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

Re: [civilwarwest] Stand Watie

Expand Messages
  • Ron Church
    Mary Alice, Susan, Pat Can t say thanks enuf, this is exactly what I needed......... and a picture to boot. Sure do appreciate it. Ron ... From: Mary Alice
    Message 1 of 10 , Jan 1, 2002
      Mary Alice, Susan, Pat
      Can't say thanks enuf, this is exactly what I needed......... and a picture to boot.
       
      Sure do appreciate it.
      Ron 
      ----- Original Message -----
      Sent: Tuesday, January 01, 2002 5:55 PM
      Subject: Re: [civilwarwest] Stand Watie

      Greetings Ron,
       
      Just as you, PapaP, GenP and MAP likewise wish all members of this esteemed group the happiest of New Years from our headquarters here in FL.  2002 is apt to be full of many new surprises when I am one to actually post a serious CW response on this forum!  {Now, no one go fainting or anything!!  (-:  }
       
      I looked up this information in Historical Times Illustrated Encyclopedia of the Civil War.  It says, "23 June 1865 ~ When the leaders of the Confederate Indians learned that the government in Richmond had fallen and the Eastern armies had been surrendered, they, too, began making their plans to seek peace with the Federal government.  The chiefs convened the Grand Council 15 June and passed resolutions calling for Indian commanders to lay down their arms and for emissaries to approach Federal authorities for peace terms.  The largest force in Indian Territory was commanded by Confederate Brig. Gen. Stand Watie, who was also a chief of the Cherokee Nation.  Dedicated to the Confederate cause and unwilling to admit defeat, he kept his troops in the field for nearly a month after Lt. Gen. E. Kirby Smith surrendered the Trans-Mississippi 26 May.  Finally accepting the futility of continued resistance, on 23 June Watie rode into Doaksville near Fort Towson in Indian Territory and surrendered his battalion of Creek, Seminole, Cherokee, and Osage Indians to Lt. Col. Asa C. Matthews, appointed a few weeks earlier to negotiate a peace with the Indians.  Watie was the last Confederate general officer to surrender his command."
       
      To quote a dear friend, "Of course, I could be wrong",....but only if the editor of this book is or of I missed something as I typed this.  (-:
       
      Best always,
       
      Mary Alice, aka MAP, aka MAPster
            
      ----- Original Message -----
      From: "buckshot_21102" <rchurch@...>
      Sent: Tuesday, January 01, 2002 5:19 PM
      Subject: [civilwarwest] Stand Watie

      > Let me first take the opportunity to wish all of the members a Happy
      > and Healthy New Year..... and to express my appreciation to those who
      > who so freely give of their time and knowledge to this group.  I'd
      > like to hope I've been able to retain just a little what has gone
      > over these lines over the last year. 
      >
      > My question has to do with Brig. Gen. Stand Watie. Gen. Watie was the
      > last Confederate General to surrender (June 23, '65) almost a month
      > and a half after what is acknowledged as the last battle of the war
      > (Palmetto Ranche, Tx. on May 13, 1865).  I'm curious as to where Gen.
      > Watie was at the time of his surrender and to whom did he surrender. 
      >
      > Any help would be appreciated.
      >
      > Thanks and best regards
      > Ron Church
      > Manchester Md.  
      >
      >
      > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
      > Tiny Wireless Camera under $80!
      > Order Now! FREE VCR Commander!
      > Click Here - Only 1 Day Left!
      >
      http://us.click.yahoo.com/WoOlbB/7.PDAA/ySSFAA/GmiolB/TM
      > ---------------------------------------------------------------------~->
      >
      >  
      >
      > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
      http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
      >
      >

      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
    • Susan Hudson
      ... From: Ron Church To: civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, January 01, 2002 8:59 PM Subject: Re: [civilwarwest] Stand Watie Mary Alice, Susan, Pat
      Message 2 of 10 , Jan 1, 2002
         
        ----- Original Message -----
        Sent: Tuesday, January 01, 2002 8:59 PM
        Subject: Re: [civilwarwest] Stand Watie

        Mary Alice, Susan, Pat
        Can't say thanks enuf, this is exactly what I needed......... and a picture to boot.
         
        Sure do appreciate it.
        Ron 
         
        I am just happy to have been able to contribute something.
        Could someone please tell me the difference between a Sent Col. and a Lt. Col. if there is any difference.
         
