A Compilation of the Official Records of the Union and Confederate Armies, Series I, Volume 7 (Serial No. 7), p. 121

Brigadier-General Ulysses S. Grant to Major-General Henry W. Halleck, January 29, 1862

HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT OF CAIRO,                      

Cairo, January 29, 1862.

Maj. Gen. H. W. HALLECK,

Saint Louis, Mo.:

In view of the large force now concentrating in this district and the present feasibility of the plan I would respectfully suggest the propriety of subduing Fort Henry, near the Kentucky and Tennessee line, and holding the position. If this is not done soon there is but little doubt but that the defenses on both the Tennessee and Cumberland Rivers will be materially strengthened. From Fort Henry it will be easy to operate either on the Cumberland, only 12 miles distant, Memphis, or Columbus. It will, besides, have a moral effect upon our troops to advance them toward the rebel States. The advantages of this move are as perceptible to the general commanding as to myself, therefore further statements are unnecessary.

U.S. GRANT,            

Brigadier-General.

SOURCE: The War of the Rebellion: A Compilation of the Official Records of the Union and Confederate Armies, Series I, Volume 7 (Serial No. 7), p. 121

Major-General Henry W. Halleck to Brigadier-General Ulysses S. Grant, January 30, 1862

SAINT Louis, January 30, 1862.

Brig. Gen. U.S. GRANT,

Cairo, Ill.:

Make your preparations to take and hold Fort Henry. I will send you written instructions by mail.

H. W. HALLECK,    

Major-General.

SOURCE: The War of the Rebellion: A Compilation of the Official Records of the Union and Confederate Armies, Series I, Volume 7 (Serial No. 7), p. 121

Major-General Henry W. Halleck to Brigadier-General Ulysses S. Grant, January 30, 1862

HEADQUARTERS DEPARTMENT OF THE MISSOURI,         

Saint Louis, January 30, 1862.

Brig. Gen. U.S. GRANT,

Cairo, Ill.:

SIR: You will immediately prepare to send forward to Fort Henry, on the Tennessee River, all your available forces from Smithland, Paducah, Cairo, Fort Holt, Bird's Point, &c. Sufficient garrisons must be left to hold these places against an attack from Columbus. As the roads are almost impassable for large forces, and as your command is very deficient in transportation, the troops will be taken in steamers up the Tennessee River as far as practicable. Supplies will also be taken up in steamers as far as possible. Flag-Officer Foote will protect the transports with his gunboats. The Benton and perhaps some others should be left for the defense of Cairo. Fort Henry should be taken and held at all hazards. I shall immediately send you three additional companies of artillery from this place.

The river front of the fort is armed with 20-pounders, and it may be necessary for you to take some guns of large caliber and establish a battery on the opposite side of the river. It is believed that the guns on the land side are of small caliber and can be silenced by our field artillery. It is said that the north side of the river below the fort is favorable for landing. If so, you will land and rapidly occupy the road to Dover and fully invest the place, so as to cut off the retreat of the garrison. Lieutenant-Colonel McPherson, U.S. Engineers, will immediately report to you, to act as chief engineer of the expedition. It is very probable that an attempt will be made from Columbus to re-enforce Fort Henry; also from Fort Donelson at Dover. If you can occupy the road to Dover you can prevent the latter. The steamers will give you the means of crossing from one side of the river to the other. It is said that there is a masked battery opposite the island below Fort Henry. If this cannot be avoided or turned it must be taken.

Having invested Fort Henry, a cavalry force will be sent forward to break up the railroad from Paris to Dover. The bridges should be rendered impassable, but not destroyed.

A telegram from Washington says that Beauregard left Manassas four days ago with fifteen regiments for the line of Columbus and Bowling Green. It is therefore of the greatest importance that we cut that line before he arrives. You will move with the least delay possible. You will furnish Commodore Foote with a copy of this letter. A telegraph line will be extended as rapidly as possible from Paducah, east of the Tennessee River, to Fort Henry. Wires and operators will be sent from Saint Louis.

