|
Post by elisabeth on Sept 20, 2007 6:45:36 GMT -6
Anybody know where Beecher was buried? Or was he? I've read accounts that say that the first burial party to visit Beecher Island couldn't find his body. But given how well-connected a man he was, it seems a touch improbable that everyone just shrugged and said "oh well then, that's it"; was no attempt made to give the family something to bury?
|
|
|
Post by KarlKoz on Sept 20, 2007 7:18:39 GMT -6
You probably got your info from these two sites-it doesn't seem like its known where he's buried: www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=7871148--"A historical marker commemorates the battle as Beecher's Island Battlefield and serves as a memorial to the dead on both sides who are buried there." www.forttours.com/pages/beecher.asp--"Two companies of the 5th US Infantry, Fort Wallace, guided by Forsyth's chief scout Abner Grover, returned to the battlefield in December 1868 to recover the remains of the five scouts buried in September. The remains of George W. Culver and Louis Farley were recovered. However, the detail failed to recover the remains of Lt. Beecher, Surgeon Mooers and Scout William Wilson. Scouts Culver and Farley were re-interred in the Fort Wallace Cemetery. When the Fort Wallace military post closed in 1882, their remains were moved to the Fort Leavenworth Post Cemetery. "
|
|
|
Post by elisabeth on Sept 20, 2007 7:48:13 GMT -6
Yes, that's where I looked -- there doesn't seem to be much else online that offers any more. It seems very unsatisfactory, really. You'd think his remains would have been taken back to Fort Wallace by the original rescue party, he being a Fort Wallace man and well known to Col. Bankhead. If not that, then at least that Grover and party would have made some effort to bring something back -- even just the odd bone or two, as per LBH -- to satisfy the relatives. And if not that, that the Beechers would have kicked up an almighty row about it. But it does look as if none of these things happened. Most bizarre.
|
|
lbhdan
New Member
Not a GOBBORD
Posts: 29
|
Post by lbhdan on Sept 20, 2007 9:14:21 GMT -6
I have a very vague (and, these days, increasingly unreliable) memory of reading about a prominent family who surprised everyone by asking that their son/nephew/etc. remain buried where he fell...I wonder if that could have been Beecher?
At any rate, in Peter Cozzens' Conquering the Southern Plains there is a reprint of Reminiscences of a Plainsman by Allison J. Pliley, a participant in the battle at Beecher Island. It was originally published in 1931, and based upon an interview done in 1909. In it, Pliley says:
"Young Beecher was mortally wounded and died that night, and lies buried at the foot of the monument which now stands on the island."
dan
|
|
|
Post by elisabeth on Sept 20, 2007 9:37:38 GMT -6
Thanks for the Pliley quote -- that's useful
The chap you're thinking of could perhaps be Crittenden at LBH? His family asked that he be buried where he fell rather than returned when the other officers were exhumed and shipped back to Leavenworth and points east ...
|
|
lbhdan
New Member
Not a GOBBORD
Posts: 29
|
Post by lbhdan on Sept 20, 2007 15:26:53 GMT -6
Ah, Crittenden...of course...I'm sure you're right about that...Thanks for jogging my faulty memory!
Here are a couple of additional citations that confirm what KarlKoz quoted above:
In his Encyclopedia of Frontier Biography, Dan Thrapp writes: "[Beecher's] body was gone from its grave when it was opened by soldiers later."
In Indian Fights and Fighters, Cyrus Townsend Brady reprints a letter from Hugh M. Johnson, "Late Lieutenant 5th U.S. Infantry". In the letter, Johnson says, "The Country from Fort Wallace to Arickaree Fork I passed over the following December [1868, after the Battle], in an unsuccessful endeavor to secure the bodies of those killed in the fight. We surprised a village of Indians at the scene of the fight, fought them off, and found the body of one of the scouts, but Lieutenant Beecher's and Dr. Mooers' graves were empty."
Interestingly, Stan Hoig claims (in A Travel Guide to the Plains Indian Wars) that "The river island along with graves and historical markers that were once there have been moved to Wray. (See Wray Museum)."
