Page:Southern Historical Society Papers volume 04.djvu/287

Rh

I am very far from intending to reflect in the slightest degree on General Rodes, of whom I had a very high appreciation as a man and a soldier, and to whose skill, gallantry and efficiency I have borne the fullest testimony when speaking of his unfortunate death in a most brilliant charge, under my command, against vastly superior numbers. He was new in his position of division commander at Gettysburg, but when killed at Winchester, on the 18th19th [sic] of September, 1864, he had learned to be less sensitive about his flanks, and would not at that day have given such an explanation of his failure to co-operate in an attack similar to that made by Johnson and myself at Gettysburg.

When Ewell's order was received I prepared for the attack by issuing the necessary orders to my brigades which were already in position, and I saw that they started promptly at the signal, and Professor Bates is not far wrong when he says they moved "with the steadiness and precision of parade."

He further says:

The two brigades, one of Louisianians and the other North Carolinians, continued to ascend the hill while a blaze of fire covered its face, until they reached the enemy's works and entered them. While fighting for the possession of the guns in the enemy's works, a brigade and three regiments were brought from the front, which Rodes should have assaulted, and after a sharp struggle my brigades were compelled to retire, but not in disorder. Hays' men brought off 100 prisoners and four battle-flags, captured from the enemy, and the North Carolinians brought back their gallant leader, Colonel Isaac E. Avery, in an expiring condition. There was no more dashing charge than that made during the