H. W. HALLECK,    

Major-general.

SOURCE: The War of the Rebellion: A Compilation of the Official Records of the Union and Confederate Armies, Series I, Volume 7 (Serial No. 7), p. 121-2

Report of Flag-Officer Andrew H. Foote, U. S. Navy, February 7, 1862

CAIRo, ILL., February 7, 1862.

SIR: I have the honor to report that on the 6th instant, at 12:30 p.m., I made an attack on Fort Henry, on the Tennessee River, with the ironclad gunboats Cincinnati, Commander Stembel; the flagship Essex, Commander Porter; Carondelet, Commander Walke, and St. Louis, Lieutenant Commanding Paulding; also taking with me the three old gunboats, Conestoga, Lieutenant Commanding Phelps; the Tyler, Lieutenant Commanding Gwin, and the Lexington, Lieutenant Commanding Shirk, as a second division, in charge of Lieutenant Commanding Phelps, which took position astern and inshore of the armored boats, doing good execution there in the action, while the armored boats were placed in the first order of steaming, approaching the fort in a parallel line.

The fire was opened at 1,700 yards distant from the flagship, which was followed by the other gunboats and responded to by the fort. As we approached the fort under slow steaming, till we reached within 600 yards of the rebel batteries, the fire both from the gunboats and fort increased in rapidity and accuracy of range. At twenty minutes before the rebel flag was struck, the Essex, unfortunately received a shot in her boilers, which resulted in the wounding, by scalding, of 29 officers and men, including Commander Porter, as will be seen in the enclosed list of casualties. The Essex, then necessarily dropped out of line, astern, entirely disabled and unable to continue the fight, in which she had so gallantly participated until the sad catastrophe. The firing continued with unabated rapidity and effect upon the three gunboats as they continued still to approach the fort, with their destructive fire, until the rebel flag was hauled down, after a very severe and closely contested action of one hour and fifteen minutes.

A boat containing the adjutant-general and captain of engineers came alongside after the flag was lowered and reported that General Lloyd Tilghman, the commander of the fort, wished to communicate with the flag-officer, when I dispatched Commander Stembel and Lieutenant Commanding Phelps, with orders to hoist the American flag where the secession ensign had been flying, and to inform General Tilghman that I would see him on board the flagship. He came on board soon after the Union had been substituted by Commander Stembel for the rebel flag on the fort, and possession taken.

I received the general, his staff, and some 60 or 70 men as prisoners, and a hospital ship containing 60 invalids, together with the fort and its effects, mounting twenty guns, mostly of heavy caliber, with barracks and tents capable of accommodating 15,000 men, and sundry articles, which, as I turned the fort and its effects over to General Grant, commanding the army, on his arrival in an hour after we had made the capture, he will be enabled to give the Government a more correct statement than I am enabled to communicate from the short time I had possession of the fort.

The plan of attack, so far as the army reaching the rear of the fort to make a demonstration simultaneously with the navy, was frustrated by the excessively muddy roads and high stage of water preventing the arrival of our troops until some time after I had taken possession of the fort.

On securing the prisoners and making necessary or preliminary arrangements, I dispatched Lieutenant Commanding Phelps with his division up the Tennessee River, as I had previously directed, and as will be seen in the enclosed orders to him to remove the rails and so far render the bridge incapable of railroad transportation and communication between Bowling Green and Columbus, and afterwards to pursue the rebel gunboats and secure their capture if possible.

This being accomplished, and the army in possession of the fort, and my services being o at Cairo, I left Fort Henry in the evening of the same day with the Cincinnati, Essex, and St. Louis, and arrived here this morning.

The armored gunboats resisted effectually the shot of the enemy when striking the casemate. The Cincinnati, flagship, received 31 shot; the Essex, 15; the St. Louis, 7; and Carondelet, 6; killing 1 and wounding 9 in the Cincinnati and killing 1 in the Essex, while the casualties in the latter from steam amounted to 28 in number. The Carondelet and St. Louis met with no casualties.

