Civil War Blog

Posted By Norman Gasbarro on December 30, 2015

Further proof that the Second Amendment originally applied specifically to a “well regulated militia” and not individuals collecting personal arsenals of unregulated weapons for their own protection and defense, is found in an explanation of the Pennsylvania Draft of 1861 as it was presented to the public in an article appearing in the Reading Times, 20 September 1861.  The article refers to the Pennsylvania law which was based on the Federal Militia Law of 1792 and quotes directly from the state law:

DRAFTING — The Old law of the United States, based upon the Conscription Law of France, or closely modeled after it, giving the President authority to call out the volunteers and in the event of these failing, a draft may be ordered.  The regular State militia are first liable; but should they fail to supply the required number, then the able-bodied males residing in the regimental districts, between the ages of 18 and 45, are liable to be drawn.

The Revised Statues of this State, Section 49 of the Militia Law prescribe —

Whenever the President of the United States or the Commander-in-Chief shall order a draft from the militia for public service, such draft shall be made in the following manner:

1. When the draft required to be made shall be equal to one or more companies of each brigade, such draft shall be made by company to be determined by lot, to be drawn by the commandant of the brigade, in the presence of the commanding officers of the regiments composing such brigade, from the military forces of the State in his brigade, organized, uniformed, &c.
2. In case such a draft shall require a number equal to the regiment (to a brigade,) it is to be determined in the same manner.
3. In case such draft shall require a larger number than the whole number composing the military force of such brigade, such additional draft shall be made of an equal number from the military roll of the uniformed militia of each town or ward, filed with the city, village, or town clerk, &c.
4. When such a draft from the un-uniformed is ordered (which means the mass of the people), all males residing in regimental districts are compelled to enroll themselves; the enlistment list is then filed (in cities) in the county clerk’s office.  On the day appointed, the Mayor or Supervisor of the Ward, in presence of the Regimental Commander of the District, draws by lot from this list a number of names, in accordance with the number called for by this draft.
5. On the day appointed, any male thus drawn may provide an able-bodied man as a substitute, who is then taken in his stead.  No person of the required age is exempt from this drafting, except clergymen, and those incapacitated by reason of bodily ailments.

The old militia law of the United States, passed in 1791, exempts the Vice President, Judicial and executive officers, members of Congress, customs house officials, post officers, and officials connected with the mail service, inspectors of exports, pilots, and marines in actual service.

A discussion of the Federal enabling legislation for the Second Amendment was presented here on this blog on 15 February 2011 in a post entitled, Gratztown Militia and the Home Guards.  In that post, the specific requirement per the Law of 1892 was stated, that all able-bodied men between the ages of 18 and 45 were required to purchase a musket and other military equipment at their own expense and be part of a local militia which would exercise regularly and be available to be called into action if needed.  Three times during the Civil War, the Governor of Pennsylvania called these local militia into service of the state to protect the homeland, the most notable of which was during Lee’s invasion of Pennsylvania as part of the Gettysburg Campaign in 1863.  These “emergency regiments” when called into action, were not part of the Union Army that was engaged in campaigns throughout the country during the war.  Their service was brief, almost always for the days in which the emergency existed.  The three periods in which these emergency regiments served were:   (1) the days surrounding the Battle of Antietam in 1862 when Pennsylvania was threatened; (2) the days surrounding the Battle of Gettysburg in 1863 when Pennsylvania was invaded; and (3) the days surrounding the burning of Chambersburg in 1864.

One major difference in the Civil War from prior wars was that regiments sent into national service were often placed in brigades with regiments from other states and these brigades were often commanded by professional army officers.  Thus the Union Army, and the Confederate Army since it was modeled on the same principles, were composed of multi-state forces acting as a single entity.  Another difference was the size of the national army compared to previous wars, as well as the number of deaths per population and after nearly 250 years of history, the Civil War remains our most costly war in terms of casualties.  Despite being parts of larger armies, many veterans of the state regiments that were called into national service usually retained their identities with the state regiments rather than referring to themselves as members of a larger army, but there was clearly a transition in later wars as the regiments no longer took on state names and were mixed-state entities.  The trend actually began just after the Civil War when some veterans referred to their service as being part of larger events such as the Gettysburg Campaign or Sherman’s March to the Sea, but for the most part, veterans referred to their service in terms of the regiment name.

