War Stories for my Grandchildren

by John Watson Foster

"Captain Dudley Smith

"I believe, my dear, that God will continue to preserve my life for you and my dear child. Live in hope and faith. I will write a long letter soon."

In the letter to my father, given above, I refer in commendation to my brother Alexander H. Foster, the regimental quartermaster. He rendered a most valuable service in saving all our camp and personal baggage. When during the first day's fighting it became evident that the battle was going against us, he brought up the wagons and loaded up all the company and headquarters baggage and outfit, and took them to the rear. The rebels occupied our tents on Sunday night, and would have plundered everything but for our quartermaster's thoughtfulness. He also displayed great daring in keeping us supplied with ammunition during the first day's heavy fighting.

Another incident respecting our tents may be noted. When attending the Harvard Law School, I had formed a very close friendship with a classmate from Alabama, Walter Bragg. I corresponded with him for some time, but lost sight of him when the war began. Years after he came to Washington to fill an important official position. I learned from him then that on Sunday night of the Shiloh battle his regiment occupied the camp of the Twenty-fifth Indiana, and he slept in our headquarters tent.

General Grant in his "Personal Memoirs" says: "The battle of Shiloh was the severest battle fought at the West during the war, and but few in the East equaled it for hard, determined fighting." General Sherman, in his "Memoirs," characterizes it as "one of the most fiercely contested of the war."

The number of the Confederate forces engaged in the battle, as reported by Beauregard, was 40,955. Grant reports the Federal forces in the first day's fighting at 33,000, and that on the second day he was reinforced by General Lew Wallace with 5000 and from Buell's army with 20,000. The losses of the Federals were, killed 1754, wounded 8408, missing 2934. The Confederate losses were, killed 1728, wounded 8012, and missing 957. In my official report I placed the loss of the Twenty-fifth Indiana at 149.

While the battle was recognized as a distinct Union victory, it was followed in the North by severe criticism of the generalship displayed on the Federal side. Sherman says that "probably no single battle of the war gave rise to such wild and damaging reports"; and in his "Memoirs" Grant writes: "The battle of Shiloh or Pittsburg Landing has been perhaps less understood, or, to state the case more accurately, more persistently misunderstood, than any other engagement during the entire rebellion."

The main criticisms were three in number: first, that no intrenchments or fortifications of any kind were made to protect the encampment; second, that our army was surprised; and, third, that the retreating enemy was not pursued. It is generally conceded that the encampment was well located for defense, as three sides were protected by the river and creeks full of water. Sherman, in discussing the first criticism in later years, said, "The position was naturally strong; ... we could have rendered this position impregnable in one night." General Force, in reviewing the battle after the close of the war, wrote: "The army had many things to learn, and the use of field fortifications was one of them."

The charge that our camp was surprised was indignantly denied by both Generals Grant and Sherman, and they produce statements of fact, not generally understood at the time, which seem to sustain their contention. But a different impression was generally prevalent in the camp. One of the most intelligent and daring of the Civil War correspondents was a young man writing under the nom-de-plume of "Agate," who became afterwards well known throughout the world, Whitelaw Reid. He was on the battlefield during the two days' fighting and wrote lengthy reports of the battle. His contention was that it was a complete surprise. Years afterwards he had a discussion on this matter with General Sherman, and in the course of it he cited my letter to my father, above quoted, to sustain his contention.

Doubtless the rebel army would have been much more demoralized and have sustained great loss in military equipment and supplies, if it had been vigorously pursued. The greater part of Grant's army was so reduced and fatigued as not to be able to make an effective pursuit of the retreating Confederates, but Buell's army was not in that condition. Publications made after the war by Grant and Buell make it plain that there was want of harmony, if not an unfriendly spirit, that prevented the cordial coöperation which might have made the battle much more decisive.