The steamers were admirably handled by their commanders and officers, presenting only their bow guns to the enemy to avoid exposure of the vulnerable parts of their vessels. Lieutenant Commanding Phelps, with his division, also executed my orders very effectually, and promptly proceeded up the river in their further execution after the capture of the fort. In fact, all the officers and men gallantly performed their duty, and, considering the little experience they o had under fire, far more than realized my expectations.

Fort Henry was defended with the most determined gallantry by General Tilghman, worthy of a better cause, who, from his own account, went into the action with eleven guns of heavy caliber bearing upon our boats, which he fought until seven of the number were dismounted or otherwise rendered useless.

I have the honor to be, very respectfully, your obedient servant,

A. H. Foote,                       

Flag-Officer.

Hon. GIDEoN WELLEs,

Secretary of the Navy, Washington, D. C.

[Report of same date and like tenor to Major-General Halleck.]

SOURCE: Official Records of the Union and Confederate Navies, Series I, Volume 22, p. 537-9

Flag-Officer Andrew H. Foote to Gideon Welles, February 6, 1862

U. S. Flag Steamer “Cincinnati,”                          

Off Fort Henry, Tennnesee River,             

February 6th, 1862.

sir:

The gunboats under my command—the “Essex,” Commander Porter; “Carondelet,” Commander Walke; “Cincinnati,” Commander Stemble; “St. Louis,” Lieut. Commander Paulding; 'Conestoga,' Lieut. Commander Phelps; 'Taylor,' Lieut. Commander Gwin; and the “Lexington,” Lieut. Commanding Shirk,—after a severe and rapid fire of one hour and a quarter, have captured Fort Henry, and taken General Lloyd Tilghman, and staff, with sixty men, as prisoners. The surrender to the gunboats was unconditional, as we kept an open fire upon the enemy until the flag was struck.

In half an hour after the surrender, I handed the fort and prisoners over to General Grant, commanding the army, on his arrival at the fort in force.

The “Essex” had a shot in her boilers after fighting most effectively for two-thirds of the action, and was obliged to drop down the river. I heard that several of the men were scalded to death, including the two pilots. She, with the other gunboats, officers, and men, fought with the greatest gallantry.

The “Cincinnati” received thirty-one shots, and had one man killed and eight wounded, two seriously.

The fort, with twenty guns and seventeen mortars, was defended by General Tilghman with the most determined gallantry.

Very Respectfully,

Your Ob't Servant,

A. H. Foote.

Hon. Gideon Welles,

Secretary of the Navy.

SOURCE:  Henry Walke, Naval Scenes and Reminiscences of the Civil War in the United States, p. 56

Details of the Bombardment and Capture of Fort Henry. Incidents, &c., February 10, 1862

The Cincinnati Gazette and Commercial’s Cairo correspondence give the following account of the bombardment and capture of Fort Henry:

Yesterday, (February 6,) at 12½ p. m. the gunboats Cincinnati, St. Louis, Carondelet, and Essex, the Tyler, Conestoga and Lexington bringing up the rear, advanced boldly against the rebel works, going to the right of Painter Creek Island, immediately above where, on the east shore of the river, stands the fortifications, and keeping out of range till at the head of the island, and within a mile of the enemy, passing the enemy in full view of the rebel guns.  We steadily advanced, every man at quarters, ever ear strained to catch the flag-officer’s signal-gun for the commencement of the action.

Our line of battle was on the left, the St. Louis next, the Carondelet next, the Cincinnati, (for the time being the flag ship, having on board Flag officer Foote,) and the next the Essex.  We advanced in line, the Cincinnati a boat’s length ahead, when at 11:30 the Cincinnati opened the ball, and immediately the three accompanying boats followed suit.  The enemy was not backward, and gave an admirable response, and the fight raged furiously for half an hour.  We steadily advanced, receiving and returning the storm of shot and shell, when getting within three hundred yards of the enemy’s works we came to a stand, and poured into him right and left.  In the meantime the Essex had been disabled, and drifted away from the scene of action, leaving the Cincinnati, Carondelet and St. Louis alone engaged.

