Lt. Wallace

[joewiggs]

We know that Wallace perjured himself at the Reno Inquiry. My goal is to list information that confirms my thesis. Later, if I am able to establish what I proposed to be true, we may discuss the "why" of his choice. Any assistance from the forum will be greatly appreciated!

"I heard General Custer order his orderly to set the tepee afire. Just then Reno, with his three companies, came around the bluff in sight; then Custer told his adjutant, Cooke, to signal Reno to cross the creek and come to him. Reno came at once and rode for several hundred yards with Custer, as we [were] moving at a gait of a slow gallop; then Reno left us with his three companies at a more rapid gate."

This paragraph was taken from a letter address to Walter Camp from Sgt knipe, 7/20/1908.

Sgt. Knipe makes it clear that Reno rode with Custer for several hundred yards failing to mention that Lt. Wallace accompanied Reno.

Remember, Wallace testified that he was continuously at Reno's side.

Reno swore that Custer did not mention any "plan"of attack and Wallace confirmed that accusation. Was it not possible for Custer to advise Reno of his wishes while riding along side by side? Absolutely?

[tbw]

Jun 12, 2011 18:55:14 GMT -5 joewiggs said:

We know that Wallace perjured himself at the Reno Inquiry. My goal is to list information that confirms my thesis. Later, if I am able to establish what I proposed to be true, we may discuss the "why" of his choice. Any assistance from the forum will be greatly appreciated!

"I heard General Custer order his orderly to set the tepee afire. Just then Reno, with his three companies, came around the bluff in sight; then Custer told his adjutant, Cooke, to signal Reno to cross the creek and come to him. Reno came at once and rode for several hundred yards with Custer, as we [were] moving at a gait of a slow gallop; then Reno left us with his three companies at a more rapid gate."

This paragraph was taken from a letter address to Walter Camp from Sgt knipe, 7/20/1908.

Sgt. Knipe makes it clear that Reno rode with Custer for several hundred yards failing to mention that Lt. Wallace accompanied Reno.

Remember, Wallace testified that he was continuously at Reno's side.

Reno swore that Custer did not mention any "plan"of attack and Wallace confirmed that accusation. Was it not possible for Custer to advise Reno of his wishes while riding along side by side? Absolutely?

I'm not trying to sidetrack your main discussion, but rather trying to get at what might have been the root of the problem to begin with.

One thing that might help us to understand this better would be the entire quote from Kanipe's letter to Camp. I had not heard this particular version before. And I think it should help to more easily identify what you are searching for, if the whole letter was quoted.

Thanks
TBW

[joewiggs]

Jun 12, 2011 18:55:14 GMT -5 joewiggs said:

We know that Wallace perjured himself at the Reno Inquiry. My goal is to list information that confirms my thesis. Later, if I am able to establish what I proposed to be true, we may discuss the "why" of his choice. Any assistance from the forum will be greatly appreciated!

"I heard General Custer order his orderly to set the tepee afire. Just then Reno, with his three companies, came around the bluff in sight; then Custer told his adjutant, Cooke, to signal Reno to cross the creek and come to him. Reno came at once and rode for several hundred yards with Custer, as we [were] moving at a gait of a slow gallop; then Reno left us with his three companies at a more rapid gate."

This paragraph was taken from a letter address to Walter Camp from Sgt knipe, 7/20/1908.

Sgt. Knipe makes it clear that Reno rode with Custer for several hundred yards failing to mention that Lt. Wallace accompanied Reno.

Remember, Wallace testified that he was continuously at Reno's side.

Reno swore that Custer did not mention any "plan"of attack and Wallace confirmed that accusation. Was it not possible for Custer to advise Reno of his wishes while riding along side by side? Absolutely?

The above information was gathered from "On the Little Bighorn with Walter Camp." Camp and kanipe exchanged a great deal of correspondence. The information may be located on page #7. All information after the quoted paragraph deals with other subject matters that do not extrapolate further intelligence regarding a specific issue; Reno riding side by side with Custer although he and Wallace swore there was no opportunity for this to have occurred. That is why I specifically stopped printing information exactly where I did.

