Feral Jundi

Thursday, June 23, 2011

History: The Jessie Scouts–The Contractor/Military Covert Warriors Of The Civil War

“The Jessie Scout was a Federal soldier, dressed and armed a la Rebel.  He was named after Mrs. Jessie Fremont, wife of the General of that name, who first suggested that mode of obtaining information.?“When a Rebel was captured, his furlough or pass was taken from him, and also his outer garments.  A soldier was then found, who resembled him in size, age, and general appearance.  The Rebel’s uniform, from hat to boots, was put upon this man, who assumed the name of the prisoner, and the Federal left the camp, a soldier of the Confederacy…. These Jessie Scouts generally preceded the advance of the army, and they frequently picked up a great many prisoners, without creating any alarm.  I made the acquaintance of many of them, and found them bold, dashing, reckless, good fellows.  I met Major Young, Sheridan’s chief of scouts, and found him eminently fitted for outpost duty and border warfare.”-John Opie, 1899

Every once in awhile, I will come across some history that I have to share. If you are a reader of the blog, you will know that I am particularly interested in history that involves contractors and their contribution to that particular war. During the Civil War, there were privateers and camp followers, but there was also a very unique type of contractor that was used for incredibly dangerous missions. These were the civilian scouts. Specifically, the Jesse Scouts are the group I would like to focus on.

I like to refer to them more as pseudo operators, as opposed to just spies.  These guys would purposely wear the uniform of the enemy as a means to operate behind enemy lines. Their missions varied from spying to conducting raids, and the risks associated with getting caught could result in torture and death. They were very much hated, and definitely earned their higher pay. They also provided crucial intelligence for the war, and they were pretty damned good at ‘capturing flags’. lol

Now what is interesting about the Jesse Scouts, or any of the other scouts/spies of either side, is the fact that these were blended work forces. Meaning they had enlisted scouts mixed with civilian scouts. I imagine the civilian scouts were used because they brought a special skill set to the table–like the ability to guide folks through enemy country, smuggle things, or whatever capability a force at that time might need.

I should also bring up how I stumbled upon the Jessie Scouts. During my research into the 8 civilian recipients of the Medal of Honor during the Civil War and Indian Wars, I had perked up when reading about a certain civilian scout named William Woodall. I was curious about the unit he served in as a ‘Chief Civilian Scout’. Here is the citation:

William H. Woodall
Rank and Organization: Civilian scout, U.S. Army, Major General Philip H. Sheridan’s Headquarters, during Civil War.
Place and Date: Virginia, Appomattox campaign, Sailors Creek, March 29 to April 9, 1865. Entered service at Winchester, Virginia. Birthdate: unknown.
Date Of Issue: 25 April 1865.
Place: Washington, D.C., 3 May 1865.
Note: Was Chief Civilian Scout for Major General Philip H. Sheridan’s Cavalry Corps, which consisted of VI and XIX Corps.
Citation:
Captured flag of Brigadier General Rufus Barringer’s headquarters brigade.
The following flag is listed as headquarter flag of General Rufus Barringer. After the promotion of James B.Gordon to Brigadier General, Barringer was put into command of the 1st NC Cavalry. When Gordon was killed, Barringer received his promotion to General and was now in charge of the North Carolina Brigade in the Cavalry Corps of the Army of Northern Virginia. So this is probably the last flag the 1st NC Cavalry followed into battle. At least US archives list this flag together with the regiment.
On morning of April, 6, 1865, a small party of federal soldiers, dressed as Confederates, captured General Barringer and his guard. Together with the General this flag was captured also.
Remarkable is that this flag, although used by cavalry, has with 47×47 inches the size of an Infantry Battle Flag of the Army of Northern Virginia. The blue cross bars are 5inches wide, the white stripes are 0.5 inches. The flag has 13 white applied five pointed stars on both sides, at 3.25 – 3.5 inches in diameter. The white frame arround the flag has a width of 2 inches. The flag is made of so called Bunting, with only the white parts being cotton. The flag is now in the North Carolina Museum of History in Raleigh, NC.