As precisely forty minutes past one, the enemy struck his colors—and such cheering, such wild excitement, as seized the throats, arms, or caps, of the four or five hundred sailors of the gunboats can be imagined.  After the surrender, which was made to Flag-officer Foote by Gen. Lloyd Tilghman, who defended the fort in a most determined manner, we found that the rebel infantry encamped outside the fort, numbering four or five thousand, had cut and run, leaving the rebel artillery company in command of the fort.

The fort mounted seventeen guns, most of them 32-pounders, one being a magnificent 10-inch columbiad.  Our shots dismounted two of their guns, driving the enemy into the embrasures.  One of their rifled 32-pounders burst during the engagement, wounding some of their gunners.  The rebels claimed to have but eleven effective guns worked by fifty-four men—the numbers all told of our prisoners.  They lost five killed and ten badly wounded.  The infantry left everything in their flight.  A vast deal of plunder has fallen into our hands, including a large and valuable quantity of ordnance stores.

Gen. Tilghman is disheartened.  He thinks it one of the most damaging blows of the war.  In surrendering to Flag-officer Foote, the rebel General remarked, “I am glad to surrender to so gallant an officer.”  Flag-officer Foote replied, “You do perfectly right, sir, in surrendering; but you should have blown my boat out of the water before I would have surrendered to you.”

In the engagement the Cincinnati was in the lead, and flying the flag officer’s pennant, was the chief mark.  Flagg-officer Foote and Capt. Stembel crowded her defiantly into the teeth of the enemy’s guns.  She got thirty-one shots, some of them going completely through her.

The Essex was badly crippled when about half through the fight, and crowding steadily against the enemy.  A ball went into her side-forward port, through the heavy bulkhead, escaping steam scalding and killing several of the crew.  Captain Porter, his aid, L. P. Britton, Jr[.], and Paymaster Lewis, were standing in a direct line of the balls passing, Mr. Britton being in the centre of the group.  A shot struck Mr. Britton on the top of his head, scattering his brains in every direction.  The escaping steam went into the pilot-house, instantly killing Mr. Ford and Mr. Bride, pilots.  Many of the soldiers, at the rush of steam, jumped overboard and were drowned.

The Cincinnati had one killed and six wounded.  The Essex had six seamen and two officers killed, seventeen men wounded and five missing.  There were no casualties on the St. Louis or Carondelet, though the shot and shell fell upon them like rain.

The St. Louis was commanded by Leonard Paulding, who stood upon the gunboat and wrought the guns to the last.  Not a man flinched, and with cheer upon cheer sent the shot and shell among the enemy.

THE REBELS NOT TRUE.—It is reported, and believed at Paducah, that the rebel troops at Fort Henry were not true to the rebel cause and took advantage of the opportunity offered by an attack to run away from a fight that was distasteful to them.

IT WAS A NAVAL VICTORY.—It appears that this victory was entirely a navel one—the troops of the expedition not having come up to the scene of action until the rebels had surrendered.  The gunboats engaged are a part of those strong iron-clad river boats, or turtles, which were built within the last few months, at, St. Louis, Carondelet and other points and which were originally destined for Gen. Fremont’s expedition down the Mississippi.  Commodore Foote mentions nine of these vessels as having been in the engagement.

ARMAMENT OF THE GUNBOATS.—The Essex, 9 guns, Commander H. [sic] D. Porter, U. S. N.; Carondelet, 13 guns, Commander H. Walke, U. S. N.; Cincinnati, 13 Guns, Commander R. N. Stembel, U. S. N.; St. Louis, 13 guns, Lieutenant Commanding Leonard Paulding, U. S. N.; Conestoga, 9 guns, Lieutenant Commanding Phelps, U. S. N.; Taylor [sic], 9 guns, Lieutenant Commanding W. Gwin, U. S. N.; Lexington, 9 guns, Lieutenant Commanding J. W. Shirk, U. S. N.