The Pennsylvania legislation allowing for a draft of men needed to supply regiments and brigades needed for the defense of the country, referred specifically to the militia companies that were in place in 1861 throughout the state.  Lincoln’s first call for volunteers was a call to the states to supply a quota of regiments based on population and these regiments would placed into national service.  At first it was uncertain if Pennsylvania could meet the call and a draft was enacted. Most communities, however, easily met the minimum number required.  As stated in the article that appeared in the Reading Times, 20 September 1861:

So far as “Old Berks” is concerned, we do not think it likely that a visit from the Drafting officer is to be feared.  Her sons have been and are still flocking to the standard of their country, in the most praiseworthy manner.

Such was the case throughout Pennsylvania with only small pockets of resistance.  In fact, more than enough men signed up for the three-month term of service, that the remaining men were placed in “reserve” regiments that were numbered as such. This is why the 30th through 45th Pennsylvania regiments have two numbering designations, which is explained further in the post entitled:  Pennsylvania Regimental Designations – Naming and Numbering.

In the post-Civil War period, the draft took on a different meaning in relation to the militia laws that were based on the Second Amendment, and it is in this latter period that the answer might be found as to why the meaning of the Second Amendment gradually morphed away from allowing or requiring a “well regulated militia” to its current interpretation.  The World War I Draft, for example, was conducted by local draft boards that were based on the old militia laws, but at that time, individuals between the ages of 18 and 45 were no longer required to be members of local or state militia companies or regiments.  However, when the men were drafted, they were assigned to companies that were composed of multi-state men and those companies and regiments no longer bore the name of individual states.  This was also the case in World War II as well as Vietnam, the last war in which the draft was in effect.  Currently, our wars are fought with a combination of men recruited specifically to serve in one of the branches of the Armed Forces and by National Guard units which are stationed in specific states and are composed of “citizen soldiers” who are called into action by the President for specific tours of duty.  The reinstatement of the draft has not come into discussion, except when the question of fairness comes up in relation to what groups of American people are being asked to fight our nation’s wars.

An analysis of the Second Amendment is complicated and in part stems from two differing texts that have emerged – each with the exact same wording, but with different punctuation and capitalization.  The version “filed and approved” by Secretary of State Thomas Jefferson after state ratification eliminates some of the commas and capitalization, but the version that was voted on by the Congress and the states appears to have the commas and capitalization that to strict constructionists give it a slightly different meaning.

The Supreme Court of the United States was not called upon to interpret the Second Amendment in any landmark decision until after the Civil War.  Those major cases are listed below, each with a link to a greater explanation, but also with a summary of the decision itself.

1. United States v. Cruikshank (1876).  Limits the application of the 2nd Amendment to the Federal government.
2. United States v. Miller (1939).  Federal government and the states can limit weapon types not having a relationship to a well regulated militia.
3. District of Columbia v. Heller (2008).  Protects the right of an individual to possess and carry firearms.
4. McDonald v. Chicago (2010).  Extends via the 14th Amendment the application of the 2nd Amendment to the states in the same manner as to the Federal government.

The above-noted Court decisions do not constitute all of the cases brought to decision and the brief explanations given of the decisions are certainly not meant to state all of the ramifications resulting from them.  For those wishing to pursue in greater detail the history of the Second Amendment issues, it is suggested that by clicking on the cases above, a more in-depth summary can been seen (as per Wikipedia), as well as referring to the list of references at the bottom of each case description.  Additional research can be done by locating the actual decisions and dissents.

In the latter two cases, the right of an individual to possess arms for self-defense was affirmed, and thus, after decades of debate, the Supreme Court shifted the interpretation from the “well regulated militia” reason for bearing arms to the protection of one’s person as an added, but most significant reason.

The Court did state that its decisions in Second Amendment cases do not apply to restrictions on certain groups of people, such as felons or the mentally ill, nor do they apply to restrictions on possession of firearms within schools or other sensitive environments such as government buildings or aircraft.  Laws can also be passed to limit the manufacture, sale and possession by individuals of certain weapons of war – but over the years, as in the case of so-called “assault weapons,” the line has become somewhat blurred as to what constitutes a war weapon and what is needed for one’s own defense. In no case has the Court ever condoned the personal use of any firearm for a preemptive strike, for revenge, for use in taking the law into one’s own hands, or for the waging of war against the government.

