Part 1

Produced by Charlie Howard and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images generously made available by The Internet Archive)

PICKETT OR PETTIGREW?

AN HISTORICAL ESSAY, [REVISED AND ENLARGED.]

BY

CAPT. W. R. BOND, Sometime Officer Brigade Staff Army Northern Virginia.

“Tell the truth and the world will come to see it at last.”--EMERSON.

SECOND EDITION.

Single copy, $ .25 Five copies, 1.00

W. L. L. HALL, PUBLISHER. Scotland Neck, N. C.

DEDICATION.

To the memory of the brave men of HILL’S CORPS, who were killed while fighting under the orders of General Longstreet, on the afternoon of July 3rd, 1863; whose fame has been clouded by the persistent misrepresentations of certain of their comrades, this “little book” is affectionately dedicated.

W. R. B.

Scotland Neck, Halifax Co., N. C., October, 1888.

Copyrighted 1888, BY W. W. HALL.

THE COMMONWEALTH JOB PRINT, SCOTLAND NECK, N. C.

PREFACE.

The first edition of this pamphlet appeared a short time before the publication of the Official Records relating to Gettysburg. Consequently many things of importance to the subject treated were unknown to the writer. Such facts as he possessed of his own knowledge or could gather from his comrades and other sources, together with a lot of statistics secured from the War Department, were published and with gratifying results. Very many of the statements then made and which were not open to successful contradiction were so much at variance with the general belief that the brochure attracted wide attention, especially among old soldiers. From Tacoma on the Pacific slope and Augusta, Maine, from Chicago and New Orleans, came assurances of interest and appreciation. In fact there are very few States from which there have not come expressions either of surprise that the slander should ever have originated or of sympathy with the effort to right a great wrong.

That the two thousand copies formerly issued should have been disposed of two years ago and that there is still a demand for the pamphlet, is deemed sufficient reason for this edition. And the recent publication in New York of a history repeating the old falsehoods emphasizes the need of keeping the facts before the public.

It would be a matter of regret should any statement in these pages wound the sensibilities of any personal friends of the author, still in such an event he would be measurably consoled by the reflection that here as in most matters it is best to “hew to the line and let the chips fall as they may.”

Scotland Neck, N. C., April, 1900.

GENERAL JAMES JOHNSTON PETTIGREW.

“There lived a knight, when knighthood was in flow’r, Who charm’d alike the tilt-yard and the bower.”

The family of Johnston Pettigrew was one of the oldest, wealthiest and most influential of Eastern Carolina. His grandfather, Rev. Chas. Pettigrew, was the first Bishop-elect of the Diocese of North Carolina. Be was born upon his father’s estate, Bonarva, Lake Scuppernong, Tyrrell county, North Carolina, on July 4th, 1828, and died near Bunker’s Hill, Va., July 17th, 1863, having been wounded three days before in a skirmish at Falling Waters. He graduated with the first distinction at the University of North Carolina in 1847. A few months after graduation, at the request of Commodore Maury, principal of the Naval Observatory at Washington, he accepted a professorship in that institution. Having remained thereabout eight months he resigned and went to Charleston, South Carolina, and became a student of law, in the office of his distinguished relative, Hon. Jas. L. Pettigru, obtaining a license in 1849. In 1850 he went to Europe to study the civil law in the German Universities. There also he became thoroughly acquainted with the German, French, Italian and Spanish languages. He became so well acquainted with Arabic as to read and appreciate it; also with Hebrew. He then traveled over the various countries of the Continent, also England, Scotland and Ireland. In 1852 he became Secretary of Legation to the U. S. Minister at the Court of Madrid. In the winter of 1861 he had printed in Charleston, for private circulation, an octavo volume of 430 pages, entitled “Spain and the Spaniards,” which has been very much admired by every one who has read it, for its learning, its research and the elegance of its style. Having remained in Madrid only a few months he returned to Charleston and entered upon the practice of law with Mr. James L. Pettigru. In December, 1856, and December, 1857, he was chosen a member of the Legislature from the city of Charleston. He rose to great distinction in that body, by his speech on the organization of the Supreme Court, and his report against the re-opening of the African Slave Trade. He failed to be re-elected in 1858. Again in 1859 he went to Europe with the intention of taking part in the war then in progress between Sardinia and Austria. His application to Count Cavour for a position in the Sardinian Army, under Gen’l Marmora, was favorably received. His rank would have been at least that of Colonel; but in consequence of the results of the battle of Solferino, which took place just before his arrival in Sardinia, the war was closed and he was thereby prevented from experiencing active military service and learning its lessons. In 1859 he became Colonel of a rifle regiment that was formed and that acted a conspicuous part around Charleston in the winter of 1860–61. With his regiment he took possession of Castle Pinkney, and was afterwards transferred to Morris Island, where he erected formidable batteries. He held himself in readiness to storm Fort Sumpter in case it had not been surrendered after bombardment. In the spring of 1861, his regiment growing impatient because it could not just then be incorporated in the Confederate Army, disbanded; Col. Pettigrew then joined Hampton’s Legion as a private, and went with that body to Virginia, where active service was to be met with. A few days afterwards, without any solicitation on his part, he was elected Colonel of the 22d North Carolina Troops. While at Evansport, he was offered promotion, but declined it, upon the ground, that it would separate him from his regiment. Late in the spring of 1862 an arrangement was made by which his regiment was embraced in the brigade. He then accepted the commission. He and his brigade were with Gen. Johnston at Yorktown and in the retreat up the peninsula. He was with his brigade in the sanguinary battle of Seven Pines, or Fair Oaks, where he was severely wounded, and left insensible upon the field and captured. He was in prison only about two months, and on being exchanged he returned to find that in his absence his beloved brigade had been given to General Pender. A new brigade was then made up for him. How well this body was disciplined and of what material it was made this essay has attempted to show. In the autumn of 1862, he was ordered with his brigade to Eastern North Carolina, where he was engaged in several affairs, which though brilliant have been overshadowed by the greater battles of the war. In May, 1863, his brigade was again ordered to Virginia, and ever after formed a part of the Army of Northern Virginia. While commanding Heth’s division, in Longstreet’s Assault, though his horse had been killed, and he had received a painful wound--a grapeshot shattering his left hand--he was within a few feet of his own brigade when the final repulse came. On his regaining our lines, his remark to Gen. Lee that he was responsible for his brigade, but not for the division, shows that he was satisfied with the conduct of a part, but not with that of all the troops under his command.

