NEWS FROM WASHINGTON: Speech of Senator Sumner, of Massachusetts; OUR SPECIAL WASHINGTON DISPATCHES (4/1/1862)

New York Times - Times Machine ^ | 4/1/1862

[Homer_J_Simpson]

WASHINGTON, Monday, March 31.

THE NAVY DEPARTMENT AND THE NASHVILLE.

It is ascertained, on examination, that Capt. FOX, Assistant-Secretary of the Navy, as soon as it was known that the Nashville had run in at Beaufort, N.C., telegraphed to every gunboat of the navy that was available to proceed forthwith to that port to prevent her escape. All urgency was expressed in his dispatches, but, by a run of ill luck that sometimes defies all human control, not one reached her destination in time to do any good.

NO PASSES TO VISIT MARYLAND.

The requirement of passes from persons visiting Maryland ceased from last Saturday.

THE STEVENS BATTERY TO BE COMPLETED.

The prospect is excellent for the passage of the bill for the completion of the Stevens Battery. The amendment of the Senate, referring the matter to the judgment of the Secretary of the Navy was merely meant as a respect to that Department, it not being contemplated that the Secretary would veto a bill deemed so important. The Secretary prefers not to have the responsibility impliedly placed on him by the language of the bill, and it is probable that he will request the amendment referring the matter to him stricken out. The Department is anxious to have everything in the way of improvement of iron-clad ships fully tested.

TRADE WITH SOUTHERN PORTS.

It has already been stated that the Secretary of the Treasury has issued instructions to the Treasury Agents, Collectors and Surveyors on the Ohio and Mississippi Rivers, dispensing with applications to the Secretary for licenses to trade, and authorizing the shipment of all goods not intended for aid to the rebellion to all places occupied by our forces in the Valley States. The Secretary in his recent letter of instruction, says:

[Homer_J_Simpson]

Free Republic University, Department of History presents U.S. History, 1861-1865: Seminar and Discussion Forum
The American Civil War, as seen through news reports of the time and later historical accounts

First session: November 21, 2015. Last date to add: May 2025.
Reading: Self-assigned. Recommendations made and welcomed.

Posting history, in reverse order

https://www.freerepublic.com/tag/by:homerjsimpson/index?tab=articles

To add this class to or drop it from your schedule notify Admissions and Records (Attn: Homer_J_Simpson) by reply or freepmail.

Link to previous New York Times thread

https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/4051123/posts

[Homer_J_Simpson]

1

2

3

4

5

[Homer_J_Simpson]

News from Washington: Our Special Washington Dispatches – 2
Battle of Winchester: Additional Names of Killed and Wounded – 2-3
The Navy Department and the Merrimac – 3
News from the Southwest: Active Operations on the Tennessee River Not Expected Immediately – 3
Operations on the Mississippi: Our Island Ten Correspondence – 3-4
Editorial: Slavery in the District-Speech of Senator Sumner – 4-5
Jackson’s Campaign in Northern Virginia – 5
The State Legislature – 5
General News – 5

[BroJoeK]

On March 30 there was a minor skirmish near Stanwix Station, Arizona, Union victory, just one wounded.

New Mexico 1861-'62 Engagements

Date	Engagement	Military Units	Losses	Victor
July 25	Mesilla, New Mexico	Union Department of the New Mexico (~300) vs. Confederate 2nd Texas Mounted Rifles (~380 +artillery )	Union: 9-total (2-killed); Confederates: 19-total (13-killed)	CSA
July 27	Fort Fillmore, NM	Union Department of the New Mexico (~500) vs. Confederate 2nd Texas Mounted Rifles (~300)	Union: 500-total (surrendered); Confederates: none	CSA (CSA outnumbered, Union surrendered)
Sep 25	Alamosa, NM	Union Dep of NM (Minks ~100 cavalry)& Confederate cavalry (Coopwood ~112)	Union 33 (4-killed); Confederates 9-total (2-killed)	CSA (Union surrendered)
Sep 27	Fort Craig, NM	Union Haspel's cavalry ( ~100) & Confederate cavalry	Union 10-total; Confederates 10-total	CSA
Sep 27	Pinos Altos, NM	Union allied Apaches (Cochise ~300) & Confederate Arizona Guards (Mastin ~15 +cannon)	Union Apaches 30-total (10 killed); Confederates 14-total (7-killed, incl. Mastin)	CSA (CSA outnumbered)
Feb 21, 1862	Valverde, NM	Union Dept of NM (Canby, McRae ~3,000) & Confederate Army of NM (Sibley, Green ~2,290)	Union 432-total (68-killed), Confederates 187-total (36-killed)	CSA (CSA outnumbered)
Feb 22	Socorro, NM	Union 2nd New Mexico & Confederate 5th Texas	None	CSA
Mar 26-28	Apache Canyon, Glorieta Pass NM	Union US & CO Infantry (Slough ~1,300) & Confederate Texas cavalry (Slurry ~1,100)	Union 147-total (51-killed), Confederate 222 total (50- killed)	USA strategic, tactical draw
Mar 30	Stanwix Station, AZ	Union CA cavalry (Calloway -272) & Confederate AZ Rangers (Swilling -10)	Union 1-total (0-killed), Confederate none	USA

This brings the war's totals to 91 engagements:

Summary of Civil War Engagements as of March 28, 1862:
Engagements in Confederate states:

State	Union Victories	Confederate Victories	Inconclusive	Total Engagements
South Carolina	1	1	1	3
Virginia	5	11	6	22
North Carolina	3	0	0	3
Florida	1	0	0	1
Louisiana	0	1	0	1
Tennessee	2	0	0	2
Arkansas	1	0	1	2
Total Engagements in CSA	13	13	8	34

Engagements in Union states/territories:

State	Union Victories	Confederate Victories	Inconclusive	Total Engagements
Maryland	1	0	1	2
West Virginia	9	2	2	13
Missouri	11	9	1	21
New Mexico	2	7	0	9
Kentucky	4	3	2	9
Oklahoma	0	3	0	3
Total Engagements in Union	27	24	6	57
Total Engagements to date	40	37	14	91

[BroJoeK]

By the way, we are approaching two interesting markers — the war’s one year anniversary, and, on April 15, the 100th engagement. So I think I’ll plan a listing of battles / engagements,by state.

At this point the tide of war is basically even, but starting to tilt towards the Union.

[BroJoeK]

"Editorial: Slavery in the District-Speech of Senator Sumner – 4-5"

Some of our fellow posters have long compared 1861 "Wide Awake" Republicans to today's Woke Democrats, a comparison I usually dispute.
However, "today's" New York Times seems to agree with them, not me.

Who would have thought it?

[sauropod]

Bkmk