The boats are built very wide, in proportion to their length, giving them almost the same steadiness in action that a stationary land battery would possess.  They are constructed upon the same principle as the famous iron battery at Charleston, the sides sloping both upward and downward from the water line, at an angle of 45 degrees.  The bow battery on each boat consists of solid oak timber 26 inches in thickness, plated on the exterior surface with iron 2½ inches thick.  The side and stern batteries are somewhat thinner, but have the same thickness of iron over that portion covering the machinery.  The boats are not plated on the roof which consists of a 2½ inch plank.

The most dreadfully savage contrivance upon these boats is that to prevent boarding.  Each boat is supplied with a number of large hose-pipes for throwing hot water from the boilers with a force of 200 pounds pressure to the square inch.  Any human being who shall encounter this terrible stream of hot water will be boiled in an instant.

The Conestoga, Taylor [sic] and Lexington are not of the same model or character as the others, being simply Mississippi River steamboats rebuilt with perpendicular bulwarks and pierced for guns.

VALUE OF THE VICTORY.—There is another and stronger rebel fort on the Cumberland, a few miles eastward of the scene of our present victory; but considering the fact that our troops are now in the rear of that fort, and learning, as we do, from the West, the movement that is on the lapis to bring it down as suddenly as Fort Henry has been brought down, we look upon the victory we have gained as being full and complete, as regards the object in view.  Look at the map at that part of Tennessee where Fort Henry is located, and at that point of the Memphis and Ohio railroad which our troops now hold, and see how far we have penetrated in the rear of Bowling Green—see how far in the rear of Columbus—how convenient we are for sweeping down on the railroad to Memphis—see how near we now are to Nashville—and how Nashville is located to the whole State of Tennessee, and that again to the whole of the rebel States of the Southwest, and some idea will be had of the value of the present advance and victory.

COMMODORE FOOTE has been in the naval service over forty years.  He is known in the navy as one of its most efficient officers, and distinguished himself greatly in China by the bombardment and breaching of a Chinese fort, the fort, in all respects, a superior work of masonry.  The feat called forth the praise of all foreign naval officers on that coast.  Commodore Foote is an affable gentleman, and as will be seen by his reply to the rebel Tilghman, never surrenders.

CAPT. PORTER.—Capt. Porter, of the gunboat Essex, who is reported as badly scalded by the bursting of his boat’s boiler, is a native of Louisiana, but entered the navy from Massachusetts in 1823.  He is a son of the renowned Commodore Porter, who figured so prominently in the war of 1812.  He has been thirty-eight years in the service, and has seen twelve years sea duty.  When the Mississippi flotilla was projected, he was detailed to the command of a gunboat.  The Captain christened his boat the Essex, after his father’s renowned vessel, and judging from precedent, Capt. Porter is the “bull-dog,” or fighting man of this expedition.  He has Dahlgren guns for his armament, and delights in “shelling.”  He worked prodigiously getting his boat ready, and since then he has been cruising around, stirring up the rebels wherever he could find them.

GEN. TILGHMAN, the traitor who commanded at Fort Henry, was graduated at West Point, and made brevet second Lieutenant in the First dragoons in 1836, but shortly after resigned, and became division engineer on the Baltimore and Susquehanna railroad, and afterward on the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad.  In the Mexican war, he re-entered the service as volunteer aid-de-camp to Colonel Twiggs, and was present at the battles of Palo Alto and Resaca de Palma.  He commanded a volunteer regiment  till October, 1846, and in January, 1847, was made superintendent of the defences of Matamoras; finally he acted as captain of volunteer artillery in Hughes’ regiment from August, 1847, till July, 1848.  At the close of the war he again entered civil live, and was chosen principal assistant engineer in the Panama Isthmus railroad.  On the breaking out of the war, he was acting railroad engineer, but joined the rebels, and was appointed to command at Fort Henry, where he has been ingloriously captured.

