| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Benteen
Lt. Colonel
Status: offline |
 Posted - October 28 2009 : 11:36:02 AM
|
First of all here Ranger, you are taking these things from extracts of the RCOI. And this occurred when? Of course Reno would agree with Wallace there on times, just as Benteen did. Recollecting something 3 years after the fact does not make those things said, the truth. And did the means explain their motive you seek? 2nd, all of your quotes from the RCOI were stated over a period of time and miles. Each one of these are a focal point of a certain location, and/or multiple locations within their answers., which requires an accurate time based upon the miles and times they stated between each location, and the time for each event at those locations. So unless one applies your “theory of relativity”, one cannot be sure of anything anyone said at that court, unless checked against official documents prior to their appearance at court, which is exactly what you do with Wallace’s 1877 report, is it not?
You said yourself that one should look for the discrepancies in their statements and testimony. And you’ve provided a plethora of them to consider right off the top. Which would require an answer so lengthy that not even I would read it myself, if it were presented. And to gloss over and leave out in the process crucial detail in each circumstance would not do justice to finding out the truth.
Lets us begin then with a point upon where we agree, to a certain extent, and work our way through this one quotation post at a time.
Last quote, first three sentences: Where Reno was explaining Hodgson’s and Wallace’s presence before leaving for the ford. Exactly where was this? Can it be demonstrated without question where this occurred from either the RCOI testimony or other reports? It sure can.
Everyone knows where Wallace was at this time, he was with Custer until he was chided into going with Reno. And this was when? If this chiding occurred when it did and Wallace was with Custer, as he surely was, then where was Reno? And if Wallace could hear this chiding, then did Custer hear this too? The answer is yes, isn’t it? And Reno? What did he hear from Custer just prior to this? “And take the Scouts with you” perhaps? Indeed if the one who shouted to Wallace (Hare, I believe) was with Reno and “within hearing distance" of Custer, and Wallace was with Custer, then Reno would have been within hearing distance of Custer. And this according to Reno’s own testimony and Official Report was where? After Reno had passed Custer and was on his way to the ford. This occurred by all accounts “not far from the tepee”, which was about “50 yards” from the Knoll where Girard shouted his famous remark: And this was about 1 mile from Ford “A”.
|
  |
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - October 28 2009 : 9:01:19 PM
|
Yes and why not these are sworn testimonies.
You stated that you believe Reno the senior officer or is it only when convenient. Wallace is not recalling times 3 years latter out of thin air. They were recorded and then it was published. Later it was used at RCOI.
I don't see the starting point if you state they lie when you disagree and are the Senior officer when it fits your purpose but I am willing to give it a shot.
Reno is asked who was there and he stated Wallace was next to Hodgson. Then in the next sentence he explains how Wallace happen to be there. The event explained in the second sentence occurs first and because Wallace is there he hears the order. Reno had to answer the question who was there. He threw in the part about how Wallace got to be there. His first sentence was the only answer he needed to give.
AZ Ranger
AZ Ranger |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
Edited by - AZ Ranger on October 28 2009 9:17:55 PM |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - October 28 2009 : 10:01:22 PM
|
In a response to a question regarding traveling down Reno Creek and before the order was given look at who Reno states he was with.
 |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
Benteen
Lt. Colonel
Status: offline |
Posted - October 28 2009 : 11:36:14 PM
|
| Your last post had nothing to do with the event we were discussing. You will note that in that answer Reno did say what his position was in the regiment, and at the time he had not been assigned a battalion, so this had to have occurred before his battalion assignment, and this was where? And how long before the event we are discussing did this occur? |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - October 29 2009 : 12:06:02 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Benteen
Your last post had nothing to do with the event we were discussing. You will note that in that answer Reno did say what his position was in the regiment, and at the time he had not been assigned a battalion, so this had to have occurred before his battalion assignment, and this was where? And how long before the event we are discussing did this occur?
You proved me correct. Reno is stating that on the 25th he was with Wallace before crossing over to Custer and you want to blow it off because it doesn't fit you idea. It certainly makes it more likely that Wallace was with Reno latter on don't you think.
Is it more likely after that statement that Wallace was with Reno?
I provided a statement that is consitent with a latter statement that Reno, Hodgson and Wallace were together.
Provide a statement from Reno Court of Inquiry that states he was not there. I don't want your words,opinions or questions just some evidence from the RCOI that Wallace was not or could not have been there to hear Custer give Reno the order.
AZ Ranger |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
Edited by - AZ Ranger on October 29 2009 12:17:58 AM |
|
|
|
Benteen
Lt. Colonel
Status: offline |
Posted - October 29 2009 : 08:31:57 AM
|
I think Ranger we may be in agreement here to a certain degree, if I understand your last post correctly. And as I began this last round of discussion, I did say that we would agree on some points here, did I not?
We do not always disagree, a fact which you do know. And in an attempt to show this, I posted what I did Yesterday : 11:36:02 AM.
Sometimes when posts become long, or we think we know from "skimming" the post rather than "reading" it, it leads to these misunderstandings. I know, your set in your ways, and perhaps i'm set in mine, and little will change either's view; and so, perhaps at this juncture the best answers to all of this may well be as you've put it; "whats the point"?
