Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Veteran Excursions to Antietam

Expand Messages
  • eighth_conn_inf
    Found a source about a veteran excursion but not of units who were at Antietam such as the 26th and 38th MA:
    Message 1 of 5 , Oct 25, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      Found a source about a veteran excursion but not of units who were at Antietam such as the 26th and 38th MA:

      http://books.google.com/books?id=DQ8TAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA113&dq=%22excursion+of+massachusetts+veterans+to+antietam%22#v=onepage&q=&f=false

      Larry

      --- In TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com, Stephen Recker <recker@...> wrote:
      >
      > I'm trying to compile a list of veteran excursions to Antietam, but am
      > mostly interested in Massachusetts veterans in 1885.
      >
      > I know there was a big one of the 15th MA in 1886, but what about 1885?
      > Thanks.
      >
      >
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >
    • Stephen Recker
      Larry, That;s great. Even mentions the photographer. Thanks. Stephen ... [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      Message 2 of 5 , Oct 26, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
        Larry,

        That;s great. Even mentions the photographer. Thanks.

        Stephen

        On Sunday, October 25, 2009, at 08:48 PM, eighth_conn_inf wrote:

        >  
        > Found a source about a veteran excursion but not of units who were at
        > Antietam such as the 26th and 38th MA:
        >
        > http://books.google.com/
        > books?id=DQ8TAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA113&dq=%22excursion+of+massachusetts+veteran
        > s+to+antietam%22#v=onepage&q=&f=false
        >
        > Larry
        >
        > --- In TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com, Stephen Recker <recker@...> wrote:
        > >
        > > I'm trying to compile a list of veteran excursions to Antietam, but
        > am
        > > mostly interested in Massachusetts veterans in 1885.
        > >
        > > I know there was a big one of the 15th MA in 1886, but what about
        > 1885?
        > > Thanks.
        > >

        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.