[joewiggs]

The below is additional information that, I feel, will support my thesis.

"I said to the GenL. that I thought it was of little use to report any more as he could see all I could. He asked me what I saw, and I said the village was out of sight behind the bluffs, but this valley was full of Indians. Col. Reno was just passing Hdquarters at a trot. I asked where they going and he [Custer] said to the attack. Reno had three troops, A, G and M. I asked where I should go and he said [to] go ahead with the scouts.

I proceeded to cuss out my Rees, telling Custer they had run away from me while I was out to the front. Gerard, the interpreter, said he thought he could take them with me and talked to them in their language. Lieut. Hare had come in and and was then with me. He and I put spurs to our horses, and the Indians followed.

Lieut. Wallace was acting Engineer Officer and was riding with Custer. I turned back and told him not to hang back with the coffee-coolers, [but] to come with on with the fighting men.

Custer laughed and told Wallace he could go. (Wallace and I were class mates and very intimate friends.) Wallace joined us and we passed Reno in the ford and started down the valley.

Again we have information that Wallace was at Custer's side (not Reno) where, as a Engineer officer, he should have been! Wallace did not have an option to do otherwise without the sanction of the Commander;Custer.

Once it is understood that the Reno inquiry was nothing more than a legal "whitewash" to preserve the integrity and the honor
of the military we begin to understand the collusion among the military witnesses.

Wallace was an up and coming member of the officer corps. respected by his peers and superiors as well. His sterling attributes completely scuttled the ignominious attributes of Reno the "sad sack" of the century. Placing Wallace at Reno's side (like a twin) enabled Wallace to confirm what Reno testified to. The board, media, and gallery had no problem believing the fair hair child.

Incredibly, the information gathered from these letters to Walter Camp were not made public 1908 and 1909. by then fabrication morphed into truth.

[tbw]

Joe,

Early in his questioning this is what he said about Major Reno's orders. It was later that he skewed this and very obviously changed what he had testified to. These later mistakes were never corrected but believed by many to the the truth of the matter. Here is what he initially testified to:


"After Capt. Benteen started to the left, Gen. Custer and Major Reno moved down this little stream, one on the right and the other on the left bank. They were moving from 100 to 300 yards apart owing to the nature of the ground. After going ten or twelve miles Major Reno was called across to the same side of the stream on which Gen. Custer was moving. The two battalions then moved along parallel to each other for some distance further. We passed a teepee which had some dead bodies in (it), and soon after passing that the Adjutant came back to Major Reno and said that the Indians were about two miles and a half ahead, and Major Reno was ordered forward as fast as he could go and to charge them and the others would support him."

Q. When that order was received was it promulgated to the command: if so, in what way?

A. I think it was promulgated through Major Reno's Adjutant (Hodgeson). I don't know that. I think so.

Now watch those orders again carefully....

"The order was about this: "The Indians are about two miles and a half ahead, on the jump, follow them as fast as you can, and charge them wherever you find them and we will support you." I think those were the words."

In the questioning this is revealed. In the first instance Reno said "others would support him." Upon further questioning, and just a few later, he changed it to "we will support you." The court questioned him as the the veracity of the "we" and knew he had earlier testified to "others", which "others" easily was and could have been any detachment, even the Indian scouts Custer did give him.

Watch again as he states what Reno was doing on his mission, chasing those Indians...

"The Indians, when the order was given, were apparently running from us; there was a big dust, but as we moved on, the dust cleared away, and the Indians were seen coming back. "

There was at this point no doubt about the orders given to Reno, he was to chase "fleeing Indians", those same Indians Girard and Hare reported earlier (abt. 40 to 50 of them) fleeing down Reno Creek. Notice here in the early testimony, mention of the village had been made, but no mention of "charging the village" was ever made at this point in the answers he gave.