Yours of yesterday:
quote:
Provide a statement from Reno Court of Inquiry that states he was not there. I don't want your words,opinions or questions just some evidence from the RCOI that Wallace was not or could not have been there to hear Custer give Reno the order.
Please re-read this carefully and you tell me what I am conveying:
quote:
Everyone knows where Wallace was at this time, he was with Custer until he was chided into going with Reno. And this was when? If this chiding occurred when it did and Wallace was with Custer, as he surely was, then where was Reno? And if Wallace could hear this chiding, then did Custer hear this too? The answer is yes, isn’t it? And Reno? What did he hear from Custer just prior to this? “And take the Scouts with you” perhaps? Indeed if the one who shouted to Wallace (Hare, I believe) was with Reno and “within hearing distance" of Custer, and Wallace was with Custer, then Reno would have been within hearing distance of Custer. And this according to Reno’s own testimony and Official Report was where? After Reno had passed Custer and was on his way to the ford. This occurred by all accounts “not far from the tepee”, which was about “50 yards” from the Knoll where Girard shouted his famous remark: And this was about 1 mile from Ford “A”.
And after (Hare?) shouted his message to Wallace about coming along, what did Wallace do according to your account? My post above indicated alot more than Wallace's mere joining of Reno at that time. To associate Wallace being with Reno before that is what one needs to establish. I've established that he was with Custer up to that point. Your follow-up post associated Wallace with Reno at a time that is irrelevant to that time, a day prior in fact. People will be people and to note their exact locations throughout would be supercilious in the extreme. The best one can do is try to establish where they were at any given moment according to statements and testimony.
|
Edited by - Benteen on October 29 2009 08:34:49 AM |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - October 29 2009 : 09:49:57 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Benteen
I think Ranger we may be in agreement here to a certain degree, if I understand your last post correctly. And as I began this last round of discussion, I did say that we would agree on some points here, did I not?
We do not always disagree, a fact which you do know. And in an attempt to show this, I posted what I did Yesterday : 11:36:02 AM.
Sometimes when posts become long, or we think we know from "skimming" the post rather than "reading" it, it leads to these misunderstandings. I know, your set in your ways, and perhaps i'm set in mine, and little will change either's view; and so, perhaps at this juncture the best answers to all of this may well be as you've put it; "whats the point"?
Yours of yesterday:
quote:
Provide a statement from Reno Court of Inquiry that states he was not there. I don't want your words,opinions or questions just some evidence from the RCOI that Wallace was not or could not have been there to hear Custer give Reno the order.
Please re-read this carefully and you tell me what I am conveying:
quote:
Everyone knows where Wallace was at this time, he was with Custer until he was chided into going with Reno. And this was when? If this chiding occurred when it did and Wallace was with Custer, as he surely was, then where was Reno? And if Wallace could hear this chiding, then did Custer hear this too? The answer is yes, isn’t it? And Reno? What did he hear from Custer just prior to this? “And take the Scouts with you” perhaps? Indeed if the one who shouted to Wallace (Hare, I believe) was with Reno and “within hearing distance" of Custer, and Wallace was with Custer, then Reno would have been within hearing distance of Custer. And this according to Reno’s own testimony and Official Report was where? After Reno had passed Custer and was on his way to the ford. This occurred by all accounts “not far from the tepee”, which was about “50 yards” from the Knoll where Girard shouted his famous remark: And this was about 1 mile from Ford “A”.
And after (Hare?) shouted his message to Wallace about coming along, what did Wallace do according to your account? My post above indicated alot more than Wallace's mere joining of Reno at that time. To associate Wallace being with Reno before that is what one needs to establish. I've established that he was with Custer up to that point. Your follow-up post associated Wallace with Reno at a time that is irrelevant to that time, a day prior in fact. People will be people and to note their exact locations throughout would be supercilious in the extreme. The best one can do is try to establish where they were at any given moment according to statements and testimony.
I am willing to discuss what you post from RCOI but you continue to want to ask questions not to the point. Reno states that he was with Lt Wallace and Lt Hodgson.(So I disagree that Wallace was always with Custer using Reno and Wallace's testimony, provide contrary evidence to support you position that Wallace was with Custer, it can not be Hare because he was not with Custer all the time) They went to spring to get a drink of water. That is clear testimony that they were together by choice before the time later on in which Custer gave the orders.
So we know when the regiment was all together Wallace had a free choice to ride wherever he wanted. When the regiment was divided into battalions Wallace probably could still ride wherever he chose but should still have friends and associates within his own company. The facts will show that G company was assigned to Reno so there is another piece of evidence to show why Wallace might be riding along with Reno.
Hare went with Reno not because his company went with Reno but because of the scouts. Wallace's own company was given the lead with and M on making the first attack upon the Indians. So Wallace decided to remain with his company something most officers would do.
AZ Ranger |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
Edited by - AZ Ranger on October 29 2009 09:54:59 AM |
|
|
|
Benteen
Lt. Colonel
Status: offline |
Posted - October 29 2009 : 12:21:49 PM
|
I think you are confused on this point. Which is why you contend so hotly against Joe's statement.