Whereas in the 18th and 19th centuries it was possible to wage war against the government, or the government to wage war against its citizenry, to do the former is no longer realistically possible.  The latter is protected from happening through other rights, such as the ballot and the freedoms we possess via Constitutional and evolutionary means.  Those who believe that a collected stash of weapon will protect them from the mythical black helicopters coming to get them should know that should that occur, they would stand no chance against a military that they as citizenry have insisted have the most formidable weapons of war and be prepared in all cases to defend them no matter the cost.

Perhaps, in our time, it is necessary to re-visit a Constitutional amendment that had some relevance up to and including the Civil War, but afterward, as militia became less important and as the draft eventually disappeared, morphed into a personal right with limited or no regulation, with the number of instances in which firearms are used in crime and terrorism steadily increasing, and with a great reduction in the safety and security of the populace as the resulting outcome.  Repealing and replacing the Second Amendment with a Constitutional protection that best meets the needs of the present might be the best way forward, rather than continuing a debate which contorts the original meaning of the amendment into something that it was never envisioned to be by its authors.

Category: Reflections, Research, Stories | 1 Comment »
Tags:

Posted By Norman Gasbarro on December 28, 2015

Of the three grave stones pictured above, only the one on the right bears a flag representing military service in the Civil War.  The stones, found in the Lexington Cemetery, Lexington, Kentucky are from left to right, marking the graves of: (1) Michael Bernard Gratz (1822-1889); (2) Hyman Cecil Gratz (1836-1866); and (3) Captain Cary Gist Gratz (1829-1861). The three men, buried side by side at Lexinton Cemetery, were brothers.

A brief biography of Michael Bernard Gratz was found in the History of Kentucky, pages 628-629, and contains the following information about his Civil War service:

He also had a military record, being an officer on General Buell’s staff in the Union Army.  He rode, starting at sun-up and arriving before dark, the 110 miles from Big Hill to Louisville on his thoroughbred Old Mike to notify the Federal authorities of the advance of the Confederates in their effort to capture Louisville and succeeded in rallying sufficient support to repel that invasion.  He was once asked to go into Wolford County and requisition horses from Confederate sympathizers.  His reply was characteristic:  “I’ll take the horses of Bernard Gratz [i.e., his own horses] but will not take those of my old friends, even if they are Confederates.”

Michael Bernard Gratz was the son of Benjamin Gratz (1792-1884) of Philadelphia.  His father’s brother was Simon Gratz (1773-1839), the founder of Gratz, Pennsylvania, and his first cousin was Theodore Gratz (1811-1863), the first mayor of that town.  Several of the sons of Theodore Gratz were soldiers in the Union Army and these men, who Michael Bernard Gratz probably did not know because of the geographic separation, were first cousins, once removed, of his.  Michael Bernard Gratz had connections with the Gist family, through his mother, Maria Cecil [Gist] Gratz, whose father was Nathaniel Gist (1733-1796) of Revolutionary War fame.  For further information on the Gist family, see:  Civil War Descendants of Nathaniel Gist.

But did Michael Bernard Gratz serve in a regiment in the Civil War or did he only have Union sympathies?

One military record card has been located in the National Archives records available at Fold3 and is shown below:

The Military Index Card notes that he joined for duty and enrolled on 12 September 1862 at Louisville, Kentucky, but was not mustered into service until 20 September 1862 into Company G of the 21st Kentucky Infantry, as a 1st Lieutenant.  In the remarks section of the card there is the following:  “Not taken up on rolls of Company H.”  Regimental histories give the organizational dates as December 1861 and January 1862 and indicate that most of the members of this fighting group were part of a state guard known as “The Old Infantry.”  The date on which Michael Bernard Gratz is credited with enrolling falls within the period when the regiment was marching to Louisville, Kentucky in pursuit of Confederate General Braxton Bragg (20 August 1862 to 19 September 1862), and the muster in date for service falls within the period when the regiment was in pursuit of General Bragg into Kentucky (1 October 1862 to 22 October 1862), with the Battle of Perryville occurring during that latter time period on 8 October 1862.

To date, no other military record has been located for Michael Bernard Gratz through Fold3.