        Sue
      • CashG79@aol.com
        In a message dated 1/1/2002 4:14:23 PM Hawaiian Standard Time, s_hudson82@hotmail.com writes:
        Message 3 of 10 , Jan 1, 2002
          In a message dated 1/1/2002 4:14:23 PM Hawaiian Standard Time,
          s_hudson82@... writes:

          << Could someone please tell me the difference between a Sent Col. and a
          Lt. Col. if there is any difference. >>

          A Lt Col is an actual rank. I don't know where you got Sent Col. Perhaps if
          we had some of the context in which you found it we could help decipher it.

          Regards,
          Cash
        • Susan Hudson
          ... From: CashG79@aol.com To: civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, January 01, 2002 10:31 PM Subject: Re: [civilwarwest] Stand Watie In a message dated
          Message 4 of 10 , Jan 1, 2002
             
            ----- Original Message -----
            Sent: Tuesday, January 01, 2002 10:31 PM
            Subject: Re: [civilwarwest] Stand Watie

            In a message dated 1/1/2002 4:14:23 PM Hawaiian Standard Time,
            s_hudson82@... writes:

            <<   Could someone please tell me the difference between a Sent Col. and a
            Lt. Col. if there is any difference. >>

            A Lt Col is an actual rank.  I don't know where you got Sent Col.  Perhaps if
            we had some of the context in which you found it we could help decipher it.

            Regards,
            Cash
            Evidently you did not read my earlier message nor did you follow the link I gave. In that case I will give you the link again and ask you to look at the signatures.
             
             
            Sue
             
          • CashG79@aol.com
            In a message dated 1/1/2002 5:38:56 PM Hawaiian Standard Time, s_hudson82@hotmail.com writes:
            Message 5 of 10 , Jan 1, 2002
              In a message dated 1/1/2002 5:38:56 PM Hawaiian Standard Time,
              s_hudson82@... writes:

              << In a message dated 1/1/2002 4:14:23 PM Hawaiian Standard Time,
              s_hudson82@... writes:

              << Could someone please tell me the difference between a Sent Col. and a
              Lt. Col. if there is any difference. >>

              A Lt Col is an actual rank. I don't know where you got Sent Col. Perhaps
              if
              we had some of the context in which you found it we could help decipher it.

              Regards,
              Cash

              Evidently you did not read my earlier message nor did you follow the link
              I gave. In that case I will give you the link again and ask you to look at
              the signatures.

              http://www.yvwiiusdinvnohii.net/history/watie.html >>

              Since the originals are not there, I'll assume whoever transcribed the
              signatures did so in error.

              Regards,
              Cash
            • Susan Hudson
              ... From: CashG79@aol.com To: civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, January 01, 2002 10:49 PM Subject: Re: [civilwarwest] Stand Watie Since the originals
              Message 6 of 10 , Jan 1, 2002
                 
                ----- Original Message -----
                Sent: Tuesday, January 01, 2002 10:49 PM
                Subject: Re: [civilwarwest] Stand Watie

                Since the originals are not there, I'll assume whoever transcribed the
                signatures did so in error.

                Regards,
                Cash
                Since no one that I have asked has ever heard Sent Col. I will also assume that it is an error. It appears both in the signature and the first paragraph of the treaty so at least they were consistant in their errors. <VBG>
                 
                Thank you
                 
                Sue
              • hank9174
                I would gusee that, depending on how one scrawls in cursive, Lieut can look like Sent ... HankC ... the ... also assume that it is an error. It appears both
                Message 7 of 10 , Jan 7, 2002
                  I would gusee that, depending on how one scrawls in cursive, 'Lieut'
                  can look like 'Sent'...

                  HankC

                  --- In civilwarwest@y..., "Susan Hudson" <s_hudson82@h...> wrote:
                  >
                  > ----- Original Message -----
                  > From: CashG79@a...
                  > To: civilwarwest@y...
                  > Sent: Tuesday, January 01, 2002 10:49 PM
                  > Subject: Re: [civilwarwest] Stand Watie
                  >
                  > Since the originals are not there, I'll assume whoever transcribed
                  the
                  > signatures did so in error.
                  >
                  > Regards,
                  > Cash
                  >
                  > Since no one that I have asked has ever heard Sent Col. I will
                  also assume that it is an error. It appears both in the signature and
                  the first paragraph of the treaty so at least they were consistant in
                  their errors. <VBG>
                  >
                  > Thank you
                  >
                  > Sue
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.