Why confusion? Simply Your trying to place Wallace with Reno "all the time" from the time they left Busby to the time the drank water together, from the time the crossed the divide to when Reno recieved his battalion to when Reno recieved his orders, is that not right? You would like me and joe to admit this, isn't that what all your puffed up verbiage is all about. So you can prove Wallace a decent and honorable soldier, isn't that right? And yet,YET, your own sentence betrays just one fact - ONE: "So we know when the regiment was all together Wallace had a free choice to ride wherever he wanted." And YET according to you he was with Reno all that time. Talking about sucking an egg.
Good lord man, there is no way you can place him with Reno all that time, no more than I or Joe can have it the other way. Why? "So we know when the regiment was all together Wallace had a free choice to ride wherever he wanted." And why did he have that "free choice"? What were his regimental duties? Why would he have "hesitated" with Custer by his side, before going over to Reno? Where was his proper place when it came to those duties? And by that time, near the tepee by the river, would those duties have meant diddle squat? And BEFORE THAT?
I've proven these facts time and time again. And your one statement proves the answer.
And yes, I was mistaken about Hare, it was Varnum who stated that to Wallace, ala Joe:
quote:
As he started off, Varnum shouted out to Wallace, "Come on Nick, with the fighting men. I don't stay back with the Coffee coolers." Custer than gave Wallace permission to go.
And that last line should prove to you that he did have Regimental Duties to perform, and only Custer could have released him from them.
Joe went on to state:
quote:
None of this information is capable of concluding what Wallace did or did not hear while riding with Custer.
Yet I have provided you with the evidence (through Reno's Official Report of July 5th, 1876) that he had to have heard Custer's direct order to Reno which Custer concluded with "And take the Scouts with you", because he was there and heard every word of that order Custer recited to Reno, and other's did hear. Indeed "Why did Wallace lie" about this?
quote:
What it does (is more than) imply that Wallace's statement was untruthful and the inference that he rode at Reno's side during the entire time of the initial phase of the battle was a corker.
|
Edited by - Benteen on October 29 2009 1:07:19 PM |
|
|
|
joe wiggs
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - October 29 2009 : 8:52:09 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by AZ Ranger
Yes and why not these are sworn testimonies.
You stated that you believe Reno the senior officer or is it only when convenient. Wallace is not recalling times 3 years latter out of thin air. They were recorded and then it was published. Later it was used at RCOI.
Benteen, you are informative, reasonable, and those willing to engage in rational discussion will always, I think, enjoy your posts. Unfortunately, there are a few individuals who are stuck in a paradigm of their own choosing and, are incapable of change. When faced with any evidence, information, or opinion that differs from their entrenched perspective they choose one response;denial.
az will quote anything he feels (hopes) will counter any opine that differs from his, In his mind, this is victory!
Benteen, you have patiently and masterfully exposed az for the small minded student of the battle,that he is, who refuses to open up and expand his options nor explore possible possibilities that may help the serious students arrive at a rational perspective as to why this battle evolved as it did.
Tank you for you informative information that, I am sure, will re-generate this forum to a new and, heretofore, unexplored plateau.
|
|
|
|
Benteen
Lt. Colonel
Status: offline |
Posted - October 30 2009 : 06:02:59 AM
|
quote:
Benteen, you are informative, reasonable, and those willing to engage in rational discussion will always, I think, enjoy your posts. Unfortunately, there are a few individuals who are stuck in a paradigm of their own choosing and, are incapable of change. When faced with any evidence, information, or opinion that differs from their entrenched perspective they choose one response;denial.
az will quote anything he feels (hopes) will counter any opine that differs from his, In his mind, this is victory!
Benteen, you have patiently and masterfully exposed az for the small minded student of the battle,that he is, who refuses to open up and expand his options nor explore possible possibilities that may help the serious students arrive at a rational perspective as to why this battle evolved as it did.
Tank you for you informative information that, I am sure, will re-generate this forum to a new and, heretofore, unexplored plateau.
Joe,
As i've said before I harbor no ill feelings for Ranger nor even DC. They do have a right to their beliefs and opinions, just as you or I do. And I respect that. All I have ever sought was a forum unto which someone would show me that same respect without harrassment, bitter personal statements, and in like fashion debate me without malicious abuse. So far Ranger has done this. He has stood toe to toe with me and debated the facts in a manner that I admire, and I do thank him for that, and will always deeply respect him for. He has permitted me to explain the facts as I see it. Sure at time's he didn't read all of my post before replying. But that's to be expected if the post is too long and so projected against what someone else believes.
Yes there are a lot of "small minded student's of the battle, who refuse to open up and expand (their) options nor explore possible possibilities that may help the serious students arrive at a rational perspective as to why this battle evolved as it did." I'm not sure, yet, whether Ranger is one of these or not. He is a dedicated and tenacious person who believes what HE believes, and I do not fault him for those beliefs, I can't. Where the fault lies is with people who will not, can not bring themselves to the table and lay down their swords upon it and stand toe to toe with me or you or anyone else with a differing view and discuss each one's views intelligently, smartly, and honorably. If they can do that, then they are in my book honorable people who do deserve so much more than respect could ever honor, or friendship ever demonstrate.
quote:
Unfortunately, there are a few individuals who are stuck in a paradigm of their own choosing and, are incapable of change. When faced with any evidence, information, or opinion that differs from their entrenched perspective they choose one response;denial.