On Ancestry.com, the following evidence of military service was located:  (1) In the database, American Civil War Soldiers, Michael Gratz is credited with enlisting on 12 September 1862 at Louisville, Kentucky, on the Union side, serving the state of Kentucky;  (2) In the database, United States Civil War Soldiers, 1861-1865, Michael B. Gratz, is credited with service for the state of Kentucky on the Union side, in the 21st Kentucky Infantry, Company H, with rank in as 1st Lieutenant, and rank out as 1st Lieutenant; and (3) In the database, U.S. Civil War Soldier Records and Profiles, Michael B. Gratz is credited with enlisting on 12 September 1862 as a 1st Lieutenant serving the state of Kentucky.  Normally, the 2nd and 3rd databases named above give both the enlistment date and discharge dates, but in these cases, only the enlistment date was given, and normally, all three databases give the name of the regiment and company, but in this case, only the 2nd one provided that information.

One additional Civil War record has been located on Ancestry.com, that of the United States Civil War Draft Registration of July 1863.  In that record, the 41 year old farmer from Woodford County, Kentucky, Michael Gratz, registered as single and gave no record of then-current or prior military service.

No record that a Michael Bernard Gratz ever applied for a Civil War disability pension has been seen despite an exhaustive search on both Fold3 and Ancestry.com.  However, this alone would not be strong evidence that he did not serve in Civil War regiment, because he died in 1889, one year before the Federal government significantly relaxed the pension rules making old age a good enough reason to get pension benefits.

At this point, all evidence points toward Michael Bernard Gratz enrolling and being mustered into service as 1st Lieutenant in the 21st Kentucky Infantry, but without any further information, his continued service in that regiment is questionable.

The biographical sketch of Michael Bernard Gratz that appeared in the History of Kentucky (cited above), may give some more insight into his life for those wishing to pursue this matter further, so, some selected portions are given below:

Bernard Gratz was a particularly lovable and big-minded Kentucky gentleman of the finest of social and family connections, and while he never married..any tribute that might be paid his memory would be read with appreciation by the many friends who recall his life and deeds.  The old homestead where he lived most of his life is known as “Canewood” located on the Frankfort Pike fifteen miles west of Lexington in Woodford County…. The estate has been in the Gratz family since 1840.  The house itself is a rambling structure, made up of a series of large rooms and dates back for fully a century….

Then follows a sketch of Benjamin Gratz, the father, of whom it was said “was a staunch Union man” and was a Whig “opposed to secession” but afterwards was a “conservative democrat.”  The second marriage of Benjamin Gratz, was also noted – to Anna Bowell Shelby – but there was no mention of Anna’s son, Joseph Shelby (1830-1897), who Benjamin Gratz raised in his home as a step-son along with his own children, thus making Michael Bernard Gratz the step-brother of the Confederate General Jo Shelby who the subject of the blog post here entitled:  Cinco de Mayo, the Confederacy, and General Jo Shelby.  See also:  Civil War Descendants of Nathaniel Gist. and on the blog of Susan Sklaroff, A Civil War Tragedy, in which she related the story of the half-brothers Cary Gratz and Joseph Shelby fighting on opposite sides at Wilson’s Creek, which is where Cary died.  Cary is buried at Lexington Cemetery and is the third grave pictured at the top of this post.

Continuing the excerpts from the biographical sketch as it appeared in History of Kentucky:

The full Christian name of the late Bernard Gratz was Michael Bernard Gratz, who was born in 1822 and died in 1889, spending most of his life at “Canewood.”  Originally this farm comprised 180 acres, being art of the old Alexander estate, but Bernard Gratz had increased the acreage to over 900 when he died.  He became a note thoroughbred horseman as well as a general farmer, and his success in business enabled him to express in practical manner the warmhearted interest and consideration he always felt for the welfare of others.  He had friends both among the rich and the poor and there were none too poor or destitute to escape his care and thoughtfulness.

The foundation and start of his career as a thoroughbred horseman was given him by his aunt, formerly Miss Gist, the wife of Frank Blair, a Washington editor.  She gave him a fine mare, but in later years his stables produced many great horses… He owned his racing sables, but his horses were raced under another name.  He was best known as a breeder, and some of his choicest stock was sold as yearlings.

Bernard Gratz was interested in everything affecting the community, yet was a man of retiring disposition.