After putting together the pieces, I was directed toward the unit he was in. Not only did he serve as a civilian scout in this famous unit, he was also called upon for a covert operation in Mexico in which he was killed. Here is the story I found while at David Phillip’s excellent website on the subject:

Why America took interest in what was happening in Mexico
Following Lee’s surrender at Appomattox, Grant knew that a large Confederate army remained in Texas. Of equal concern, a large European army composed of French, Austrian, and Belgian troops were fighting among side Imperial Mexican soldiers supporting Maximilian, an Austrian prince. Grant’s fear involved the creation of an allied army of former Confederates, Europeans, and Imperial Mexicans that would continue the Civil War out of Mexican territory. He quickly ordered Sheridan and a large number of veteran Union troops to move west.
While the records are vague and confusing, there are indications that two separate – and compartmented – programs were developed. The first was encouraged, if not ordered, by Grant that resulted in a former general, Lew Wallace, managing an essentially civilian-mercenary effort. The second program involved US Army officers and enlisted soldiers serving as advisors, trainers, and in some cases they may have participated in combat operations.
The Jessie Scouts involved arrived in the theater of operations in mid-1865 and their operations apparently concluded in early 1867 with Sergeant Jim White delivering a diplomatic note deep inside Mexico to Benito Juarez’s provisional government in an effort to prevent the execution of Maximilian.
Scout casualties were heavy. Available Union army records indicate that Lieutenant-Colonel Henry H. Young and four enlisted scouts were involved under Sheridan, but this was probably the advance party. Scout Arch Rowand’s letters from New Orleans indicated that several scouts requested discharges with their parent regiments, but available evidence exists to show that 12-15 enlisted scouts and Young entered Mexico by boat from New Orleans in late October 1866 and most were killed under relatively mysterious circumstances. Young was definitely a casualty and former Confederate, William H. Woodall, also a Medal of Honor recipient, was probably killed. The identities of the remaining scouts who lost their lives are unknown.
The scouts delivered intelligence to Sheridan’s headquarters that enabled him to understand what was occurring throughout northern Mexico. They also developed individual operations against Imperial Mexican commanders and may have recruited two former Confederate officers to kill the Mexican commander at Matamoras. Currently, it is difficult to assess overall the impact the scouts had in supporting Sheridan’s operations into Mexico as much of their reporting has not been discovered.

Pretty interesting history, and William was a stud. Definitely check out the links below that I have provided, to include a PDF of William G. Beymer’s book about the Jessie Scouts called On Hazardous Service. My take away from all of this is that during that war, every resource and able bodied man and woman was essential to both sides. At the time, using private industry to help accomplish the mission was certainly a part of the strategy.  And recognizing men and women civilian contractors for their heroism was also something we did back then.

The Jessie Scouts were also the special forces of the Union.  You could easily compare them to MACV SOG who would drop special forces behind enemy lines during the Vietnam War, or to the Selous Scouts who would operate behind enemy lines in their war in Africa. The common tactic of all of these units was to blend into their environments by wearing the uniform of the enemy, and use every ounce of their wits and capabilities to survive and accomplish the mission. They also depended upon captured and turned enemy combatants to further give them an edge behind enemy lines. Anything it took to accomplish the mission, these forces did it.

The most profound point the reader can take away from this history is that contractors were used for ‘offensive operations’ in past US wars.  That they were right there with the military, doing the extremely dangerous work of war fighting. These contractors also paid a horrible price when they got caught by the enemy. The contractors back then were even used to protect Lincoln (Pinkertons), which also makes a pretty amazing statement as to the public/private relationship back then. Pretty cool history, and check it out. –Matt

The flag William Woodall captured.

The pay of a civilian scout.
Shortly after the beginning of the Civil War, he became a civilian “Scout” for the Union Army. Civilian “Scouts” were very well paid, sometimes as much as $1-$3 per day or $30-$90 or more a month depending on the hazardous nature of their mission in enemy territory. (Note: The base pay of a private soldier in the Union Army was $13 a month).
Link to source here.
————————————————————–
Jessie Scouts – Special Operations Forces (SOF) of the American Civil War.
The Jessie Scouts, dressed in Gray, raised havoc behind Confederate lines.
The Jessie Scout did in the American Civil War what US Military Special Operations Forces do today
By David L. Phillips
————————————————————–
Jessie Scouts
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jessie Scouts were irregular soldiers during the American Civil War on the side of the Union who operated in territory of the Confederate States of America in the southern United States in insurgency missions. The unit was created by John C. Frémont and named in honour of his wife, rather than of a Colonel Jessie, who was himself a myth. The initial Jessie Scout unit was formed in St. Louis, Missouri early in the war as the plan to develop independent scouts was implemented. The first man to command the scouts was Charles C. Carpenter. The Jessie Scouts wore Confederate uniforms with a white handkerchief over their shoulders to signify their allegiance to friendly troops, and number around 58 for much of the war, commanded by Major Henry Young.
————————————————————-
From the book, On Hazardous Service
By William G. Beymer
Archibald Rowand Jr.
To Major H. H. Young, of my staff, chief of scouts, and the thirty or forty men of his command, who took their lives in their hands, cheerfully going wherever ordered, to obtain that great essential of success, information, I tender my gratitude. Ten of these men were lost.—From Gen. Philip H. Sheridan’s report of the expedition from Winchester to Petersburg, Virginia. February 27— March 28, 1865. Official Records, Vol. 46: I: 481. “THIRTY or forty men, of whom ten were lost.” It was not chance which worded that phrase. Sheridan has chosen his words well. Of the ten, no one of them died as do men in battles; two were found by their comrades hanging by their own halter-straps; several more died like trapped animals, fighting desperately, at bay. And the others—never returned. Until the Great Book opens it will never be known where, or how, they died; they never returned, that is all. Of the ten, not a man was wearing the uniform of the country for which he died.