Perhaps this is as it should be. I fault no one for those beliefs. But to not allow another to express their opinion because of their own, and in a fit and tirade befitting that of Vlad the Impaler, another then is christened heretical and further inquest's before their peers begin to demonstrate their own is hypocrisy. And in this, any faith, so i'm told does not abide.
When it comes to discussion on this or any other board, your observations Joe are correct, but there were a few others who put it better than I ever could have. Their remarks were taken from another thread here, and are as follows:
Sgtmajor109th
quote:
I have pulled out a couple of times as there are those, who give you the opinion that you do not know what you are talking about. Or the favorite is I don't understand the answer or question. No matter what I say or what anybody says, we will never change the out come of the battle itself. But, you will always have those that think they know more then you do, and you don't want give an opinion because you know they are going to tear you apart. Just keep one thing in mind, we are looking for answers,and you don't know anymore about it then the next guy. All we can do is analyze what took place,and maybe we could come up with an answer that is suitable to everyone. Lets us respect every ones opinion.
movingrobewoman
quote:
One of the reasons I've gone over to the "other" side is because I'm more comfortable with their approach to those "Tupperware" questions. I like the gossipy stuff, and this place is more to talk tactics. I learn an awful lot from everyone's information, but I don't contribute because I don't know squat (about tactics)!
I inserted what I feel MRW implied. I knew her well, and I don't think she would have disagreed. Both MRW and the good SGT contributed in many ways to this board, as others once did, and both got it right.
|
Edited by - Benteen on October 30 2009 07:23:32 AM |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - October 30 2009 : 08:07:46 AM
|
Benteen I have never said nor implied that Wallace was always with anyone. The only times that I have referenced are on the 25th so I don't understand your Busby comment. Do you think they were in Busby on the 25th?
So to clear that up I believe Wallace was free to move about the regiment when it was together. I believe he may have been friends with Hodgson and maybe even Reno. So he could be with them just as he and Reno testified to. There is not much testimony that lays out every minute.
I believe:
- Wallace went to water with Reno and Hodgson
- Wallace was riding with Reno when Custer called Reno over
- Wallace heard Cook give Reno the order
- Wallace went with his company and Reno
Taking the total hours starting on the 25th to the time Reno's battalion moves forward to the crossing the occasions that I believe they were together are insignificant in total time. In other words there would be more time for Wallace to be away and we have no testimony where that was at.
Now we get to the conversation that Varnum had. That he was within speaking distance is consistent with Wallace being with Reno. You must remember Joe's point is that Wallace did not hear the order.
So I see an easy answer to your proposed dilemma with Varnum. Up to the order for Reno to advance down Reno Creek the regiment was together and Wallace was free to move about. Once Wallace, Reno and Varnum heard the order there would be a separation of the commands. It is quite possible that Wallace would need permission to separate from the main body. I don't know.
So Wallace was free within the whole main body movements but after hearing the orders that separated Reno from the main body he may have needed permission to go. Certainly Varnum could have not made the reported comments until after the orders to separate were given.
AZ Ranger
|
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
Edited by - AZ Ranger on October 30 2009 08:35:24 AM |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - October 30 2009 : 08:26:51 AM
|
If were posting favorite quotes here is mine from Sgtmajor109th
quote:
I agree 100% with what, AZ said about Custer, he knew of the force that faced Reno, If he had thrown more companies into the fight and followed up Reno's attack, I believe you would of had a lot different battle. Once he got to that point near Reno Hill where he could see that village, he then should have moved his force
down to support Reno. Had he done that I believe he would have
caused the indians, nothing but mass confustion.
|
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
Edited by - AZ Ranger on October 30 2009 08:28:18 AM |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - October 30 2009 : 09:02:33 AM
|
quote:
Recorder: Q. What command were you with at that time?
Lt. Wallace: A. I was riding near Major Reno and with his battalion.
I believe that by testifying that he was at Reno's side during the initial phase of the battle, Wallace gave the Court a false inference that he was in position to hear any orders that Reno may or may not have received from Custer. By testifying that no orders were received by Reno from Custer created a false assumption that lent credence to the theory that Custer was a foolish commander who, as President Grant exclaimed,sacrificed his men "foolishly."
Wallace may have been privy to much information that he chose to conceal.
If there is any confusion lets make it clear. The question asked in Joe's first post is for a point in time and has no duration to it either before or after.
I do not understand how you would interpret that answer to mean that Wallace was always with Reno. I don't and see it as only a point in time. Wallace was not with Reno's command in an official capacity and never states that he was. He was riding within the bounds of the whole regiment and at that point in time in regards to the question above and was riding with Reno.
For all we know that he could have ridden with McDougall for awhile. Though the dust factor may have made the head of each battalion a better place to be.
The bottom line is Wallace was there when the order was given in my opinion and to argue that he was with Custer doesn't change hearing the order. All witnesses have approximately the same recollection of the order. What changes is the individual recollections of who was there who gave it and specific words. The base that Reno was to move to contact with the Indians is the same.
