Summary Statement, 1st Quarter, 1863 – Independent batteries from Illinois

Proceeding through the Summary Statements for first quarter, 1863, we arrive at the various non-regimented batteries from Illinois.  Like a blast of canister into the darkest night, these tables are hit and miss:

0100_1_Snip_Other_ILL

Ten lines, but with six registered entries.  And all of these referring to a battery commander’s (or former commander’s) name.  We had the same issue with the previous quarter’s summary, so this is nothing new:

  • Stoke’s [Stokes’] Battery: Also known as the Chicago Board of Trade Independent Battery Light Artillery, commanded by Captain James Stokes.  At Murfreesboro, Tennessee with four 6-pdr field guns, one 6-pdr (3.67-inch) rifle, and two 3.80-inch James rifles.  One of the 6-pdrs was a Confederate gun captured at Stones River, to replace a gun damaged in the battle.  This battery was authorized as a seven gun battery during the quarter, presumably adding the 6-pdr rifle at that time.  The battery was assigned to the Cavalry Corps, Army of the Cumberland.
  • Vaughn’s Battery: Also known as known as the Springfield Independent Battery. Outside Memphis, at Germantown, Tennessee with six 3.80-inch James rifles. However, returns show Captain Thomas F. Vaughn’s battery was assigned to the District of Jackson, as part of Sixteenth Corps as of April 30, 1863.  Same corps, just a duty location dependency.
  • Busteed’s Battery: No report.  This is an odd entry, if the name matches to other records.  This battery, which according to a Chicago Tribune report dated February 17, 1862, was raised at war’s onset by Captain Richard Busteed, Jr. as the Chicago Light Battery (not to be confused with Battery A, 1st Illinois Artillery).  They were soon assigned to Washington, D.C. However, when Busteed and other officers resigned in November 1861, leading to the battery being disbanded.  Most of the artillerymen were reassigned to what became the 4th New York Independent Artillery.  So why is there a line here?
  • Phillips’ Battery: No report.Another curious line entry.  This might match to Captain John C. Phillips’ Battery M, 2nd Illinois, which had suffered the indignity of capture at Harpers Ferry the previous fall.
  • Cooley’s Battery: This was the Chicago Mercantile Independent Battery.  Reporting at Milliken’s Bend, Louisiana with four 6-pdr field guns and two 3-inch Ordnance rifles.  Under Captain Patrick H. White, this battery was assigned to Tenth Division, Thirteenth Corps.
  • Bridges’ Battery: Also at Murfreesboro but with three(?) 6-pdr field guns, two 12-pdr Napoleon and two 3-inch Ordnance rifles. The battery formed from Company G, 19th Illinois Infantry, officially, in January 1863.  However, during the previous fall, the men had been detailed to service guns in the defenses of Nashville.   Captain Lyman Bridges commanded the battery, which supported the Pioneer Brigade, Army of the Cumberland.
  • Elgin’s Battery: Lieutenant Andrew M. Wood assumed command of this battery during the spring (replacing Captain George W. Renwick).  The battery was assigned to the District of Western Kentucky. Later in June 1863, the battery reported four 24-pdr field howitzers and six 3.80-inch James rifles. But for the first quarter, we have no report.
  • Colvin’s Battery: No report. This battery was being organized during the winter from parts of the 107th Illinois Infantry, 33rd Kentucky Infantry and 22nd Indiana Battery. Captain John H. Colvin’s command was part of the Department of the Ohio.
  • Coggswell’s [Cogswell’s] Battery: Reporting at Camp Sherman, Mississippi with four 3.80-inch James rifles.  Captain William Cogswell’s battery supported First Division, Sixteenth Corps at this time.  When Cogswell moved up to command the artillery brigade, Lieutenant Henry G. Eddy assumed command of the battery.
  • Henshaw’s Battery: At Loudon, Tennessee (which probably better reflects the November 7, 1863 reporting date) with four 6-pdr field guns and two 3.80-inch James rifles. This was Captain Edward C. Henshaw’s battery, which had just formed at the end of 1862.  The battery was also part of the District of Western Kentucky.

One side note, those batteries listed as part of the District of Western Kentucky at this time were soon pulled into the Twenty-Third Corps when General Burnside took command of the Department of the Ohio.  So there was another administrative change for these batteries just weeks into the next quarter.

Of those reporting, we see fifteen 6-pdr smoothbores, one rifled 6-pdr, and fourteen James rifles.  Quite possible that all three types used the same casting pattern – that of the Model 1841 field gun.  Keep such in mind as we review the ammunition reports.