SOURCE: The National Republican, Washington, D.C., Monday, February 10, 1862, p. 2

Diary of Gideon Welles: Friday, May 20, 1864

The Secretary of State is becoming very anxious in view of our relations with France. Wants the ironclad Dictator should be sent over soon as possible. I told him she was yet in the hands of the contractor, and was likely to be for some time, and when we had her I was not certain that it would be best to send her across the Atlantic. But he was nervous; said it was the only way to stop the Rebel ironclads from coming out, unless Grant should happen to get a victory.

The recent arrest of a Spaniard (Arguellis) who was in New York, and who was abducted, it is said, by certain officials under instructions or by direction of the Secretary of State is exciting inquiry. Arguellis is accused of having, in some way, participated in the slave trade. But if the assertion be true, we have no extradition treaty with Spain, and I am therefore surprised at the proceeding. There is such hostility to the slave trade that a great wrong may perhaps be perpetrated with impunity and without scrutiny, but I hope not. Nothing has ever been said in Cabinet on the subject, nor do I know anything in regard to it, except what I see in the papers.

Mr. Seward sometimes does strange things, and I am inclined to believe he has committed one of those freaks which make me constantly apprehensive of his acts. He knows that slavery is odious and all concerned in slave traffic are distrusted, and has, it seems, improved the occasion to exercise arbitrary power, expecting probably to win popular applause by doing an illegal act. Constitutional limitations are to him unnecessary restraints.

Should there be an investigation instituted and mere denunciation of the act, the President will be called upon to assume the responsibility, yet I am persuaded he has nothing to do in this affair beyond acquiescing without knowledge in what has been done. Could the abduction by any possibility be popular, Mr. S. expects it to inure to his credit.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 2: April 1, 1864 — December 31, 1866, p. 35-6

Review: The Vicksburg Assaults, May 19-22, 1863

The Vicksburg Assaults, May 19-22, 1863

Edited by Steven E. Woodworth & Charles D. Grear

With “The Vicksburg Assaults: May 19-22” Southern Illinois University Press has added another volume to its “Civil War Campaigns in the West” series. It is the second volume in the series to cover Major-General Ulysses. S. Grant’s Vicksburg Campaign.  Picking up where the previous volume “The Vicksburg Campaign: March 29-May 18, 1863” left off,  it covers the four days between May 19 and May 22, 1863 during which Grant made two suicidal, uphill frontal assaults on the Confederate earthworks surrounding the heavily fortified city.

This small book, only 136 pages, is a treasure trove of information and firsthand accounts of the fighting which demonstrated to Grant that Vicksburg, “The Gibraltar of the West,” couldn’t be taken as easily as Mississippi’s State Capital, Jackson.

In the book’s Introduction Charles D. Grear gives a brief sketch of the last few days of the Vicksburg Campaign and brings readers up to May 19, 1863.

J. Parker Hills follows up with two essays covering both assaults “Haste and Underestimation: May 19” and “Failure and Scapegoat: May 22”

“The Assault on the Railroad Redoubt” by Stephen E. Woodworth analyzes the fight for the Railroad Redoubt, the site of bloodiest fighting from the viewpoint of the Union men who fought there while Brandon Franke conversely examines it from the point of view of it’s Confederate defenders in his essay “Texans in the Breach: Waul’s Legion at Vicksburg.”

The title of the final essay of the book by Charles D. Grear speaks for itself, “The North-West is Determined with the Sword”; Midwesterners’ Reactions to the Vicksburg Assaults.”

The assaults against the outer works of Vicksburg are rarely given treatment of their own by authors.  They are usually folded into the final few pages of books about the Vicksburg Campaign, in the first few pages of books about the Siege of Vicksburg, or sandwiched between the two in books covering both the campaign and the siege.

Each essay is well researched and well written by its author.  There are end notes following each essay. Taken independently of the others each essay is a slim slice that doesn’t fail to deliver upon its topic, but together the four days between May 19 & May 22, 1863, are completely covered.  “The Vicksburg Assaults: May 19-22, 1863” rightly deserves to take its place on the shelf among many other scholarly works of the Vicksburg Campaign and Siege.

ISBN 978-0809337194, Southern Illinois University Press, © 2019, Hardcover, 136 pages, Photographs, Maps, End Notes at the end of each essay & Index. $29.50.  To purchase this book click HERE.