(more…)

Sunday, May 8, 2011

Bounties: The Truth About Geronimo…And Usama Bin Laden, By Benjamin Runkle

The original Geronimo campaign and the hunt for bin Laden share plenty of similarities. On May 3, 1886, more than a century before a $25 million reward was offered for information on bin Laden’s whereabouts, and almost 125 years to the day before the al-Qaeda leader’s death, the U.S. House of Representatives introduced a joint resolution “Authorizing the President to offer a reward of twenty-five thousand dollars for the killing or capture of Geronimo.”

Excellent little article about the comparisons between these two manhunts. But what is really interesting to me is that back then the President was authorized by congress to issue a bounty for the killing or capturing of Geronimo.  So does that mean that a bounty was paid to the members of Lt. Charles Gatewood’s small five man party that sealed the deal on Geronimo?  Mind you that this party was composed of ‘two Apache scouts, an interpreter and a mule-packer’.  Not bad for such a small team, and it reminds me of the effectiveness of the small teams required for the capture of UBL.(on a side note here, no one has been awarded the millions in bounties that UBL had on his head)

Which brings me to my next point.  It is not the size of force or intelligence apparatus, but the quality and effectiveness of such a thing.  In both cases, it was not a large army that was able to find these guys and put them away.  It was small teams. And in both cases, these teams were tipped off to the location of their guy by a local or a detainee.  So what does that say?

Could this indicate that small companies or units are more capable of finding people, than large cumbersome armies? I think so.  I also think that bounties can work, if they actually support a vibrant ‘offense industry’.  The bounty for Bin Laden did not support the kill or capture by companies or individuals, and only depended upon an individual to come forward with a tip.  That’s if they would come forward.  If a company was tasked with finding and capturing/killing UBL or any of the other leaders, then they too could use a bounty system to get their information locally. Or use whatever means, based on the guidelines and laws of a issued license.

The other point I wanted to make is how long and how costly this manhunt has been.  According to this author in the Atlantic, the total time for the hunt of UBL was 15 years at a cost of 3 trillion dollars. I cannot even imagine what 3 trillion dollars looks like, but I do know what cost effective is.  This hunt for UBL was not cost effective, and I definitely think that there is another way to go about this task. Not to mention the lives lost in this long war.

Finally, there is the question of violating a country’s sovereignty in order to go after an individual(s). We definitely crossed Pakistan’s border with military force, landed on their territory, killed UBL and several others, and took materials from this compound.  All of these acts were done without the permission of Pakistan, and I am sure it will have it’s repercussions.(logistics for Afghanistan come to mind) But my point is that the US authorized this act at the highest levels.  So the US has now set a precedence and has deemed this a necessary act for national security.  I agree and applaud the President for making this move, but the US must also consider that Al Qaeda is still operating and still out there.

It will take many raids, and many small teams to reach all of these groups and violate the sovereignty of many countries out there in order to accomplish what we just did in Pakistan.  If such acts are this important to the national security of the US, then I do not see how issuing Letters of Marque and Reprisal to private industry to help in this endeavor would be considered that much more of a stretch? Or we can continue to spend trillions of dollars on large scale military deployments in places like Iraq or Afghanistan, violate those country’s sovereignty with large scale occupation, all to find these people? Something to think about when talking about waging war efficiently and using the right tool/strategy for the job.

