|
Post by elisabeth on Aug 19, 2006 23:28:05 GMT -6
Gordie,
Re Keogh vs. Benteen: could it have had anything to do with their volunteer ranks? Benteen was appointed captain on October 1st 1861 (according to Men With Custer). Keogh didn't arrive in the country until the following spring: appointed captain on April 9th 1862. Benteen thus had a six-month head start on him.
Re seniority of captains: when Keogh first gets his appointment into the 7th, he writes home to his brother saying he's going to be "4th Senior Captain" -- in which case, as per rch's info above, he should have had Co. D. That letter's dated October 27th 1866, so not much time for a flood of other more senior captains to bump him down the rankings before he reports for duty ... Assuming he's right, and not kidding himself, does his status as 4th senior shed any light on what the seniority factors might have been?
Incidentally, he never had to join the 4th Cavalry. He would have been stationed in Texas if he had (and as a mere 2nd Lt.) but was rescued by Custer poaching him for the 7th at a higher grade. (It was third time lucky for Custer; he'd twice tried to get Keogh to join him, or Sheridan's staff, during the CW, but Keogh turned him down.)
Re Benteen's recruits, rch: that's a really interesting observation. It hadn't struck me that that engagement was fought with nothing but recruits (apart from one orderly, that is). That baptism of fire must have done them the world of good. It would be great to know how they were distributed through the various companies, and better still, who they were by name; some of them might still have been around for LBH ...
|
|
|
Post by rch on Aug 20, 2006 9:50:16 GMT -6
On another thread there is a link to a letter Elizabeth Custer wrote dated 6 Dec 1866. She mentions Sheridan and Keogh and Robeson among the new Capts of the regiment. She also mentions Charles L. Fitzhugh (a former horse artillery battery commander and one Thomas Devin's brigade commanders), and Custer's former Chief of Staff and Inspector-General Edward Whittaker.
I have found 10 Capts of the 7th with dates of rank of 28 Jul 66. In the order listed in Mills they are Hamilton - A , Robeson - B resigned 8 Jun 67, Thompson - also B but he may have been assigned on paper to another company, Morrow - E, Myers - also E like Thompson, Barnitz -G, Benteen - H, Keogh - I, West - K, and Sheridan - L. Mills doesn't list any Capts for Cos. C, D, F, or M.
Thompson probably moved to Co B from Co. C because Lee Gillette was promoted from 1lt 7th Cav as of the date Robeson resigned and Gillette at the time of the Washita was Capt. of Co. C on detached service or waiting for his resignation ti go through.
Weir was promoted to Capt on 31 Jul 67 from 1st Lt 7th Cav and commanded D at Washita.
Yates was appointed as Capt (from 2nd Lt, 2nd Cav) on 12 Jun 67 and commanded F at the Washita.
Lewis Dayton was appointed Capt as of 6 Mar 67 (from 2nd Lt 2nd Inf) and was Capt of M on detached servece at the time of the Washita. Dayton was on Sherman's staff.
You have to remember that these appointments and promotions were all retroactive and had to go through the War Department. Yates was apparently doing duty as Regimental Quartermaster of the 2nd Cavalry through 28 Oct 67. That he was a 2nd Lt doing that job probably reflects the state of flux even old regiments were in at that time.
When they talk about the promotions within the 7th Cavalry as a result of the Custer Battle, it's because the 7th is an old regiment by then, and they know the rules of seniority will apply. The promoted men still had to wait to be offered the promotions, and they still had to accept them.
elisabeth
Benteen descibes the action on p. 263-4 of Carroll's "The Benteen-Goldin Letters."
rch
|
|
|
Post by rch on Aug 20, 2006 15:41:46 GMT -6
Gordie
I'm not sure Benteen was the senior Capt in 1867, which is why I've been curious about the original Capts of the 7th. It's possible that because of the state of flux at the time Capts were assigned to companies without regard to seniority. I think the War Department probably established the seniority in the new regiments. That's why the Army Register for 1867 may be of help. The 23 Nov 66 order designating the regiment and announcing the top field officers apparently did not name any capts. Only an extract of it appears in the regimental history. Benteen was certainly not the senior Capt after Verling Hart joined the regiment under the special rules that applied during the 1869-71 reorganization. Hart was the only 7th Cavalry Capt to be promoted to Maj after the 1866-7 reorganization and before the LBH.
I've also had doubts about Custer turning down a colonelcy. Wesley Merritt who was always Custer's senior accepted a lieutenant colonelcy in the 9th Cavalry. I suppose it's possible he also turned down a colonelcy and then thought better of it, but could only salvage a Lt. Col's appointment. If he had never been offered a colonelcy of any kind it might alter the perception of how Custer and Merritt were viewed by Sheridan.
rch
|
|
|
Post by harpskiddie on Aug 20, 2006 18:35:30 GMT -6
RCH: You might be right about enerything. I'm not at all sure where I heard about Benteen and Custer turning down appointments to negro regiments . I should have made it clear it was just something I heard. Maybe Merritt turned one down also. I know he ranked Custer. I think a lot of guys probably turned down commissions in colored regiments. I've heard it was hard to staff them.
One thing you are surely right about, and that is the state of flux around the time the 7th was formed.