Colonel Rutherford B. Hayes to Sardis Birchard: Thursday, May 19, 1864

Meadow Bluff, Greenbrier County, West Virginia,

May 19. l864.

Dear Uncle: — We are safely within what we now call “our own lines” after twenty-one days of marching, fighting, starving, etc., etc. For twelve days we have had nothing to eat except what the country afforded. Our raid has been in all respects successful. We destroyed the famous Dublin Bridge and eighteen miles of the Virginia and Tennessee Railroad and many depots and stores; captured ten pieces of artillery, three hundred prisoners, General Jenkins and other officers among: them, and killed and wounded about five hundred, besides utterly routing Jenkins' army in the bloody battle of Cloyd's Mountain. My brigade had two regiments and part of a third in the battle. [The] Twenty-third lost one hundred killed and wounded. We had a severe duty but did just as well as I could have wished. We charged a Rebel battery entrenched in [on] a wooded hill across an open level meadow three hundred yards wide and a deep ditch, wetting me to the waist, and carried it without a particle of wavering or even check, losing, however, many officers and men killed and wounded. It being the vital point General Crook charged with us in person. One brigade from the Army of the Potomac (Pennsylvania Reserves) broke and fled from the field. Altogether, this is our finest experience in the war, and General Crook is the best general we have ever served under, not excepting Rosecrans.

Many of the men are barefooted, and we shall probably remain here some time to refit. We hauled in wagons to this point, over two hundred of our wounded, crossing two large rivers by fording and ferrying and three ranges of high mountains. The news from the outside world is meagre and from Rebel sources. We almost believe that Grant must have been successful from the little we gather.

Sincerely,

R. B. Hayes.

S. BlRCHARD.

SOURCE: Charles Richard Williams, editor, Diary and Letters of Rutherford Birchard Hayes, Volume 2, p. 463-4

Colonel Rutherford B. Hayes to Lucy Webb Hayes: Thursday, May 19, 1864

Meadow Bluff, May 19, 1864

Dearest: — We got safely to this point in our lines, two hours ago, after twenty-one days of constant marching, frequent fighting, and much hardship, and some starvation. This is the most completely successful and by all odds the pleasantest campaign I have ever had. Now it is over I hardly know what I would change in it except to restore life and limbs to the killed and wounded.

My command in battles and on the march behaved to my entire satisfaction. None did, none could have done better. We had a most conspicuous part in the battle at Cloyd's Mountain and were so lucky. You will see the lists of killed and wounded. We brought off two hundred of our wounded in our train and left about one hundred and fifty. But we have good reason to think they will fare well. . . .

We took two cannon which the regiment has got along here by hard work. The Thirty-sixth and Twenty-third are the only regiments which went into the thickest of the fight and never halted or gave back. The Twelfth did well but the "Flatfoots" backed out. The Ninety-first well, but not much exposed. The Ninth Virginia did splendidly and lost heavier than any other. The Potomac Brigade, (Pennsylvania Reserves, etc., etc.,) broke and fled. I had the dismounted men of the Thirty-fourth. They did pretty well. Don't repeat my talk. But it is true, the Twenty-third was the Regiment. The Thirty-sixth I know would have done as well if they had had the same chance. The Twenty-third led and the Thirty-sixth supported them. General Crook is the best general I have ever known.

This campaign in plan and execution has been perfect. We captured ten pieces of artillery, burned the New River Bridge and the culverts and small bridges thirty in number for twenty miles from Dublin to Christiansburg. Captured General Jenkins and three hundred officers and men; killed and wounded three to five hundred and routed utterly his army.*

We shall certainly stay here some days, perhaps some weeks, to refit and get ready for something else. You and the boys are remembered and mentioned constantly.

One spectacle you would have enjoyed. The Rebels contested our approach to the bridge for two or three hours. At last we drove them off and set it on fire. All the troops were marched up to see it — flags and music and cheering. On a lovely afternoon the beautiful heights of New River were covered with our regiments watching the burning bridge. It was a most animating scene.