As to one of the two brigades that gave way before the rest of the line, he labored under a very great misapprehension. He did not know then, and the reading world has been slow to realize since, how very great had been its loss before retreating. As to the fact that in proportion to the number carried into the assault its loss had been more than twice as great as that of any of Pickett’s brigades, there is not the slightest doubt. The highest praise and not censure should be its reward.

At Falling Waters, on the 14th, he had just been placed in command of the rear guard, which consisted of his own and Archer’s brigade, when a skirmish occurred in which he was mortally wounded. He died on the 17th, and his remains were taken to his old home, Bonarva, and there he lies buried near the beautiful lake, whose sandy shores his youthful feet were wont to tread. May he rest in peace!

PICKETT OR PETTIGREW?

Longstreet’s assault on the third day at Gettysburg, or what is generally, but very incorrectly, known as “Pickett’s Charge,” has not only had its proper place in books treating of the war, but has been more written about in newspapers and magazines than any event in American history. Some of these accounts are simply silly. Some are false in statement. Some are false in inference All in some respects are untrue.

Three divisions, containing nine brigades and numbering about nine thousand and seven hundred officers and men, were selected for the assaulting column. The field over which they were ordered to march slowly and deliberately, was about one thousand yards wide, and was swept by the fire of one hundred cannon and twenty thousand muskets. The smoke from the preceding cannonade, which rested upon the field, was their only cover. In view of the fact, that when the order to go forward was given, Cemetery Ridge was not defended by Indians or Mexicans, but by an army, which for the greater part, was composed of native Americans, an army, which if it had never done so before, had shown in the first and second day’s battles, not only that it could fight, but could fight desperately. In view of this fact, whether the order to go forward was a wise thing or a frightful blunder, I do not propose to discuss. The purpose of this paper will be to compare and contrast the courage, endurance and soldierly qualities of the different brigades engaged in this assault, dwelling especially upon the conduct of the troops commanded respectively by Generals Pickett and Pettigrew.

If certain leading facts are repeated at the risk of monotony, it will be for the purpose of impressing them upon the memories of youthful readers of history. As a sample, but rather an extreme one, of the thousand and one foolish things which have been written of this affair, I will state that a magazine for children, “St. Nicholas,” I think it was, some time ago contained a description of this assault, in which a comparison was drawn between the troops engaged, and language something like the following was used: “Those on the left faltered and fled. The right behaved gloriously. Each body acted according to its nature, for they were made of different stuff. The one of common earth, the other of finest clay. Pettigrew’s men were North Carolinians, Pickett’s were superb Virginians.” To those people who do not know how the trash which passes for Southern history was manufactured, the motives which actuated the writers, and how greedily at first everything written by them about the war, was read, it is not so astonishing that a libel containing so much ignorance, narrowness and prejudice as the above should have been printed in a respectable publication, as the fact, that even to this day, when official records and other data are so accessible, there are thousands of otherwise well-informed people all over the land who believe the slander to be either entirely or in part true. And it looks almost like a hopeless task to attempt to combat an error which has lived so long and flourished so extensively. But some one has said, “Truth is a Krupp gun, before which Falsehood’s armor, however thick, cannot stand. One shot may accomplish nothing, or two, or three, but keep firing it will be pierced at last, and its builders and defenders will be covered with confusion.” This little essay shall be my one shot, and may Justice defend the right.

