Tweet
MEMPHIS DAILY APPEAL [MEMPHIS, TN], October 29, 1861, p. 4, c. 2
A Camp Incident.
A Columbus correspondent of the New Orleans Crescent relates the following incident:
We had a scene on the parade ground the other evening, during battalion drill. The regiment was standing at open order and ordered arms, when Col. Marks gave the order, stack arms. Your military readers will at once see what a blunder this was, and how impossible it was to execute such an order according to modern tactics. It threw the line into confusion; some companies stood fast without obeying the order, and others, in an awkward and bungling manner, shouldered arms without order; the rear rank marched forward without order, and then the stacks were made without order. Among the companies that didn't obey the order was the Continental Guards. Seeing this, the colonel shouted to Capt. Fleming, wanting to know why his company didn't stack arms. The captain replied that he didn't know how to execute the order. The colonel said he would teach him how. The captain replied that that was just what he wanted. The colonel, instead of teaching him how to execute the movement, indignantly ordered him to march his company off the ground, and report himself under arrest. The remaining companies then finished the bungle of stacking arms from an open order.
Subsequently Col. Marks ordered the Continentals to appear before him at his tent, which they did, under command of Lieut. Babin. The colonel informed the company that he did not order them off the parade ground to disgrace them, or order them before him to punish them; he merely wished to let them understand distinctly that in battalion drill he alone was their commander, and that when he gave an order, right or wrong, it must be obeyed, if possible.
Lieut. Peyton, who had drilled the company, stepped up to speak in extenuation of the company, and to take the blame upon himself, he having always instructed the men never to obey a wrong order, but the colonel refused to listen to him. The lieutenant then offered him his sword; this the colonel also refused, saying he had just as good a sword of his own. Soon afterward the colonel sent an order to Capt. Fleming to return to his duty. And so the matter, as far as I know, has "simmered down." High military authority has decided that the colonel was wrong in the first place, and the captain wrong in the second place; the former in giving the wrong order, and the latter in refusing to obey the order, though he knew it to be wrong.
Vicki Betts
vbetts@gower.net
A Camp Incident.
A Columbus correspondent of the New Orleans Crescent relates the following incident:
We had a scene on the parade ground the other evening, during battalion drill. The regiment was standing at open order and ordered arms, when Col. Marks gave the order, stack arms. Your military readers will at once see what a blunder this was, and how impossible it was to execute such an order according to modern tactics. It threw the line into confusion; some companies stood fast without obeying the order, and others, in an awkward and bungling manner, shouldered arms without order; the rear rank marched forward without order, and then the stacks were made without order. Among the companies that didn't obey the order was the Continental Guards. Seeing this, the colonel shouted to Capt. Fleming, wanting to know why his company didn't stack arms. The captain replied that he didn't know how to execute the order. The colonel said he would teach him how. The captain replied that that was just what he wanted. The colonel, instead of teaching him how to execute the movement, indignantly ordered him to march his company off the ground, and report himself under arrest. The remaining companies then finished the bungle of stacking arms from an open order.
Subsequently Col. Marks ordered the Continentals to appear before him at his tent, which they did, under command of Lieut. Babin. The colonel informed the company that he did not order them off the parade ground to disgrace them, or order them before him to punish them; he merely wished to let them understand distinctly that in battalion drill he alone was their commander, and that when he gave an order, right or wrong, it must be obeyed, if possible.
Lieut. Peyton, who had drilled the company, stepped up to speak in extenuation of the company, and to take the blame upon himself, he having always instructed the men never to obey a wrong order, but the colonel refused to listen to him. The lieutenant then offered him his sword; this the colonel also refused, saying he had just as good a sword of his own. Soon afterward the colonel sent an order to Capt. Fleming to return to his duty. And so the matter, as far as I know, has "simmered down." High military authority has decided that the colonel was wrong in the first place, and the captain wrong in the second place; the former in giving the wrong order, and the latter in refusing to obey the order, though he knew it to be wrong.
Vicki Betts
vbetts@gower.net
Comment