Also his watch (timepiece), and I know I'll get flak over this one, but it wasn't set to the equivalent of the Mountain time zone we have today. It wasn't even set to Chicago time, it was set to Eastern standard time which was two hours later at that location.

[joewiggs]

The information you've posted is factual and extremely productive and I thank you for it. It tells a story, I believe, that may not paint a complete picture or, rather an inaccurate picture. To help explain what I'm attempting to accomplish with this thread let me begin with the only the only salient point I am capable of confirming, to some extent, is that Wallace perjured himself when he testified to the following:

Q. "What command were you with at that time?"
A. "I was riding near Major Reno and with the battalion.


This response, if true, places Wallace in the enviable position of being a substantial witness in that this critical piece of testimony (at this juncture) deals with any plans that may have been given to Reno and Benteen by Custer.

For example:

Q: State if you know, what was the plan of attack."

A: At the time of the division I don't know what orders were given. Captain Benteen with his battalion moved to the left, General Custer moved down the right bank of a little stream with his command, and Major Reno down the left bank.


Q: "State, if you know, the position of Captain Benteen's command with reference to to that of Major Reno at that time.

A: I don't know where it was. When he went to the left it was over broken ground and I lost sight of him."

What these statements accomplish is that Wallace was in a position to know if Custer gave any orders other than the "attack orders" to either Reno and Benteen.

With one blow, he presents to the, inquiry, that Benteen received no orders and that Reno receive the "attack" orders only

This does much to confirm Reno's position that he received no additional orders, there were no plans, that Custer failed to support Reno and, basically that Custer simply caused this fiasco by failing to act with responsibility as a commander.

Wallace may not have over heard conversations between Custer Reno and Benteen, however, his testimony gives a false impression that at no time was Custer in a position to give additional and personal orders to these officers.

Kanipe, for one, recalls Custer riding with Reno for several, hundred yards!

My position is not to unnecessarily defame Wallace as it is to dig into the corners for testimony that has been hidden by participants in this battle in hopes of sparing the military the embarrassment of the truth.

It seems that every so often new and exciting information comes up that sheds new light on this battle.

In summation, as students of this battle perhaps you and I and everyone else through diligent and preservation may be luck enough to dig up additional kernels of truth about the battle of the Little Big Horn. Thank you for your input and I hope we may continue this thread!

Joe

[joewiggs]

Here is another interesting fact that may lead a person to believe several officers were in collusion to create a scenario, during the inquiry, that was not true;to include Wallace.

Churchill: "We unpacked the ammunition mules and then had to pack them up again. I heard no firing for about one and a half hours;then it down river. I took it to be volleys and spoke of it to some of the men. I heard four or five volleys.

Sgt. Culbertson: I was sitting near Lt. Varnum talking with Lt. Edgerly. We heard firing from down below. At first it was a couple of volleys, very heavy. Lt. Varnum remarked that Gen. Custer was hotly engaged or was giving it to the Indians.

Sgt. Davern: "Shortly after reaching the top (Reno Hill) I heard volley firing from down stream. It was not very distinct, but you could tell it was volley firing."

Lt. DeRudio: "I remained in the woods till 9 P.M. The firing I heard started soon after Maj. Reno reached the hill. I could hear immense volleys from the other side of the village down the river."

Lt. Edgerly: "Shortly after I got on the hill, almost immediately, I heard firing and remarked it - heavy firing, by volleys, down the creek. The firing down the valley was perfectly distinct and was heard by everybody about me."

Girard: "And I heard firing to the left of the village; 3 or 4 volleys as if it were 50 to 100 guns at a volley. Lt. DeRudio was with me and he said, 'By God there's Custer coming; let's go and join him.

Lt. Godfrey: "After Lt. hare had returned from going after the packs, we heard firing from below. I heard two very distinct volleys." (PS Godfrey was very hard of hearing.)