When Michael Bernard Gratz died on 18 March 1889, his obituary appeared in the Courier-Journal of Louisville, Kentucky, the next day:

Bernard Gratz Dead

Lexington, Kentucky,18 March 1889 — (Special.) — Early this morning M. Bernard Gratz of Woodford County, died from acute uremia.  He was out working in his garden Friday in apparent good health, when he was suddenly taken ill, and continued to grow worse until this morning, when he died.  Mr. Gratz was the oldest son of the late Benjamin Gratz, of this city, and the only surviving brother of H. H. Gratz, editor of the Kentucky Gazette.  He was the owner of the well-known stock farm, Canewood, adjoining the Woodburn farm, and containing 900 acres.  He was the breeder of a number of fine horses, the most noted among which were Virgil, Checkmate and Silent Friend.  He was in his sixty-seventh year.

Nothing was mentioned in the obituary of Civil War service.

Also, nothing is mentioned in the above-cited sources of whether Michael Bernard Gratz or his father Benjamin Gratz were slave owners, and that issue has not been researched for this blog post.  In reading between the lines in the sources, it could be concluded that the loyalties of at least some members of the family, if not the neighbors in Woodford County, Kentucky, had some slave owner sympathies which were connected to their Confederate positions during the war.  The description of the horse requisitioning incident that appeared in the History of Kentucky, may have been a way for the family of Michael Bernard Gratz to show that he was not a traitor to his friends and neighbors while at the time conceding that he he supported the winning side.  Whether he actually did supply any horses to the Union cause, even from his own farm, is an open question and no evidence has been seen either way.

Additional information is sought from readers who may have additional information about the Civil War service of Michael Bernard Gratz.  At the very least, he must be given credit for enrolling in the 21st Kentucky Infantry, regardless of his motives at the time.  Whether he actually served for any period of time and was honorably discharged or transferred, is still an unresolved issue.

Please add comments to this post or send the information via e-mail.

——————————–

The news clipping is from Newspapers.com.  A free download of History of Kentucky is available from Google Books.

Category: Research, Resources, Stories | Comments Off on Michael Bernard Gratz – Did He Serve in a Union Regiment?
Tags:

Posted By Norman Gasbarro on December 25, 2015

In this Christmas season, don’t forget to reward your local historical society with a tax-deductible gift.  That gift can either be monetary, goods, or services.

To determine whether a historical society is a legitimate 501(c)3 organization, properly registered with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), the IRS provides current, on-line information about each group in this status.  The information is most easily found on the web site Charity Navigator, which downloads the data directly from the IRS web site and which also rates the larger organizations.

The best advice that can be given is to check the IRS status of any organization before donating to it.  Just because an organization is properly registered doesn’t mean it is doing everything properly, but if an organization is not listed and is improperly claiming that they are a 501(c)3 organization, that should be a warning sign that they are operating fraudulently and criminal charges could be brought against the officers and directors of the group.

For six local historical societies in the Lykens Valley area, five are properly registered and one is not.  The link to the Charity Navigator page (“Tax Information”) for each of the properly registered organizations is provided below.

Tax information provided on Charity Navigator includes the Employer Identification Number (EIN) of the organization, address, type of services offered, foundation status, ruling determination date, declared asset amount, income in most recent year, last Form 990 Return filed, and copies of last five Form 990s received by the IRS.

———————————-

The following historical societies are…

RECOMMENDED – Contributions are Tax Deductible

For all of the historical societies in this category, information is readily available on the web and contact persons are easily identifiable.  Click on one or more of the categories following the organization name for further information, including the required information annually given to the IRS (“Tax Information”).

Elizabethville Area Historical Society.  Web Site, Facebook, & Contact Information.  Tax Information.

Halifax Area Historical Society.  Facebook.  Contact Information.  Tax Information.

Historical Society of Millersburg and Upper Paxton Township.  Web Site, Facebook, & Contact Information.  Tax Information.

Lykens-Wiconisco Historical Society.  No Web Site.  Contact Information.  Tax Information.

Pillow Historical Society.  Web Site.  Contact Information.  Tax Information.

————————————-

The following historical society is…

NOT RECOMMENDED – Contributions are Not Tax Deductible

Gratz Historical Society.  No Web Site.  No phone.  No e-mail.  Presently closed.  Contact Through P.O. Box Only.