And speaking of which, we start with the smoothbore rounds on hand:

0102_1_Snip_Other_ILL

I’m going to stick with the names provided on the summaries, but keep in mind the alternate designations mentioned above (which are just half the story, as some of those independent batteries were at times cited within the regimental system, with much confusion). By battery:

  • Stokes’ Battery: 334 shot, 302 case, and 259 canister for 6-pdr field guns.
  • Vaughn’s Battery: 72 shell, 42 case, and 50 canister for 12-pdr field howitzer.  Recall the battery reported similar quantities on hand the previous quarter, with no weapons in that caliber on hand.
  • Cooley’s Battery: 397 shot, 327 case, and 74 canister for 6-pdr field guns.
  • Bridges’ Battery: 98 shot, 366 case, and 122 canister for 6-pdr field guns; 100 shot, 50 shell, 250 case, and 50 canister for 12-pdr Napoleon.
  • Henshaw’s Battery: 522 shot, 406 case, and 84 canister for 6-pdr field guns.

So just one question mark, and that one retained from the previous quarter.

Moving over to the rifled projectiles, we start with the products of Mr. Hotchkiss:

0102_2_Snip_Other_ILL

We see quantities on hand for those four 3-inch rifles, along with rounds for the James rifles:

  • Stokes’ Battery:  17 shot and 50 fuse shell, Hotchkiss, in 3.67-inch caliber.  Presumably feed for the lone rifled 6-pdr. (And more to add to that on the next page.)
  • Cooley’s Battery: 44 canister, 96 percussion shell, 82 fuse shell, and 167 bullet shell, Hotchkiss, for 3-inch rifles.
  • Bridges’ Battery:  84 canister, 65 percussion shell, 320 fuse shell, and 115 bullet shell, Hotchkiss, for 3-inch rifles.
  • Cogswell’s Battery: 148 shot, Hotchkiss, for 3.80-inch James rifles.
  • Henshaw’s Battery: 40 percussion shell, 80 fuse shell, and 280 bullet shell for 3.80-inch James Rifles.

Moving to the next page, we have quantities in the “spill over” Hotchkiss columns, in addition to some James-patent (full page here):

0103_1A_Snip_Other_ILL

First, breaking out the orphaned Hotchkiss entries:

  • Stokes’ Battery: 40 canister, Hotchkiss, 3.67-inch rifle caliber.
  • Vaughn’s Battery:  180 canister, Hotchkiss, 3.80-inch rifle caliber.

Moving to the James columns:

  • Stokes’ Battery: 33 shot and 72 shell, James, 3.80-inch.
  • Vaughn’s Battery: 250 shot, 451 shell, and 30 canister, James, 3.80-inch.
  • Cogswell’s Battery: 31 shot, 327 shell, and 47 canister, James, 3.80-inch.
  • Henshaw’s Battery: 120 shell, James, 3.80-inch.

Onto the next page, we have some sparse entries:

0103_2_Snip_Other_ILL

Of Schenkl-patent projectiles:

  • Stokes’ Battery: 392 shell, Schenkl, for 3.80-inch rifle.

And Tatham’s Canister:

  • Vaughn’s Battery: 36 canister in 3.80-inch.
  • Cogswell’s Battery: 107 canister in 3.80-inch.

With all the projectiles out of the way, we turn to the small arms:

0103_3_Snip_Other_ILL

By battery:

  • Stokes’ Battery: Eight Army revolvers, eight cavalry sabers, and twenty horse artillery sabers.
  • Vaughn’s Battery: Ten horse artillery sabers.
  • Cooley’s Battery:  Four horse artillery sabers.
  • Bridges’ Battery: Ten Army revolvers and fifteen cavalry sabers.
  • Cogswell’s Battery: Two Army revolvers and six horse artillery sabers.
  • Henshaw’s Battery: Twenty army revolvers and twenty horse artillery sabers.

So not a lot of small arms issued to the batteries.  We might translate such to indicate these were artillerymen who were primarily performing the role of artillerymen.

Overall, we see one nice line item separation that I’d like to highlight.  The rifled 6-pdr guns and the James 3.80-inch rifles are very similar in many regards, notably metal used, external appearance and rifling standards.  However, they were slightly different calibers.  Exactly 0.13-inch different as we dry measure things.  But that difference meant ammunition lots had to be kept straight.  We see indications that was done in Stokes’ Chicago Board of Trade Battery.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s