Lt. Hare: "Also, I heard firing down there just after Benteen came up. My attention was called to it by Capt. Godfrey. He asked if I 'heard that volley.' I said yes , I heard two distinct volleys.'

Moylan : "I heard some firing in the direction of the Custer field, about an hour after reaching the hill. The sound was like volley firing, but very faint."

Lt. Porter: "We hadn't been there long til I heard firing down the stream and to the left. Pretty heavy and sharp for a few minutes and then scattering shots.

Lt. McDougall: "I heard some firing in the direction of the Custer field, about an hour after reaching the hill."

Of the sixteen witnesses who testified to hearing or not hearing the sound of firing from the Custer field 13 did and three did not.
the three? Reno, Benteen, and Wallace.

I ask the forum to offer their rationale for these three individuals not hearing the sound of firing. My answer is simple, the three had a vested interest in denying the obvious to create the perception that no one had a clue that Custer was in danger.

The military hiarchy could not afford to make public the truth; military personnel refused to respond to a portion of the command in dire straits. In doing so they committed a cardinal infraction of the rules and regulations held sacrosanct in the American military; always respond to the sound of fire!

[joewiggs]

Let us now hear from the dissidents:

Benteen: "I have heard officers disputing about hearing volleys. I heard no volleys.

Reno: "I heard no firing from down river till after we moved out in that direction and then only a few scattering shots."
(In his official report he admitted to hearing shots coming from the field occupied by Custer's command.)

Wallace: "Whether their firing could have been heard I don't know. I heard none;though others will testify that they did."

How is this possible? How can 16 of 19 witnesses at the inquiry hear volleys yet, three did not? Cover up folks. Someone had to take responsibility for a military mistake and the dead were nominated to fulfill that role thanks to the assistance of some of the living.

[strange]

Gunfire is detected in different ways sometimes. There are some soldiers who can notice it very distinctly even when it is very faintly audible. D.W. Griffith actually made a very good talking picture about Abraham Lincoln where Sheridan is depicted as somehow catching earshot of a battle very far away and rushing along to it miraculously even though so very far away and no one else hearing anything. This would be a great story if it turns out to be true which it sounds like it might. Nikola Tesla apparently also struggled with a hyper sensitivity to the sounds or vibrations of trains or noises happening many many miles, or many entire towns or counties, away from him. he was either out of his mind or his senses were extremely heightened.

That being said, Wallace is probably a bit full of it or he is deaf or he was situated in the wrong places. Other survivors heard these things very clearly and rather loud.

[joewiggs]

I couldn't agree with you more. The possibilities are endless when it comes to determining the sounds of gun fire in an area saturated with coulees, divides, promontories etc.

Secondly, I believe Wallace was a good soldier who appeared to have performed as expected during the battle.

I suspect, however, that he had a propensity to stretch the truth a bit when it served the purpose of preserving the Esprit De Corps and reputation of the 7Th. Calvary.

The battle plans, I believe, where the responsibility of Custer's superiors and, when viewed by contemporaneous standards, were nonsensically based upon the incorrect supposition that Indians would rather run than fight. This theory absolutely refutes the reality that Indians will fight just as earnestly and as passionately as whites to protected their families. This racial (not racist) assumption by Sheridan, Terry, Custer and a host of other military personnel is the fundamental tragedy of this battle.

It would, indeed, become an embarrassment if the public discovered that Custer and Company were commanded to follow rash and incompetent orders. I think they believed that it would be better for all concerned (the military) that responsibility for the fiasco lay upon the shoulders of a man know for his haste to do battle.

Secondly, a substantial portion of the officers at this battle did not perform well. This reality had to be covered up as well.

Reno was drunk and Benteen was in a funk for most of the ordeal because he believed he had been disrespected by Custer when hew was usurped from participating in his "lead out."

Just as battles consist of a myriad of circumstances that are sometimes puzzling, startling, circumstantial, biased, and evasive the same may be said for some of the testimony at the Inquiry. Determining the "why" of both of these issues are important.