AZ Ranger |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
Benteen
Lt. Colonel
Status: offline |
Posted - October 30 2009 : 09:49:09 AM
|
quote:
The bottom line is Wallace was there when the order was given in my opinion and to argue that he was with Custer doesn't change hearing the order.
Yet is does. As I've pointed out by Reno's Official Report of that incident and the events that led up to it, not only was Wallace by Custer's side at that time, this due to Varnum's statement, Reno was too.
quote:
All witnesses have approximately the same recollection of the order. What changes is the individual recollections of who was there who gave it and specific words. The base that Reno was to move to contact with the Indians is the same.
Those orders heard and stated by F. Girard and others who heard Custer give Reno THAT order was vastly different than the orders Custer sent to Reno moments later through Cooke. This occuring shortly after Reno departed, following on the heels of Wallace's defection due to Varnum's statement. |
|
|
|
Benteen
Lt. Colonel
Status: offline |
Posted - October 30 2009 : 10:51:52 AM
|
And as for Favorite post, one of mine is this one by Sgtmajor109th.
quote:
Frank, I was doing some checking, while Custer moving along the trail
the burning Tepee was spotted. According to Sgt Kanipe in order to getto the Tepee they had to find a crossing on the Creek,thus Custer wason the south side of Reno when he was at the Tepee.
Now if you go to the mouth of South Fork creek and use google use the
ruler on path and move to 1,17 miles. You will come out close to whereyou had shot your picture. Speaking of your picture, I had blown it up larger to study it found that cattle were out grazing.
Now one other thing that may be helpful. Custer and Reno rode overs the flats together, however when he made the split he recrossed Reno Creek to make his crossing at the LBH. I don't know if you have ever been to this site but if not check it out. It is Terraserver-USA. Much like google, but no toys to play with. And its in black and white, however you can get a great view of things, take a look at Ford "A" and you can see why Reno had to make a crossing over Reno Creek.
Custer's path from the divide westward wasn't where everyone thinks it was, and the good sgtmajor knew this. |
|
|
|
joe wiggs
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - October 30 2009 : 4:57:30 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by AZ Ranger
If were posting favorite quotes here is mine from Sgtmajor109th
quote:
I agree 100% with what, AZ said about Custer, he knew of the force that faced Reno, If he had thrown more companies into the fight and followed up Reno's attack, I believe you would of had a lot different battle. Once he got to that point near Reno Hill where he could see that village, he then should have moved his force
down to support Reno. Had he done that I believe he would have
caused the indians, nothing but mass confustion.
This is exactly why I find your inexplicable rhetoric so appalling and indefensible and, I'm not being personal because I don't think of you in a personal manner one way or the other.
Sgt. Major was a fantastic contributor and, Brent as well. Both left because of the adversarial posting of you and dc as shown by Benteen in his latest post. As a result, this forum suffered a terrible lost.
Sgt. Major and Brent agreed with you on certain points. No one can be always wrong, not even you. Now, what do you do with this particular post? You up-size it, plaster it across the screen in a laughable attempt to imply that, in actuality, Sgt. Major adored you and that Benteen was in error and did not know snot from tea.
What I find amazing is that you somehow forget that people can read. They can go back and review your statements. How do I know this? Because everyone has left rather than deal with you and d.c.
Personally, I hope you stay here and, bring d.c. back too. I enjoy the opportunity that you provide Benteen and I with one day opening your eyes to the wonderful world of possibilities. |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - October 30 2009 : 8:50:55 PM
|
As senior, my command was then A, B, D, G, H, K, and M, about three hundred and eighty men, and the following officers: Captains Benteen, Weir, French and McDougall, First Lieutenants Godfrey, Mathey, and Gibson, and Second Lieutenants Edgerly, Wallace, Varnum, and Hare, and Acting Assistant Surgeon Porter.
This is the only sentence in Reno's official report that Wallace is mentioned.
As we approached a deserted village, and in which was standing one tepee, about 11 a.m., Custer motioned me to cross to him, which I did, and moved nearer to his column until about 12.30 a.m. [p.m. ?] when Lieutenant Cook, adjutant, came to me and siad the village was only two miles above, and running away; to move forward at as rapid a gait as prudent, and to charge afterward, and that the whole outfit would support me. I think those were his exaxt words.
There is nothing in the official report that would not be consistent with Wallace hearing Cook give Reno the Custer order. |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - October 30 2009 : 9:07:36 PM
|
Wallace claimed to only hear the orders one time and here is Girard at that time. How does this differ signifcantly from Reno or Wallace statment regarding the content of the order.
AZ Ranger |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
Benteen
Lt. Colonel
Status: offline |
Posted - October 31 2009 : 03:05:29 AM
|
Girard had two statements concerning Reno’s orders, when examined together this is the result:
"Major Reno, You will take your battalion and try and overtake them (“the Indians [once]) and bring them to battle, and I will support you….And take the scouts with you.”
The only difference between his two statements was in one he mentioned “the Indians” were to be overtaken, and dropped the reference to them in the other.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lt. Wallace’s 3 statements to the court concerning Reno’s orders when examined together, this is the result:
That Major Reno was 1) “ordered forward”, 2)“to go Forward”, 3) to “follow the Indians” - 1)“as fast as he could go“, 2) “as fast as you can“, 3) “as fast as you think proper” - “and charge them”, “wherever you find them” [stated twice, omitted once], 1) “and the others would support him”, 2) “and we will support you”, 3) “and he will support you”
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
And last but certainly not the least, Major Reno’s 2 statements, one the Official Report, the other in testimony.
