Battle of Philipi

 | America's Civil War  | 0 comments  |  Print This Post  |  Email This Post

The other Confederate casualty, James E. Hanger, had been a student at Washington College at Lexington and had arrived at Philippi on June 1 to join the Churchville cavalry, in which two of his brothers were serving. He was wounded by the first shell fired by Federal artillery at the battle. In 1914, Hanger wrote: The first two shots were canisters and were directed at the Cavalry tents; the third shot was a six-pound solid shot aimed at the stable in which the Churchville Cavalry company had slept. This shot struck the ground, ricocheted, entered the stable and struck me. He was captured and, like Daingerfield, had to have his leg amputated, the first amputation performed by a Union doctor.

While he was recuperating near Philippi, Hanger designed and built, mainly from barrel staves, an artificial leg. After two months as a prisoner of war, he was exchanged at Norfolk, Va. Following his exchange, he was commissioned by the Confederate government to make artificial limbs for other soldiers, and he continued to do so after the war, founding a firm known as the J.E. Hanger Company, which remains the largest factory in the world for the manufacture of artificial limbs and braces.

Colonels Lander, Dumont, Steedman, Milroy, Irvine and Crittenden blithely watched the retreating Rebel columns. They made no attempt to follow, since their soldiers had traveled by railroad and had no horses and were tired from the dreary, rainy march. Had they followed the Confederates, they could have cleared the entire Tygart Valley, perhaps without a single loss. But by staying in Philippi they set a pattern of delay after victory that McClellan and his subordinates were to follow throughout his military career.

When news of the defeat reached Richmond, there were quick and sharp repercussions. Porterfield was relieved of command and formally censured. Colonel Robert S. Garnett, Lee’s adjutant general, was commissioned a brigadier general and hastily dispatched to assume command of the troops of northwestern Virginia.

A court of inquiry demanded by Porterfield to examine the circumstances of the retreat from Philippi was convened in Beverly at noon on June 20. Colonel William B. Taliaferro, 23rd Virginia; Lt. Col. John Pegram, 20th Virginia; and Captain Julius A. de Lagnel, Garnett’s chief of artillery, made up the board to report the facts and rule thereon.

The examination into the facts and questioning of witnesses continued for two days. The court subsequently found:

#1. That the commanding officer, having received information deemed by him sufficient to prepare for an early retreat, erred in permitting himself to be influenced by the weather, so far as to delay the execution of his plan.

#2 That the commanding officer did order disposition to be made to prevent surprise, but a misunderstanding as to the time at which the scouts were to be called in, and as to the want of proper vigilance on the part of the infantry pickets, caused a surprise, which distinct and definite instructions, properly executed, would have avoided.

#3. That the commanding officer erred in not advancing and strengthening his picket guard beyond the usual limits, under the circumstances.

#4. That the commanding officer exhibited upon the occasion, decisive coolness, self-possession and personal courage, and exerted himself, as far as possible, to effect a retreat in good order.

Garnett felt the opinions of the court necessitated further proceedings and recommended a court-martial be convened to look into Porterfield’s conduct. Lee, however, did not agree with Garnett’s recommendation, and upon reviewing the proceedings, remarked: The position at Philippi was seriously threatened by a superior force of the enemy, distant only four hours’ march; Colonel Porterfield was aware of the danger of his position and prudently prepared to vacate it. His desire to prevent the occupation of the town by the enemy was worthy of all praise, and had he promptly sent back his baggage and ineffective men and arranged his plan of defense and taken proper measures to secure information of the advance of the enemy, he might safely have retained his position and either given battle or retired, as circumstances might dictate.

Help HistoryNet by bookmarking to

Tags: 19th Century, America's Civil War, American Civil War, Historical Conflicts

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a comment, or trackback from your own site.