Gordie
|
|
|
Post by elisabeth on Aug 21, 2006 1:47:53 GMT -6
Not sure about Custer (I'll have to check in Merington, and that's downstairs!) -- but Benteen confirms it in his own case. Benteen-Goldin Letters, p. 196: "In 1866 I could have gone into the 10th U.S. Cavalry as a Major but I preferred a Captaincy in the Seventh." He then talks of the irony of fate that "after being a Captain for 17 years, threw me into a negro organization of cavalry anyhow ... a race of troops that I could take no interest in".
No, can't find anything in Merington ... but Utley says (Cavalier in Buckskin, p. 40), re controversy over whether Custer had been promised a colonelcy in return for joining in the "Swing Around the Circle" junket, that "only a few weeks earlier he had written directly to the president asking for such a commission (though specifically not in a black unit)." No source cited. Like you, though, I'm sure I've seen it in several places, and with chapter and verse given.
I've read (also in that elusive "somewhere") that the problem with coloured regiments was that their officers lost caste in polite society. The job itself was probably far easier than in white regiments; fewer desertions, longer-serving and thus more experienced soldiers. They certainly acquitted themselves well. It was just snobbery. And the Custers did like their place in society ...
|
|
|
Post by markland on Aug 21, 2006 8:26:03 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by elisabeth on Aug 21, 2006 10:09:52 GMT -6
Fabulous stuff, Billy!
|
|
|
Post by markland on Aug 21, 2006 10:18:56 GMT -6
Thanks Elisabeth...in case you did not already notice, it was the 1867 Army Register, not the 1876 as I initially stated...I hate Mondays! Billy
|
|
|
Post by rch on Aug 21, 2006 11:41:42 GMT -6
Billy
Thank you for your hard work and making the information available. You have answered a couple of questions I've had for quite some time. Well done.
Benteen could not have been senior Capt until Thompson retired in 1875.
Company assignments were not made by seniority.
In addition, by the summer of 1867 Keogh was 3rd senior captain instead of 4th.
rch
|
|
|
Post by markland on Aug 21, 2006 13:01:38 GMT -6
RCH, my pleasure to have helped. For those who like this stuff, here are the "Casualties" for the Army which occurred. In this case, the term "Casualties" refers to anyone who left a slot, not necessarily due to dying. This is a PDF file and will require Adobe Acrobat Reader to open. In addition, it is a large file, at 7.4 megabytes. Users with broadband should not experience any problems, however those with dial-up connections may have a long wait. If those users wish, I can break it down into two or three sections. Granted, the cumulative time will be the same but the aggravation may be less. Let me know. This is not of the superior quality that you will see from the Library of Congress, etc. but, for our needs, it is workable. freepages.history.rootsweb.com/~familyinformation/Army%20Register/AR1867_Casualties.pdfBilly
|
|
|
Post by elisabeth on Aug 22, 2006 6:57:24 GMT -6
Fascinating ... especially to see the number of people who "declined" commissions in the Seventh. Some of them may have been hoping for better offers, but there are at least two 1st Lts who turn down Captain!
What's happening with the "Cancelled" appointments -- do we know? Is it people who just changed their minds -- or people who failed before the examining board?
|
|
|
Post by markland on Aug 23, 2006 10:36:23 GMT -6
Fascinating ... especially to see the number of people who "declined" commissions in the Seventh. Some of them may have been hoping for better offers, but there are at least two 1st Lts who turn down Captain! What's happening with the "Cancelled" appointments -- do we know? Is it people who just changed their minds -- or people who failed before the examining board? Re Cancelled appointments. I don't know but was wondering the same. Beyond the examination boards (which is a very viable option) I was wondering if some appointments had fallen victim to either politics or someone senior to the original appointer wanting another person to fill the slot. I will scout around and see if I can come up with the answer. Billy
|
|
|
Post by rch on Aug 23, 2006 12:52:51 GMT -6
DeRudio was appointed 2nd Lt 2nd Inf effective 31 Aug 67, but the appointmet was cancelled on 20 Sep and then reneweds on 25 Oct. That sounds like a bad recommendation from an examining board and then an appeal and reversal by the board or a higher authority.
rch
|
|
|
Post by markland on Aug 23, 2006 14:59:00 GMT -6
DeRudio was appointed 2nd Lt 2nd Inf effective 31 Aug 67, but the appointmet was cancelled on 20 Sep and then reneweds on 25 Oct. That sounds like a bad recommendation from an examining board and then an appeal and reversal by the board or a higher authority. rch *blush* I suppose putting the index on-line would be a help wouldn't it? I will try to get working on that tonight. Billy
|
|
|
Post by rch on Aug 28, 2006 10:15:42 GMT -6
Markland
Thanks for posting the "Casualties." Because I'm too cheap to buy a new computer I had to get the information on a friend's and could only make imperfect notes.
It appears that neither Custer nor Benteen was formally offered appointments in the 9th or 10th Cavalry Regiments.
Mrs. Custer was correct when she wrote that Charles Fitzhugh and Edwar Whitaker had received Capts appointments, although Fitzhugh declined and Whitaker's appointment was cancelled.
It occurred to me that another possibile reason why an appointment might be cancelled is that the appointee may simply not have replied.
It's also interesting that the entire span of service of 2 deceased officers in the 7th Cavalry occured within the time between the registers and might not have have appeared anywhere in the register except in Casualties . One, Maj Cooper, was well known, but I had never heard of 1st Lt Fairley, who had served in Custer's division.
rch
|
|