In the great war the soldiers from New York and North Carolina filled more graves than those from any of the other States. In the one case fourteen and in the other thirty-six per cent. of them died in supporting a cause which each side believed to be just.

Virginia, North Carolina and Georgia each had about the same number of infantry at Gettysburg, in all twenty-four brigades of the thirty-seven present. Now, this battle is not generally considered a North Carolina fight as is Chancellorsville, but even here the soldiers of the old North State met with a greater loss (killed and wounded, remember, for North Carolina troops never attempted to rival certain Virginia brigades in the number of men captured), than did those from any other State, and, leaving out Georgians, greater than did those from any two States. Though the military population of North Carolina was exceeded by that of Virginia and Tennessee, she had during the war more men killed upon the battlefield than both of them together. This is a matter of record. It may be that she was a little deliberate in making up her mind to go to war, but when once she went in she went in to stay. At the close of the terrible struggle in which so much of her best blood had been shed, her soldiers surrendered at Appomattox and Greensboro more muskets than did those from any other State in the Confederacy. Why troops with this record should not now stand as high everywhere as they did years ago in Lee’s and Johnston’s armies, may appear a problem hard to solve, but its solution is the simplest thing in the world, and I will presently give it.

The crack brigades of General Lee’s army were noted for their close fighting. When they entered a battle they went in to kill, and they knew that many of the enemy could not be killed at long range. This style of fighting was dangerous, and of course the necessary consequence in the shape of a casualty list, large either in numbers or per centage, followed. Then there were some troops in the army who would on all occasions blaze away and waste ammunition, satisfied if only they were making a noise. Had they belonged to the army of that Mexican general who styled himself the “Napoleon of the West,” they would not have been selected for his “Old Guard,” but yet, without exception, they stood high in the estimation of the Richmond people, much higher indeed than very many of the best troops in our army.

As said above, Longstreet’s assault is almost invariably spoken and written of as “Pickett’s charge.” This name and all the name implies, is what I shall protest against in this article. At the battle of Thermopylæ three hundred Spartans and seven hundred Thespians sacrificed their lives for the good of Greece. Every one has praised Leonidas and his Spartans. How many have ever so much as heard of the equally brave Thespians? I do not know of a case other than this of the Thespians, where a gallant body of soldiers has been treated so cruelly by history, as the division which fought the first day under Heth and the third under Pettigrew. I have no personal concern in the fame of these troops, as I belonged to and fought in another division; but in two of its brigades I had intimate friends who were killed in this battle, and on their account I would like to see justice done. Among these friends were Captain Tom Holliday, A. A. G., of Davis’ Brigade, and Harry Burgwyn, Colonel of the 26th North Carolina. (This regiment had more men killed and wounded in this battle than any one of the seven hundred Confederate or the two thousand Federal ever had in any battle. Official records show this.) And then, too, I know of no reason why truth, honesty and fair dealing should not be as much prized in historical as in business matters.

As the battle of Gettysburg was the most sanguinary of the war, as by many it is considered “the turning of the tide,” so the final charge made preceded and attended as it was by peculiarly dramatic circumstances, has furnished a subject for more speeches, historical essays, paintings and poems than any event which ever occurred in America. Painters and poets, whose subjects are historical, of course look to history for their authority. If history is false, falsehood will soon become intrenched in poetry and art.

The world at large gets its ideas of the late war from Northern sources. Northern historians, when the subject is peculiarly Southern, from such histories as Pollard’s, Cook’s and McCabe’s, and these merely reflected the opinions of the Richmond newspapers. These newspapers in turn got their supposed facts from their army correspondents, and they were very careful to have only such correspondents as would write what their patrons cared most to read.

During the late war, Richmond, judged by its newspapers, was the most provincial town in the world. Though the capital city of a gallant young nation, and though the troops from every State thereof were shedding their blood in her defence, she was wonderfully narrow and selfish. While the citizens of Virginia were filling nearly one-half of the positions of honor and trust, civil and military, Richmond thought that all should be thus filled. With rare exceptions, no soldier, no sailor, no jurist, no statesman, who did not hail from their State was ever admired or spoken well of. No army but General Lee’s and no troops in that army other than Virginians, unless they happened to be few in numbers, as was the case of the Louisianians and Texans, were ever praised. A skirmish in which a Virginian regiment or brigade was engaged was magnified into a fight, an action in which a few were killed was a severe battle, and if by chance they were called upon to bleed freely, then, according to the Richmond papers, troops from some other State were to blame for it, and no such appalling slaughter had ever been witnessed in the world’s history.

