Antietam: A Perspective

[67th Tigers]

Not that it's germane to the point made, but "really"? Thanks for the tip but assume that a lot of folks here - and not just you - already knew that. And I'm sure you also know that when a review board was established in 1916 it reviewed all of the MOH awarded to date and struck 911 for failure to comply with the standard for award. Do we know if Wilson's was one of those?

The 911 rescinded awards were:

864 issued to every member of the 27th Maine, 311 of whom stayed in service 4 days beyond their expiration date
5 to members of the 27th NJ for similar reasons
29 to the pallbearers of Lincoln's coffin
6 to civilians (Mary Edwards Walker, restored in 1977 and 5 scouts restored in 1989)
2 to members of the 8th US Infantry who concealed the Colors on themselves when captured in Texas and brought them home when exchanged
1 (Robert Storr) was a British citizen and ineligable, but it was for building a bridge not in the presence of the enemy and so still would have been revoked
1 (Gardiner) simply wrote a letter asking for one as a souvenir
1 (John Lynch) carried a message from Lincoln to Grant
1 (Thomas Gilbert) poured water on some shells during a fire at Baton Rouge
1 (James Hawkins) put out a fire in a warehouse

The only test that was applied was the presence of the enemy. Everybody that named an action got to keep it, regardless of what it was for.

 

[Belfoured]

The 910 (not 911, Gardiner is a double count) rescinded awards were:

864 issued to every member of the 27th Maine, 311 of whom stayed in service 4 days beyond their expiration date
5 to members of the 27th NJ for similar reasons
29 to the pallbearers of Lincoln's coffin
6 to civilians (Mary Edwards Walker, restored in 1977 and 5 scouts restored in 1989)
2 to members of the 8th US Infantry who concealed the Colors on themselves when captured in Texas and brought them home when exchanged
1 (Robert Storr) was a British citizen and ineligable, but it was for building a bridge not in the presence of the enemy and so still would have been revoked
1 (Gardiner) simply wrote a letter asking for one as a souvenir
1 (John Lynch) carried a message from Lincoln to Grant
1 (Thomas Gilbert) poured water on some shells during a fire at Baton Rouge
1 (James Hawkins) put out a fire in a warehouse

The only test that was applied was the presence of the enemy. Everybody that named an action got to keep it, regardless of what it was for.

Thanks for that reduction of just about .1% And 2d US, Batteries B/L was definitely in the presence of the enemy under fire at Gaines's Mill and Malvern Hill. Not that this diversion hasn't been riveting but I'm to going to go read some good old soils maps for the Peninsula. G'day.

 

[67th Tigers]

And 2d US, Batteries B/L was definitely in the presence of the enemy under fire at Gaines's Mill and Malvern Hill.

Indeed, but about 5,000 other officers (without checking) were also there. In theory almost all of them could have self-certified themselves for a MOH. It made a mockery of the MOH which essentially started to become a "participation trophy". When the government changed the rules it did not retroactively apply the new requirements onto old recipients. The army didn't want to revoke large chunks of that 911 in 1917 (only really agreeing that the 555 awarded to members of the 27th Me who did stay shouldn't have it). This is because if the 1897-8 rules were retroactively applied, the vast majority of MOH's awarded would be revoked.

It's just worth remembering that a pre-1898 MOH is in reality not the same thing as the post-1898 MOH. For ACW officers a MOH literally just means they filled in the paperwork to receive it.

 

[Belfoured]

Indeed, but about 5,000 other officers (without checking) were also there. In theory almost all of them could have self-certified themselves for a MOH. It made a mockery of the MOH which essentially started to become a "participation trophy". When the government changed the rules it did not retroactively apply the new requirements onto old recipients. The army didn't want to revoke large chunks of that 911 in 1917 (only really agreeing that the 555 awarded to members of the 27th Me who did stay shouldn't have it). This is because if the 1897-8 rules were retroactively applied, the vast majority of MOH's awarded would be revoked.

It's just worth remembering that a pre-1898 MOH is in reality not the same thing as the post-1898 MOH. For ACW officers a MOH literally just means they filled in the paperwork to receive it.

Just curious - who said it was the same standard as applies today? And officers weren't the only ones who applied for it in that era. Tell us how many medals were awarded for Gettysburg. I doubt that anybody is following this sub-sub-thread but party on.

 

[JKT]

The difference is General Lee took responsibility for the lose at Gettysburg,
General McClellan makes excuses for not winning.

EXACTLY...McClellan the over-organizer and under-achiever. And his arrogance about it makes him even more distasteful.