Although the Gratz Historical Society claims it is registered with the IRS as a 501(c)3 organization under the IRS Code and that all contributions to GHS are tax deductible, when asked, it has failed to produce a required “Letter of Determination” giving them that status.  Annual tax returns (Form 990, or Form 990-N) are required of all 501(c)3 organizations since 2008, but the Gratz Historical Society has never filed any tax returns with the IRS.  They are not listed on Charity Navigator as a legitimate, charitable organization under the Tax Code and the IRS does not recognize them as such.

——————————–

Note:  There are three other historical societies that fall within the geographical triangle of the Civil War Research Project.  Links are provided to the Charity Navigator page, where appropriate.  If no link is provided, an explanation of status is given as best known from information given by the current society officers.

1. Tremont Area Historical Society (Tremont, Pennsylvania)
2. Mahanoy and Mahantongo Historical and Preservation Society, Inc. (Dalmatia, Pennsylvania)
3. Williamstown and Williams Township Historical Society (Williamstown, Pennsylvania).  This organization is working on reconstructing documents lost by past officers who did not properly care for them.  These documents are needed to apply for 501(c)3 status with the Internal Revenue Service.  The organization and its leaders do not claim that contributions are tax-deductible nor to the best knowledge of the current officers has anyone ever claimed that contributions are tax-deductible.

Category: Overviews, Reflections | Comments Off on Christmas and the Spirit of Giving
Tags: Dalmatia, Elizabethvile, Gratz Borough, Halifax, Lykens Borough, Millersburg, Pillow, Tremont, Upper Paxton Township, Wiconisco, Williams Township, Williamstown

Posted By Norman Gasbarro on December 23, 2015

John Greiner, who was about 36 years old (born about 1829) when he enrolled in the 103rd Pennsylvania Infantry, Company G, as a Private at Harrisburg on 7 March 1865 and was mustered into service at the same place two days later, was 5 foot eleven inches tall, had sandy hair, a light complexion, and gray eyes.  He indicated that he was a blacksmith by occupation and that he resided in Mifflin Township, Dauphin County.

He apparently was awarded an honorable discharge in June 1865 when he was mustered out with his company.

On 25 November 1884, he applied for an invalid pension, which, according to the Pension Index Card (from Fold3), was not awarded to him. No death date appears on the card.  There is no evidence that a widow ever applied.

In 1890, in Williams Township, Dauphin County, John Greiner appeared in the Veterans’ Census, in which he named the 103rd Pennsylvania Infantry as his Civil War service, with dates of service consistent with those dates that appear on the Pennsylvania Veterans’ Index Card (from Pennsylvania Archives).

At this time, not much else is known about him.  When did he die?  Where is he buried?  Was he married and to whom?  Who were his parents?  Did he have children?  Did he live in any other communities in the Lykens Valley area?

In 1860, there was a John Greiner, age 31, living in Washington Township, Dauphin County, and working as a laborer.  Also in the household, were a wife, Margaret Greiner, age 27, and two children:  Mary J. Greiner, age 8, and George H. Greiner, age 5.  Is this the same John Greiner?

In 1880, there was a John “Grenier”, age 51, living in Williamstown, Dauphin County, working as a coal miner. His wife Margaret, age about 47, was in the same household.  Is this the same John Greiner?

There is a John Greiner buried at Seybert’s Cemetery in Williamstown, but the Findagrave Memorial does not indicate Civil War service.  That John Greiner was born on 4 April 1829 and died on 17 January 1896.  There is also a Margaret Greiner buried at the same cemetery, born 26 December 1832, and died, 15 March 1896.  The Findagrave Memorial does not mention a wife for John and does not picture a grave marker for either Margaret or John.  Is this the same John Greiner?  In a recent photographic trip to Seybert’s Cemetery, neither grave was seen, but the maintenance of this cemetery is not too good and the stones could have been missing, unreadable or broken.

It seems as if the John Greiner who was married to Margaret is the same person as the one who served in the Civil War, but more conclusive proof is needed.   Readers are invited to provide research notes by adding comments to this blog post or by sending an e-mail to the Civil War Project.

———————————

Note:  If the Civil War veteran is the same John Greiner who lived in Washington Township in 1860, then he belongs in the revised, comprehensive list of Civil War veterans that is being compiled for the Elizabethville (and area) Bicentennial in 2017.  Related photographs are also appreciated.