On a side note, Benjamin Runkle has put together an excellent blog to coincide with the topic of his book called Wanted Dead or Alive: Manhunts from Geronimo to bid Laden. I have put his blog in my RSS reader, and this is an area of study that everyone should take a look at if they are interested in the method behind ‘finding’ bad guys.-Matt

The truth about Geronimo .. and Osama bin Laden
By Benjamin Runkle
May 6, 2011
“Geronimo!” That was the call that went over the command net on May 1, indicating that Navy SEALs had found their man. And that code name for Osama bin Laden has angered some Native Americans, who have demanded a formal apology from the Obama administration.
Their complaints are understandable, but misguided. The code name doesn’t denigrate the Apache war captain, a hero to some students of Native American history, through comparison to the Saudi terrorist leader. The similarities are not in the men themselves but in the military campaigns that targeted them.
In May 1885, Geronimo led the breakout of 120 Chiricahua Apache from the San Carlos Reservation in what is now Arizona, creating mass hysteria in the American Southwest. The Chiricahua had legitimate grievances: Civilian “Indian agents” were corrupt and consistently cheated the Apache on their rations, while the land the tribe had been given was almost worthless for farming but still encroached upon by miners. (more…)

Monday, April 11, 2011

History: The 8 Civilian Recipients Of the Medal Of Honor And The Purge Of 1917

In the past I have talked about William ‘Buffalo Bill’ Cody and his Medal of Honor. It is significant, because he was awarded this medal for heroism, as a civilian contractor.  What is not talked about though, are the other 7 civilians that were the recipients of this medal, to include the only female recipient Dr. Mary Walker.

Mary’s medal is the reason why Buffalo Bill and the other civilians were able to retain their Medal’s of Honor after the Purge of 1917.  This purge was an effort to thin out the ranks of the MoH and make it a purely military honor. It was also designed to take away medals from individuals that did not receive the medal for heroism. Basically, they wanted to make the medal more exclusive.

But what is interesting here is that all of these civilian medal recipients mentioned below were purged from the list back in 1917, not because of a lack of heroism, but because they were not military.  But then along came Mary….. As soon as it was determined that Mary and company could not wear the medal any more, of course that caused a backlash. Mary would purposely wear the medal out of defiance of the ruling, all the way up until her death.

What happened after her death is that her family fought for the medal to be restored, and for sixty years this battle continued. In 1977, these efforts caught the attention of President Carter and he restored her medal posthumously. It is that event that that led to the other 7 civilians having their MoH restored. So that is a big thanks to Dr. Walker and President Carter. Although I am sure he did not intend for his actions to legitimize the heroic acts of contractors during times of war, and I think he was thinking more in terms of women’s equality. lol

The other interesting part of this history are the civilians who were working for the navy that received the MoH. They were boat pilots it sounds like, and this was during the Civil War. They were not privateers, but they were still working as civilians and were awarded the medal for heroism. Although there is not much on this history, so I really cannot add much there.

Finally, the guys I really like on this list, were the scouts.  These folks were crucial to the Army mission during the years of brutal warfare in the wild west. There were other famous scouts from that time period like Frederick Russell Burnham, but it is these four scouts below that were recognized by the government for their heroism in battle.

I often wonder if congress would ever consider including civilians once again for the MoH?  In this current war, there are numerous acts of gallantry and sacrifice that were performed by contractors, and yet their act goes unnoticed? Contractor use in this war far surpasses the use of contractors in US history, with over 2500 plus killed and thousands wounded. Yet there has been very little recognition of the heroes in this group (250,000 plus contractors serve in the war zones). Of course there have been a handful of Defense of Freedom Medals given out, but that is it.

Of course some would say that contractors get their reward in the from of monetary payment. But so does the US military, and so does all of it’s partners. What I am talking about are recognizing an individual’s sacrifice and efforts during times of war, despite if they are military or civilian. I celebrate our military heroes, and I would like to celebrate our civilian heroes as well. But no one knows about those civilian heroes, because they have not been recognized for their efforts.-Matt

Restoration of 6 Awards Previously Purged From TheRoll Of Honor
From Home of Heroes website.
There was no intent on the part of the 5 retired generals that reviewed all prior awards of the Medal of Honor, to single out any individual or group of individuals from whom to revoke our Nation’s highest award.  Certainly the case of the 27th Maine precipitated the review, and as a former commander of the Medal of Honor Legion, General Miles presumably agreed with the Legion’s opposition to the inappropriate awards to that unit.  Even so, however, the five generals approached their daunting task with reverence for the award as well as a sensibility to those who had already received the award. (more…)

Thursday, April 7, 2011

Bounties: The US Congress Paid $100 Per British Prisoner Captured During War Of 1812

1814, March 19. The $25 for each prisoner captured by private armed vessels of the United States to be $100 hereafter. $200,000 appropriated.
(What cost $100 in 1814 would cost $1025.20 in 2010.)