But I called the museum, and a nice lady there tells me that's not the case. She was unaware of any graves, and the monument (which was washed away, along with the island, in a 1935 flood) was moved to higher ground out near the site (the parts of the monument, that is, that were recovered after the flood).
dan
|
|
lbhdan
New Member
Not a GOBBORD
Posts: 29
|
Post by lbhdan on Sept 20, 2007 17:40:55 GMT -6
Curiouser and curiouser...Here are two more citations for you...
In The Battle of the Washita, Stan Hoig writes:
"During late December 1868, Sharp Grover led an expedition of 5th Infantry from Fort Wallace back through the snow to the battle site for the purpose of recovering the remains of Beecher. They found Wilson and Culver where they had been buried in the same grave, Wilson above Culver. Wilson's body had been found by the Indians and a Spencer carbine taken, but Culver's body had gone undiscovered. Farley's grave was also missed by the grave marauders. Beecher's burial site was located, and his body identified by the wool blanket in which he had been wrapped for burial and by the handkerchief used to tie his hands over his chest."
Remarkable detail, yet it contradicts most other sources, including the letter from Johnson, a leader of the 5th...Is this like Hoig's statement about the island & graves being moved to the museum in Wray?
Then, in a book called Saints, Sinners and Beechers by Lyman Beecher Stowe (Lt. Beecher's cousin?), there is a chapter about Charles Beecher, the Lt.'s father. In a very dispassionate paragraph, the author writes:
"In 1868 Charles Beecher's son, Lieutenant Frederick Beecher, who had recovered from his well-nigh mortal wound received at the Battle of Gettysburg, was killed in a battle in Yuma County, Colorado, between Forsythe's Scouts and Indians. This engagement is now known as the Battle of Beecher Island and the spot where Lieutenant Beecher fell is marked by the Beecher Island monument."
Nothing about the trauma of a missing body, or the burial of a beloved son, or the pain of the loss. He just goes on from there to talk about Charles Beecher's retirement.
dan
|
|
|
Post by elisabeth on Sept 21, 2007 1:40:27 GMT -6
Good finds. I see that Hoig cites "Letters Received, Fort Wallace" as his source for the blanket etc., but annoyingly doesn't say who wrote the letter or to whom ...
The Beecher Stowe quote is surprising. As you say, there's nothing of what one would expect. Compare and contrast (as they say in exam papers) with the behaviour of Lt. Kidder's father: desperately anxious to be sure he was identified, desperately anxious over his reburial. (Didn't he even trek out to Fort Wallace himself? I wouldn't swear to that, but I rather think he did.) Very odd. It's not as if young Beecher was a black sheep or anything; he was a thoroughly nice lad, and constantly writing chatty letters home. I find their attitude difficult to understand.
If Hoig is right, there must be a grave somewhere. If he's not, a missing body is a big story. Either way, one can't help feeling that if the man qualifies to have a landmark named after him, the whereabouts of his mortal remains ought to be a matter of record. Instead, vagueness and confusion. Most peculiar.
|
|
lbhdan
New Member
Not a GOBBORD
Posts: 29
|
Post by lbhdan on Sept 22, 2007 12:11:09 GMT -6
Not only did Kidder's father trek out to Fort Wallace, but -- irony of ironies -- the leader of the expedition to recover his son's body was...Lt. Beecher. Randy Johnson and Nancy Allen (in their excellent book, A Dispatch to Custer) reprint some very poignant (in light of future events) letters from Beecher to his father about the recovery: "I went out as I told you I intended to and was unsuccessful, owing to a most severe snow storm that covered every sign of a grave. The cold was intense and I have been so suffering from snow blindness since I returned that I can not write...Were it not that I have a father with me who feels the most intense longing to see where a beloved son was killed, I would not endeavor so much." A week later, he was able to report: "I arrived home from my trip with Judge Kidder and brought the remains of his son...The sight on the battle ground was terrible...The poor father had an awful sight to witness." Could it be that these reports, just a few short months before Beecher's death, influenced his own father's actions? (As a source for these letters, Johnson & Allen cite " A Memorial to Frederick H. Beecher, a pamphlet prepared by his parents, the Reverend Charles and Sarah Beecher, Portland, Maine, 1870.") Another interesting tidbit: When Beecher was wounded during the Civil War, his father "came after him and took him home to Georgetown" according to a Booklet Published in Commemoration of the Fiftieth Anniversary of the Class of 1862, Bowdoin College, June 25-27, 1912. (See www.rootsweb.com/~coyuma/vets/goldstar/BeecherFH.htm ) The same site also lists Beecher as "Buried on the battlefield, remains not recovered." dan
|
|
|
Post by gary on Sept 22, 2007 13:07:58 GMT -6
A letter from Col Bankhead to Gen Sheridan on September 26th 1868, apparently from Beecher Island, is quoted in Bob Snelson's 'Solomon Avengers' (pp.156-158). It mentions the death of one of the scouts (Farley) and says that he "was buried on the island with the others". Bankhead also says that he "cannot remove the dead".