Category: Queries, Research | Comments Off on Who Was John Greiner of Williamstown & Mifflin Township?
Tags: Elizabethville, Mifflin Township, Washington Township, Williams Township, Williamstown

Posted By Norman Gasbarro on December 21, 2015

Edward Pugh was born 6 April 1843 in Schuylkill County, Pennsylvania, the last-known child of English immigrants Samuel Pugh and Catherine Philpot.  The two oldest children, Peter Pugh and John Pugh were born in England.  The third child, Elizabeth Pugh, was born in Pennsylvania after the parents arrived in Philadelphia in 1836 aboard the ship Susquehanna.

Portion of Susquehanna passenger list showing Samuel and Catherine Pugh and their two young sons, Peter and John Pugh. Arrived at Philadelphia, 31 May 1836, from Liverpool, England.  Source:  Ancestry.com.

Edward Pugh, age 7, first appears in the 1850 Census of East Norwegian Township, Schuylkill County living in the household of older brother Peter Pugh, unmarried, who is working as a machinist.  The parents are not in the household but the other children, John and Elizabeth, are in the household.

Edward Pugh is next found in the 1860 Census of Pottsville, where he is still in his brother’s household and he is single and learning the trade of moulder.  His brother Peter Pugh is still working as a machinist, but is married to Elizabeth Ann Bennet, and has three children and his mother-in-law Elizabeth Bennet also living in the household.

The 1861 Pennsylvania Veterans’ File Card from the Pennsylvania Archives (shown below) indicates that Edward Pugh was a moulder at the time of his enrollment in the 96^th Pennsylvania Infantry, Company G, at Lykens.

Edward Pugh was at Gettysburg in July 1863 with the 96^th Pennsylvania Infantry, and his name appears with Company G on the Pennsylvania Memorial:

Click on tablet to enlarge

Some other military “milestones” for Edward Pugh:  He re-enlisted on 15 February 1864 at Brandy Station, VA.  He transferred to the 95^th Pennsylvania Infantry, Company G, on 18 October 1864.  He was promoted to Corporal on 15 May 1865.  He was honorably discharged on 17 July 1865.  He applied for a disability pension on 1 November 1879.

Edward Pugh married Sarah E. “Sallie” Wallace sometime after his army discharge and before 1867.  She was born about June 1851.  After Edward’s death in 1888 in Lykens, Sarah applied for a widow’s pension which she received and collected until she married for a second time to George E. Mucher of Lykens in 1896.  War widows who re-married and had a means of support through their new husbands became ineligible for pensions received as a result of becoming widows from prior marriages to Civil War veterans.

Edward Pugh and Sarah “Sallie” Pugh had four children:  (1) William Pugh, born about 1867.  (2) Anna Christabelle Pugh, born 6 November 1869, who married Franklin Enders.  (3) Edward Thomas Pugh, born about 1875.  (4) Frank Pugh, born April 1885.

In the 1870 Census of Wiconisco Township, Edward Pugh is working as a car brakemaster for the railroad and in the 1880 Census of Lykens, he is working as a coal miner.

Edward Pugh’s death occurred on 2 April 1888 in Lykens.  This is confirmed by the records of Zion Lutheran Church, Lykens:

As the record states, he is buried in the I.O.O.F. Cemetery in Lykens.  His grave marker has not yet been photographed for this Civil War Project and the cemetery records state that the marker is broken, with dates not available.

An additional confirmation of the death date is the Pension Index Card from Fold3, shown above.

When the Lykens G.A.R. Monument was erected, Edward Pugh‘s name was included as a member of the Heilner Post who joined after the post’s organization.  His name is listed as a “Corporal”, the highest rank he achieved during the war.  The portion of the plaque where his name appears is shown at the top of this post.

Peter Pugh, brother of Edward Pugh, lived in Pottsville for the remainder of his life and died there in 1903. The following brief death notice was located for him in the Harrisburg Daily Independent of 23 January 1903:

Peter Pugh, one of Pottsville’s most prominent citizens, and an ex-president of the town council, fell dead upon the pavement.  His death was due to apoplexy.  Mr. Pugh was 65 years old, and a factor in Republican politics in Pottsville for many years.

No Civil War service has been locate for Peter Pugh or for Edward’s other brother John Pugh.

————————————

The news clipping is from Newspapers.com.

Category: Research, Resources, Stories | Comments Off on Edward Pugh of Lykens – 96th Pennsylvania Infantry
Tags: Lykens Borough, Wiconisco Township