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

128041st VS 89th

Expand Messages
  • nathanheald@webtv.net
    Dec 1, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      Richard, I am 95% with you now. The only thing that I disagree with, is that, when Nicholas received "instruction" from Major or Colonel McRea of the engineers, that this was not when they went up the hill to support Miller. The "instructions" led to the 1st actually moving from column into line moving up and then takng the casualties, then "right about" and the staff officer riding up to Nicholas asking why he was coming back down. This is part of the "slanted reporting" that was in Brown's report stating that the enlisted men of the 1st had broken. Except for some of the inaccurate selective testimony in the court martial, all other reports from the officers of the 1st all state that they received orders to move against the hill. Lt. Shaw, Lt. Bissell and Captain Symmes have all stated, that Lt. Colonel Bissell was approached by a staff officer (McRee or McRea I can't remember and too tired to look) who gave directions for the 1st to move up the hill. I bow to your thorough research of the British regimental positions and exact location where the 1st came under fire. All of the officers of the 1st stated they came under fire of the guns and not musketry, though it may had been both. Before I end our lengthy discussion, I'll leave you with a few other tibits. The 1st fired an average of 70 rounds a man, buck and ball. Symmes stated in later years, that the British had complained after the battle about the buck and ball? The 1st took one fourth casualties. Interestingly, of the four men in the company over six feet in height, three were killed and one was missing. I'm awlful glad I'm only 5' 10". Kind regards, Dave Bennett.
    • Show all 9 messages in this topic