1st Cooke,
1) I there received an order from Lt. Cooke to move my command to the front.
2) I moved forward in accordance with the orders received from Lt. Cooke to the head of the column.
2nd Cooke,
Lt. Cooke came to me and said, (the village was only two miles ahead and running away - Gen. Custer directs you - [once]), 1) to take as rapid a gait as you think prudent, 2) to move forward at as rapid a gait as prudent, and charge (the village [once]) afterwards, and you will be supported by the whole outfit.
In both statements he confirmed that Cooke came to him twice, once to move his command to the front. And the 2nd time to relay some kind of “village” message from Custer.
The village was only mentioned twice but in different ways. In the Official Report he said that Cooke told him to “charge the village afterwards”. In testimony he stated it this way, “Lt. Cooke, Adjutant, came to me and said the village was only two miles ahead and running away…”
The discrepancies in Reno’s “village” statements leaves a lot of doubt when it comes to “charging the village”. He mentioned this only once, and that was in his Official Report. In testimony he makes it seem as though the village is “running away” and leaves the impression that something was to be charged, but leaves that just hanging out there as and after thought, “to move forward at as rapid a gait as prudent, and to charge afterward” Afterward of what?
Neither Wallace nor Girard make any mention of “the village”, only Reno does; and he does this in an odd manner, especially when one considers he had to have reviewed his own official report. Indeed what was Major Reno supposed to attack that was “running away”?
Wallace’s testimony reads like a who’s who for the deaf, dumb and blind. Was Reno “ordered forward”, merely charged to “go forward” and in one statement this was dropped altogether and the nearest thing to it in one statement, was that he was “to follow the Indians”. Well now that one has established what was “running”, just how fast according to Wallace was he supposed to go? “As fast as he can”? “As fast as he thinks proper”? Or, “as fast as he could go”? All three statements agreed on only one thing, that he was to “charge them” and then he proceeds to tell us this: “wherever you find then” . The only “Indians” that were actually observed to be “running” were about 40 or 50 Reno stated that were sent out there as “Decoy’s”. And of course according to Wallace, Reno was to “charge them wherever he found them”, Note to those mentally impaired, Wallace NEVER mentioned “the Village” -wherever he, Reno could find it, anyway. Of course in fairness to Wallace he did drop that in only 1 of his 3 statements. Wallace then proceeds to confuse the bejesus out of everyone by stating that: “He”, “We” or “Others” would support him. Good grief there must have been someone, anyone or something out there to support him and help him chase those “Decoy’s”.
Billiards anyone?
|
Edited by - Benteen on October 31 2009 03:18:02 AM |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - October 31 2009 : 06:56:00 AM
|
I see no difference. The village referred to could be the one the Indians were running from down Reno Creek. What it did not refer to is the big village. If the "Big Village" had been discovered Custer would have sent for Benteen in Reno Creek not after they start down Cedar Coulee.
Those are as close of witness statements as you can get without some kind of collusion. The small village was running away. It was running to the "Big Village". The word village and Indian in this case means the same thing. A running village refers to people not the infrastructure of the village.Reno was not ordered to charge 1800 standing tipis with thousand of warriors who were not running.
Look at the scout report of who was running. The warriors in the Big Village were running all right but that was to kick Custer's butt not away. I would more likely believe the running Indians were part of trap to get the troops to follow them. Probably not but it accomplished the same thing.
So the difference is do you believe that there were Indians in a smaller village running toward the "Big Village" or not. If there was then a running village and/or Indians is the same thing. I do believe that any scout could see from their vantage point anyone running away from the "Big Village" which was several miles down the river and the running away end of it even further. Any scout that stated the Big Village was running away committed a huge error.
Once you understand that a small group of Indians(Reno's village in his statements) were running toward the Big Village all the testimony makes sense.
Read Wallace again he was states he was only there for one event of orders given to Reno. The first to move forward and any following he does not claim to have heard. The key elements that Reno takes the advance, charges, and is supported by Custer appears in all three statements.
Reno was not ordered to attack running tipis or is that what you think? Maybe a little more reading and deciphering could be had if you stay out of pool halls. I'll stick with my horses and guns and don't have time to waste in a pool hall. At least not until I retire.
AZ Ranger |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
Edited by - AZ Ranger on October 31 2009 07:05:23 AM |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - October 31 2009 : 07:17:01 AM
|
See anyone that actually believes that a perfect word for word recollection after the battle of the LBH whether in a report or witness statement in my opinion does not understand the human condition. Custer could have said Indians and Reno saw the village shortly there after and figured that is where they were fleeing from hence the village in his recollection.
False statements planned among witnesses line up word for word and don't mix Indian for village but when asked other details they can't remember. So if one states I heard the general give an officer an order then can't remember who was there other than the general I would be suspicious. If you can't remember the surroundings it would be a clue that something might not be right. A clue does not guarantee the false statement but is an indicator.