Our band has been the life of the campaign. The other three bands all broke down early. Ours has kept up and played their best on all occasions. They alone played at the burning of the bridge and today we came into camp to their music.

I have, it is said, Jenkins' spurs, a revolver of the lieutenant-colonel of [the] Rebel Thirty-sixth, a bundle of Roman candles, a common sword, a new Rebel blanket, and other things, I would give the dear boys if they were here. — Love to all.

Affectionately ever

R.

Mrs. Hayes.

_______________

* See Dr. Joseph T. Webb to Marietta Cook Webb, May 24, 1864

SOURCE: Charles Richard Williams, editor, Diary and Letters of Rutherford Birchard Hayes, Volume 2, p. 461-3

Dr. Joseph T. Webb to Marietta Cook Webb, May 24, 1864

[Meadow Bluff, May 24, 1864]

The more we learn of the Rebels, etc., at Cloyd's Mountain, the greater was our victory. It is well ascertained now that in addition to their strong position and works, they had more men in the fight than we had, and also more killed and wounded. They not only expected to check us there, but fully counted on capturing our whole force. Their officers whom we captured complain bitterly of their men not fighting. Our new recruits, whom we were disposed to smile at, did splendidly. One of them, whom Captain Hastings on inspection at Camp White told he must cut off his hair, as men with long hair could not fight, meeting the captain in the midst of the fight, the fellow at the head of his company, playfully remarked, shaking his locks at the captain: “What do you think of longhair fighting now?”

SOURCE: Charles Richard Williams, editor, Diary and Letters of Rutherford Birchard Hayes, Volume 2, p. 462

Diary of John Beauchamp Jones: December 16, 1863

The Examiner to-day discovers that if the President's project of enrolling all men, and detailing for civil pursuits such as the Executive may designate, be adopted, that he will then be constituted a Dictator—the best thing, possibly, that could happen in the opinion of many; though the Examiner don't think so. It is probable the President will have what he wants.

Per contra, the proposition of Senator Johnson, of Arkansas, requiring members of the cabinet to be renominated at the expiration of every two years, if passed, would be a virtual seizure of Executive powers by that body. But it won't pass.

SOURCE: John Beauchamp Jones, A Rebel War Clerk's Diary at the Confederate States Capital, Volume 2, p. 116

Diary of John Beauchamp Jones: December 17, 1863

Averill (Federal) made a raid a day or two since to Salem (Roanoke County, Va.), cutting the Virginia and Tennessee Railroad, destroying the depot, bridges, court-house, etc.

Gen. J. E Johnston has been ordered to take command of Bragg's army.

I saw a communication from Lieut.-Col. Ruffin (Commissary Bureau), suggesting the trade of cotton to the enemy in New Orleans for supplies, meat, etc., a Mr. Pollard, of St. Louis, having proposed to barter meat for cotton, which Col. Ruffin seems to discourage.

Gen. Halleck has proposed a plan of exchange of prisoners, so far as those we hold go. We have 15,000; they, 40,000.

A letter from Mr. Underwood, of Rome, Ga., says our people fly from our own cavalry, as they devastate the country as much as the enemy.

We have a cold rain to-day. The bill prohibiting the employment of substitutes has passed both Houses of Congress. When the Conscription act is enlarged, all substitutes now in the army will have to serve for themselves, and their employers will also be liable.

SOURCE: John Beauchamp Jones, A Rebel War Clerk's Diary at the Confederate States Capital, Volume 2, p. 116

Diary of John Beauchamp Jones: December 18, 1863

Yesterday evening the battalion of clerks was to leave for Western Virginia to meet the raiders. After keeping them in waiting till midnight, the order was countermanded. It is said now that Gen. Lee has sent three brigades after Averill and his 3000 men, and hopes are entertained that the enemy may be captured.

It is bright and cold to-day.

SOURCE: John Beauchamp Jones, A Rebel War Clerk's Diary at the Confederate States Capital, Volume 2, p. 116-7