By the way, glad you're back!

[strange]

As opposed to saying racial or racist, I would call that just an educated assumption, or a cultural observation.

[joewiggs]

Again you are correct Strange. No man should be called a racist unless specific knowledge to confirm such an accusation exist. However, during my years of research, as we all have experienced, I've pondered one issue concerning the battle more so than any other. Why the universal conviction on behalf of the military that the Indians would always run rather than stand up to an European style military?


It is that philosophy, in my opinion, that created the circumstances that resulted in Custer's Last Stand! The Indians didn't run and decided to protect their love ones no matter the cost. Why were the military intelligentsia caught with their proverbial "pants" down?

I believe that the average American of the Custer era was convinced that the Indians would run, no matter what, and to the exclusion of the safety of their families.

At the Rosebud, the warriors traveled 20 miles to meet Crook so that if they lost, the non-combatants could strike the village and escape. Why is that not one individual, on the American side, could not or would not realize that this possibility ( that morphed into a reality) was not possible?

Here's my suggestion, after a Civil War wherein a great nation fought, died, than began healing itself, the thought that some pesty, uncoordinated, and un-trained guerrilla fighters having a chance in a thousand of winning just didn't seem possible!

[strange]

Jul 1, 2011 18:16:03 GMT -5 joewiggs said:

Again you are correct Strange. No man should be called a racist unless specific knowledge to confirm such an accusation exist. However, during my years of research, as we all have experienced, I've pondered one issue concerning the battle more so than any other. Why the universal conviction on behalf of the military that the Indians would always run rather than stand up to an European style military?


It is that philosophy, in my opinion, that created the circumstances that resulted in Custer's Last Stand! The Indians didn't run and decided to protect their love ones no matter the cost. Why were the military intelligentsia caught with their proverbial "pants" down?

I believe that the average American of the Custer era was convinced that the Indians would run, no matter what, and to the exclusion of the safety of their families.

At the Rosebud, the warriors traveled 20 miles to meet Crook so that if they lost, the non-combatants could strike the village and escape. Why is that not one individual, on the American side, could not or would not realize that this possibility ( that morphed into a reality) was not possible?

Here's my suggestion, after a Civil War wherein a great nation fought, died, than began healing itself, the thought that some pesty, uncoordinated, and un-trained guerrilla fighters having a chance in a thousand of winning just didn't seem possible!

I think they came to that conclusion by experience (by the time of the Custer conflicts we had been fighting Indians on and off for probably a good hundred years), and also just an overall assessment of what an Indian's best interests are based on their lack of textbook training, lack of established chain of commands, lack of technology (except in what they borrow of coarse) and lack of numbers in comparison to our country as a whole. Custer surprising them as he did and hammering in closer than anyone else was a surprise in more ways than one and it got a different kind of reaction from the indians also.

And with all the steps Custer took to corner them, it may have even forced them to stand and fight.

In a way though, as Grand Master Keogh sorta tells me, the probably were still scattering around in their own way even if they didn't run away. He mentioned that there were no indian ponies found on the Custer battlefield, and that means a grand mounted charge from the Indians is probably something that did not happen. I still naturally of coarse believe in close quarters fights but he made me see the battle quite a bit differently and it still fits rather consistently with the Indians fighting as they usually would.

The appearance that they "didn't run" just feels like people stating the obvious that they did not run away from the fight. They still of coarse fought but they were likely still flanking around to a considerable degree until they got their full control as a result of Custer's human errors and lack of support.

I' hoping that make sense, go ahead and add or subtract as you see fit.

[joewiggs]

Great reply. Well thought out and factual! Experience did lead the military to think as they did. I just wish, as do many, that other options could have been laid on the table such as a negotiated surrender.

The earlier demand by the government set forth in the middle of winter with a 30 day time requirement was not a realistic one.

Again, thank you for a great response!