AZ Ranger |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
Benteen
Lt. Colonel
Status: offline |
Posted - October 31 2009 : 10:16:09 AM
|
Ranger, I hate to say this because I do like you. But you sound like a man with a paper head.
First the Billiard remark was in reference to Reno's clash that brought him up on charges, when he struck the man with his cue stick.
quote:
"Read Wallace again he was states he was only there for one event of orders given to Reno. The first to move forward and any following he does not claim to have heard."
And Reno gave those to you, both at the RCOI and in his Official Report. And that FIRST order that Cooke brought to him was... AGAIN:
1st Cooke order,
1) I there received an order from Lt. Cooke to move my command to the front.
2) I moved forward in accordance with the orders received from Lt. Cooke to the head of the column.
THAT WAS ALL THERE WAS TO IT. Nada, Zip, not one other thing, just "move your command forward....to the head of the column."
And this was ALL that WALLACE heard, by his own admission. And he ADDED? Is it any wonder that he had too many different, verbs, adjectives, nouns and pronouns to explain his idiotic notion of what he should have heard, as opposed to what he actually heard? The man outright lied, and the court knew he was lying at the time, and they did not call him on it. The only time was on the question of the pronoun "I" or "we" and it was never settled at that court. Yet look below do you see "I" or "we" in association with the "support" issue? And how about the word "he", and when that didn't,couldn't or wouldn't work? "others" in an attempt to grasp another straw from thin air. Indeed exactly what he heard was the same thing GIRARD heard for that 2nd order. And he heard Custer DIRECTLY give that order to Reno. Never once, not one time did he mention a "village" as Reno heard in his 2nd order through Cooke.
quote:
Lt. Wallace’s 3 statements to the court concerning Reno’s orders when examined together, this is the result:
That Major Reno was 1) “ordered forward”, 2)“to go Forward”, 3) to “follow the Indians” - 1)“as fast as he could go“, 2) “as fast as you can“, 3) “as fast as you think proper” - “and charge them”, “wherever you find them” [stated twice, omitted once], 1) “and the others would support him”, 2) “and we will support you”, 3) “and he will support you”
As for the rest of your comments, I would suggest that you choose a better tag line to follow. Because the only SOLDIER that day who said "bring them to battle" was GIRARD. And he said that in reference to what Custer's DIRECT orders to Reno were. And you sir simply must believe that Wallace did lie here, and that Girard's observations and statements are true; because you continually have used Custer's direct orders to Reno as heard by Girard countless times, as recorded below.
Posted - August 13 2009 : 09:40:18 AM Responsibility at the LBH, page 40
quote:
There were hundreds of Indians waiting in the creek channel. It would been impossible to cross it on line even with no Indians in it. The Indians appeared as they stopped. The shots hitting the village were the over estimation of the range by the troopers shooting at those Indians.
I would ask you for your sources but there is none for:
"The actual village did not respond until skirmish rounds flashed through the tops of village teepee's. Then, and only then, did mainstream warriors began responding toward Reno's position."
You don't even get Reno's orders. It was to bring them to battle. He did that and they stayed until they won. If Reno had caused panic and the village fled he would have disobeyed his orders.
Ditto, page 41 Posted - September 09 2009 : 09:33:54 AM
quote:
You don't even get Reno's orders. It was to bring them to battle. He did that and they stayed until they won. If Reno had caused panic and the village fled he would have disobeyed his orders.
and then you wrote
To say that if Reno had caused panic in the village if he stayed would be a disobeying of orders is incomprehensible.
They = Indians Joe in "He did that and they stayed until they won." How did you change it he=Reno in "if he stayed".
Another Joe Jewell
"Military annalists and pundits, for eons, have realized that panic among enemy forces is tantamount to sure victory. Certainly you can agree with me that Custer desired a victory, no matter what orders he may or may not have issued."
I would guess that Terry and Custer were afraid of the Indians fleeing. If all Custer wanted to do was cause them to panic and flee than he only needed to build large fires on the divide and sit there for a day or two drinking coffee.
Reno was sent with a small enough force to bring them to battle. If panic was the goal then bring the whole regiment together.
Posted - October 25 2009 : 8:41:10 PM
quote:
I beleive Custer thought the Indians would run and had no expectation that Reno could hold them. He had only to bring them to battle or drive them. Thanks to someone on another board I now believe Custer did not intend a flank attack or else he could have done it. Seeing the size of the village I believe his objective was to let Reno and Benteen drive them from the village and Custer would block them from crossing the river. The new objective drive them towards Terry, kill a few, and capture the village.
Unfortunately there were to many Indians for Reno to drive them but he did bring them to battle. There were to many Indians willing to fight and Custer got them to battle.
Posted - September 11 2008 : 09:31:30 AM , Custer’s Plan, page 1
quote:
My thought is that Custer did not have a plan rather a tactical approach which was broader than a specific plan would call for. Benteen's approach was for scattered villages, Reno was after fleeing Indians, Custer was recon in force, and the packtrain was in the dark just trying to keep up and get close.
I think an actual plan would be more specific. I don't see much difference in all opinions here which is unusual.
