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

Re: Grant's Canal

Expand Messages
  • bjer50010
    ... That would do it! That s probably why the original canal was placed where it was, to avoid just such a possibility.
    Message 1 of 4 , May 5, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, "slippymississippi" <
      slippymississippi@y...> wrote:
      > --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, "bjer50010" <bjewell@i...> wrote:
      > > --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, GnrlJEJohnston@a... wrote:
      > > > The attempts by Grant to dig a canal to bypass Vicksburg as we
      > have said
      > > > before, was futile. Today however, there is only one remaining
      > part of the
      > > > attempts to dig a canal. Please click on the link below to see
      > that part
      > > > that remains.
      > > >
      > >
      > > Thanks for the message General. I finally found the Porter reply
      > to
      > > the Grant note about Col. Bissell. Porter that the placing of the
      > > canal to be "ridiculous", which he informed Bissell of and then
      > sent a
      > > reply to Grant indicating the same thing. The problem, as he
      > described
      > > it, was that there was an overhanging bank of the river upstream of
      > the
      > > mouth of the canal, which caused a strong eddy preventing the flow
      > of
      > > water into the canal. But Porter recommended several modifications
      > to
      > > the original canal, which apparently Bissell agreed with. Don't
      > know
      > > why they were never implemented however.
      >
      >
      > Probably because a Confederate battery was moved into a position
      > where it had a clear line of sight all the way down the canal.

      That would do it! That's probably why the original canal was placed
      where it was, to avoid just such a possibility.
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.