It would seem therefore that Beecher was indeed buried on 'his' island. This impression is strengthened by Snelson's later comments (p.172) about the expedition in December 1868 to recover the bodies. He confirms that Beecher's body (and those of two others) could not be found. He cites Criqui's 'Fifty Fearless Men' as his source.
Homer Wheeler's contribution to the 'Beecher Island Annual' also confirms the burial on the island and empty grave account. He also implies that Beecher had already been buried before the troops arrived to relieve the scouts. Criqui's contribution to the Annual provides more detail, as a he quotes a contemporary report suggesting that Beecher's body had been exhumed by Indians.
|
|
|
Post by elisabeth on Sept 22, 2007 22:26:08 GMT -6
Thank you, Gary -- I'd completely forgotten about Wheeler. In Buffalo Days, p. 17-19, he says: "Those of the scouts who had been killed, four in number, were buried before we [Bankhead's party] arrived. This was necessary, as the bodies had commenced to decompose." And then: "A few months after the Beecher Island fight Captain Butler of the Fifth Infantry, with his company was sent out to recover the bodies of those that had been buried at the scene of the battle. He found only the bodies of Farley and a scout named Culver. The graves of Lieutenant Beecher and Doctor Mooers were empty."
So the consensus is shaping up to be that he was buried at the scene, then removed by Indians. (Perhaps Hoig is correct in saying that "his burial site" was located; it could be that the blanket and handkerchief were still there, minus the body?)
Dan, nice point about the possible influence of the Kidder saga on Beecher's father. He might well have felt he couldn't put another officer through what young Fred had suffered. Not impossible, even, that Fred could have urged him not to in the event that he was killed; it'd be like his thoughtfulness.
There was a copy of the Beecher pamphlet for sale on one or other of the bookshop sites a week or so ago. It was a bit pricey, so I resisted it at the time ... but I think I'm going to have to get it after all. Such a nice young man; every quote one sees from him is a pleasure to read.
[P.S. Needless to say, it's no longer available. Let this be a warning to all: do not waste time wrestling with your conscience when a book you want comes up, but grab it at once!]
|
|
|
Post by harpskiddie on Sept 23, 2007 0:49:55 GMT -6
Let me second that last piece of advice from Elisabeth. Yesterday, I Emailed a seller of something I wanted [not desperately, but keenly], to enquire as to the shipping cost. I got his reply, and Emailed my order, only to find out that someone else had purchased it in the hour or so I dawdled. Since the shipping was about 5% of the cost, I'm kicking myself that I didn't just buy it without asking. Of course, it was a one-off, and if it comes up for sale again will likely be three times as much.
Habits of a long lifetime are often hard to shake, especially when it comes to money and the lack thereof.
Gordie, it's alright dear, maybe he will write another letter. What, from the grave!?!?..........................
|
|
|
Post by elisabeth on Sept 25, 2007 8:55:25 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by harpskiddie on Sept 25, 2007 10:46:27 GMT -6
Elisabeth:
Thanks for the link. Whatever else one thinks of him, one must give Custer his due as a writer for the popular trade.
Gordie, ah yes, I remember it well...............................................
|
|
Gumby
Full Member
Posts: 202
|
Post by Gumby on Mar 24, 2008 20:38:02 GMT -6
Elisabeth,
A bit late but, Beecher's body was never officially reburied. As was stated earlier, Sharp Grover returned with some soldiers to retrieve the bodies of Beecher and the other dead scouts. Beecher's body was missing. However, I did find an account in the Denver Public Library of an old timer who claimed to have found the body and donated it to the Colorado Historical Society. I haven't gotten around to asking there yet.
Bob
|
|