Posted - September 20 2009 : 9:08:11 PM, Custer’s Plan, page 1
quote:
Since Reno hit the village side of the river and engaged bringing the Indians to battle what 3/4s of the regiment are left. Benteen was on a recon in force/blocking mission and Custer went north. Approximately 1/4 of the regiment was with the packtrain and only had to follow wherever. Of the attacking force Custer had 5/11 of the troops along with scouts and HQ. Reno had a little over 3/11 with the scouts, and Benteen had 3/11 of the troops.
Custer was under Terry's plan and took advantage of loopholes to not follow it. Once on his own, mistakes forced moving forward without proper recon. The only plan left was try to stop them from running away to the south and drive them toward Terry. There was no plan to have all 12 companies engaged at one time.
Posted - September 30 2007 : 7:01:01 PM, Custer’s Command Decisions page 2
quote:
Reno was ordered to chase fleeing Indians not to attack a village of thousands. He was to bring them to battle. The problem was there was to many that game to that battle for the divided u regiment to handle. The support needed to applied to the Indians brought to battle and within one half hour or it would be of no value. Reno gave Custer that one half hour and the support did not arrive.
I chose one half hour because anything longer allowed to many Indians to get ready and come from all over the village. Surprise would be a key element of this type of an attack. I don't blame Custer because it was the terrain and the large number of Indians that defeated this attack. Some days you lose and on this day the Indians won. Its that simple.
Posted - October 05 2007 : 10:53:59 AM, Custer’s Command Decisions, page 2
quote:
I think Reno made the right decision to form the skirmish line. He did not have fleeing Indians to contend with once the village was observed. He was faced with overwhelming odds He could deploy the carbine rather than the revolver Defensive positions can withstand larger numbers of opposing forces then offensive attacks
His orders were to bring them to battle not scatter a village
A retreat is appropriate if the alternative is annihilation
I would suggest that Reno's whole battalion could have been annihilated by riding into the village in a shorter amount of time than the half hour he gave Custer to deliver the promised support.
Reno was told to stop the running Indians and bring them to battle. When writing after the fact word selection becomes problematic. If Custer truly knew there was a village that could be struck then he made a serious error in splitting up his forces. Why not take the whole regiment on the same path that Reno traveled. There would be no way for the village to pack up and leave before he got there and it was the best terrain for cavalry to operate. Recon from 15 miles leaves a lot to be desired in the 1870's. Custer found that out.
Posted - October 08 2007 : 09:43:06 AM, Custer’s Command Decisions, Page 2
quote:
Reno was told to stop the running Indians and bring them to battle. When writing after the fact word selection becomes problematic. If Custer truly knew there was a village that could be struck then he made a serious error in splitting up his forces. Why not take the whole regiment on the same path that Reno traveled. There would be no way for the village to pack up and leave before he got there and it was the best terrain for cavalry to operate. Recon from 15 miles leaves a lot to be desired in the 1870's. Custer found that out.
Posted - September 11 2008 : 10:04:31 AM, Custer’s Command Decisions, Page 2
quote:
The village is running is the Intel. In this case the village means people not the actual infrastructure of village. The total observations is less than 100 Indians observed. If they had seen the larger stationary village they would not have said there is running Indians ahead and fewer than 100 don't you think?
I would expect the the intel to be that there is 50 Indians ahead running to warn a "Big Village". It not hindsight to look at the information they had at the time.
|
Edited by - Benteen on October 31 2009 10:49:01 AM |
|
|
|
joe wiggs
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - October 31 2009 : 12:21:07 PM
|
Wow!!!What he said! When he ran this information (?) past me sometime ago I was to shocked to respond. I thought to myself that if he believes what he wrote, how could one change his mind. then I thought, it just ain't worth it. That's the point when I realize that the man may have a cog or two out of sync.
This man actually believes that Reno's order was to simple chase Indians yet, not "scatter he village." The objective was to kill, scatter, round up, destroy or do whatever it takes to break the back of the village.
secondly, retreat not covered by standard military protocol such as cover fire is a misnomer. Retreat is a organized military action coordinated by command control. This helter-skelter flight was anything but a retreat. az, how is it that you can not understand that? |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - October 31 2009 : 8:59:57 PM
|
Bring them to battle is a generic term. You don't really think it was used one time only in the history of military tactics? Since you probably read Conz on the other board then you would know that. Reno took the advance and that job is to fix the enemy and bring them to battle, I am suprised you didn't know that or maybe you do. Some people think Reno needed to charge the village and that is incorrect he only needed to bring them to battle.
I see nothing wrong with any of those posts if one understands how the advance is used in basic tactics. Iy is to bring them to battle. Reno did not need to charge the Big Village" after pursing the Indians to the big village to comply with Custer's orders.
AZ Ranger |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
Edited by - AZ Ranger on October 31 2009 9:12:44 PM |
|
|
|
joe wiggs
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - October 31 2009 : 9:56:04 PM
|
| You may be insane. Reno's responsibility was to follow orders; He did not. Need I repeat the "as fast a gait as you deem prudent" order from Custer. Secondly, it is his responsibility to utilize cover fire to protect his men at the crossing. To deny these two factors is to be immersed in extraordinary denial that is beyond comprehension. Is coming out on top of an argument so important to you that can not see what Benteen and I are saying? My God Man, get a grip! |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Why Did Wallace Lie?