Indiscriminate praise had a very demoralizing effect upon many of their troops. They were soon taught that they could save their skins and make a reputation, too, by being always provided with an able corps of correspondents. If they behaved well it was all right; if they did not it was equally all right, for their short-comings could be put upon other troops. The favoritism displayed by several superior officers in General Lee’s army was unbounded, and the wonder is that this army should have continued to the end in so high a state of efficiency. But then as the slaps and bangs of a harsh step-mother may have a less injurious effect upon the characters of some children than the excessive indulgence of a silly parent, so the morale of those troops, who were naturally steady and true, was less impaired by their being always pushed to the front when danger threatened, than if they had always been sheltered or held in reserve.

Naturally the world turned to the Richmond newspapers for Southern history, and with what results I will give an illustration: All war histories teach that in Longstreet’s assault on the third day his right division (Pickett’s) displayed more gallantry and shed more blood, in proportion to numbers engaged, than any other troops on any occasion ever had. Now, if gallantry can be measured by the number or per centage of deaths and wounds, and by the fortitude with which casualties are borne, then there were several commands engaged in this assault, which displayed more gallantry than any brigade in General Longstreet’s pet division. Who is there who knows anything of this battle to whom the name of Virginia is not familiar?

To how many does the name of Gettysburg suggest the names of Tennessee, Mississippi or North Carolina? And yet the Tennessee brigade suffered severely; but the courage of its survivors was unimpaired. There were three Mississippi regiments in Davis’ brigade, which between them had one hundred and forty-one men killed on the field. Pickett’s dead numbered not quite fifteen to the regiment. The five North Carolina regiments of Pettigrew’s division bore with fortitude a loss of two hundred and twenty-nine killed.

Pickett’s fifteen Virginia regiments were fearfully demoralized by a loss of two hundred and twenty-four killed. Virginia and North Carolina had each about the same number of infantry in this battle. The former had three hundred and seventy-five killed, the latter six hundred and ninety-six.

When in ante-bellum days, Governor Holden, the then leader of the Democratic cohorts in North Carolina, was the editor of the “Raleigh Standard,” he boasted that he could kill and make alive. The Richmond editors during the war combining local and intellectual advantages without boasting did the same. They had the same power over reputations that the Almighty has over physical matter. This fact General Longstreet soon learned, and the lesson once learned, he made the most of it. He would praise their pet troops and they would praise him, and between them everything was lovely. He was an able soldier, “an able writer, but an ungenerous.” Troops from another corps, who might be temporarily assigned to him were invariably either ignored or slandered.

The Gascons have long been noted in history for their peculiarity of uniting great boastfulness with great courage. It is possible that some of General Longstreet’s ancestors may have come from Southern France. His gasconade, as shown of late by his writings, is truly astonishing, but his courage during the war was equally remarkable. Whether his Virginia division excelled in the latter of these characteristics as much as it has for thirty-six years in the first, I will leave the readers of this monograph to decide.

If to every description of a battle, a list of casualties were added, not only would many commands, both in the army of Northern Virginia and in the army of the Potomac, which have all along been practically ignored, come well to the front; but those who for years have been reaping the glory that others sowed, would have the suspicion that perhaps after all they were rather poor creatures. Our old soldier friend, Col. John Smith, of Jamestown, Va., to an admiring crowd, tells his story: “He carried into action five hundred men, he charged a battery, great lanes were swept through his regiment by grape and canister, whole companies were swept away, but his men close up and charge on, the carnage is appalling, but it does not appall, the guns are captured, but only he and ten men are left to hold them. His regiment has been destroyed, wiped out, annihilated,” and this will go for history. But should Truth in the form of a list of casualties appear, it would be seen that Colonel Smith’s command had fifteen killed and sixty wounded. That is three in the hundred killed, and twelve in the hundred wounded. Some gallantry has been displayed, some blood has been shed, but neither the one nor the other was at all phenomenal. “There were brave men before Agamemnon.”

In some commands the habit of “playing possum” prevailed. When a charge was being made, if a fellow became badly frightened, all he had to do was to fall flat and play dead until his regiment passed. Afterwards he would say that the concussion from a shell had stunned him. It is needless to say that troops who were addicted to this habit stood higher abroad if their correspondent could use his pen well, than they did in the army.