Now this is interesting, and I found this nugget of information in the Spirit of 76, Volume 6 edition. Did you know that the US Congress authorized a bounty system for British Prisoners during the War of 1812?  Apparently back then, the British had captured a ton of American prisoners during that war. The reason for that was because there were hundreds of American privateers involved in the war that went after the enemy, and many of these privateers were captured during operations.  These privateers were not as experienced and as professionalized as the Royal Navy back then, and suffered the consequence of being ill prepared.

Another problem that popped up in the war was that many of these American privateers had no use for prisoners and often let them go.  So in 1814, that is when Congress decided to appropriate money for bounties for privateers to hang on to prisoners and turn them in to US detention. My guess is that Congress wanted to do prisoner exchanges to get all of these Americans freed from British prisons. So naturally, Congress created an industry out of capturing prisoners to solve the problem. That is on top of the prize capture system implemented by Congress, which was an industry created to destroy enemy logistics and infuse money into the US Treasury.

With that said, privateers did some damage during that war and were a very important part of the overall strategy.  Despite the risks and poor conditions, many guys were driven to join the privateer schooners in the hopes of capturing a prize (or enemy vessel).  I compare it to today’s crab fishermen in Alaska, and a good visual representation of that ‘risk versus reward’ mindset is to watch a show like the ‘Deadliest Catch‘. It is the allure of the hunt and of striking it rich, that drove these men to do what they did back then.  Plus it was the patriotic thing to do at the time, and privateering was very popular.

Another little nugget I found out recently, was the concept of Prize Tickets.  What these were, were contracts between the sailors and the privateer company in which that sailor would get his share of the prize, after all the proceedings of the prize court and after everyone was paid.  The interesting thing here is that guys didn’t know how much they would get for their efforts, and it required patience to wait for the final outcome. What happened with many privateers is that instead of waiting, they would instead sell their prize tickets to brokers who would pay a small fee.  These brokers would stand to make a killing, just because they were rich enough and patient enough to wait for the final outcome of the prize.

The other thing that I thought was interesting is that privateer and letter of marque were two types of vessels/enterprises during that war. Not only was a Letter of Marque a commission/license issued to privateers, but the name Letter of Marque was given to a certain type of enterprise/vessel in this war. A Letter of Marque was a cargo vessel whom was issued a LoM for the possible chance that they might come across an enemy vessel and make a capture. But their primary task was shipping their cargo.  A privateer was a vessel that was primarily a fighting vessel, and prize captures/commerce raiding was is it’s purpose.

For more information on the War of 1812, I highly suggest a new book that came out called the Perilous Fight: America’s Intrepid War With Great Britain On the High Sea’s 1812-1815, By Stephen Budiansky. And I really liked this quote from the product description of this book: “Never again would the great powers challenge the young republic’s sovereignty in the aftermath of the stunning performance of America’s navy and privateersmen in sea battles that ranged across half the globe. Their brilliant hit-and-run tactics against a far mightier foe would pioneer concepts of “asymmetric warfare” that would characterize the insurgency warfare of later centuries.” Pretty cool. –Matt

ACTION FOR THE BENEFIT OF REVOLUTIONARY SOLDIERS.
COMPILED FROM THE MINUTES OF CONGRESS
The Spirit of ’76, Volume 6
1812, Jan. 18. Act declaring war with Great Britain.
1812, June 26. Act concerning letters of marque, prizes and and prize goods. The 17th section says: “That two percentum on the net amount (after deducting all charges and expenditures) of the prize money arising from capture of vessels and cargoes, recaptured by the private armed vessels of the United States, shall be secured and paid over to the collector or other chief officer of the customs at the port or place in the United States at which such captured or recaptured vessels may arrive; or consul or other public agent of the United States residing at the port or place not within the United States, at which such captured or recaptured vessels may arrive. And the moneys arising therefrom shall be held, and is hereby pledged by the government of the United States as a fund for the support and maintenance of the widows and children of such persons as may be slain; and for the support and maintenance of such persons as may be wounded and disabled, on board of thte private armed vessels of the United States, in any engagement with the enemy, to be assigned and distributed in such manner as shall hereafter by law be provided.” ) (more…)

Wednesday, March 9, 2011

Weapons: A Force Multiplier And Strategic Asset–The Girandoni Air Rifle Used By Lewis And Clark

Filed under: History,Weapons — Tags: , , , , — Matt @ 2:54 PM

« Newer PostsOlder Posts »

Powered by WordPress