![Transcription Center logo](/themes/custom/tc_theme/assets/image/logo.png)
This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.
112 L.R. F 177. 2.V.66. War Dept Bureau &c Rec'd Back May 12"/66 Office Supt 4th Dist Gordonsville Va May 10th/66 18/ Respty returned to Bvt Brig Genl. O. Brown Asst Com'r for Va. with the following report. At Tappahannock on the 3rd of April a party numbering about 30 persons formed a procession and marched through some portion of the town, celebrating the day of their emancipation. No request was made by the citizens either to have the procession prevented or to have it stopped. after it had been formed. Lieut Wentworth knew of no reason why the Freedmen should be forbidden to clebrate the day in Tappahannock. Similar permission being allowed the freedmen in other parts of the state. Nor had he any reason to suppose at the time that the procession was offensive to the citizens. So far as the "firing in the street" is concerned I can learn of but one round of blank cartridges being so fired. This was in front of Lieut Wentworth's office, and on hearing the discharge. he went out to prevent further firing and found that the celebration had come to an end. The firing he had just heard being the finale to the exercises. There was more firing during the day, but it took place either on the River Bank or in the rear of the Town. I visited the houses said in the within communication to have been struck with "balls and to still have the marks" I could find no such marks. nor could the parties occupying the houses point out any such marks. My inquiries and examinations were careful and extensive but I received no evidence of any balls or shot being fired that day. This in connection with the fact that the that the Asst Supt cautioned these freedmen against firing anything except blank cartridges and the testimony of the freedmen that no others were fired forces me to the conclusion that no missiles of any kind were fired. I saw and conversed with Eleven of the parties whose names are signed to this communication. They were unanimous in testifying that there was no riot in the town further than the firing alluded to. No person was injured. There were two objections urged against the affair. First the 113 firing of guns. 2nd the day chosen for the celebration. Several of the citizens remarking that they would have no objection to the procession on any other day. this last objection was the most serious one in their estimation. The procession was in no manner threatening or abusive. it was more calculated to excite ridicule and merriment than anything else. There were but about half a dozen young men engaged in the affair the remainder consisting of boys of 14 years and younger. They had 4 old muskets two rusty sabres a tin drum and a cracked fife. most of the party were armed with sticks and cornstalks the cornstalks being most numerous. The procession was under the charge of a col'd man who had been a Serg't in one of our Regts and the exercises were of a ridiculous and farcical character. The difficulty between a freedman and the mail carrier alluded to in the within complaint was in no way connected with this celebration. On the testimony of the mail carrier it was entirely an individual affair. growing out of a dispute concerning some shoemaking done by the freedmen for the mail carrier. The parties met at the Town Pump. The freedmen was said to be intoxicated, a dispute arose. each called the other hard names, and each threatened to shoot the other. The only objection found to the administration of Lieut Wentworth is that he did not prevent this procession on the 3rd day of April. aside from that I could learn of no fault being found with him. I believe that had the citizens requested him to prevent this celebration it would have been done As proof of this I may state that on a subsequent day when another celebration was proposed it was repressed by the Lieut at the request of the citizens It may be proper to add that a large majority of the persons signing this communication requested that it should not be forwarded after they had learned that Lieut Wentworth had prevented the second celebration from taking place. Believing Lt Wentworth to be a competent and efficient Officer and desirous of doing his duty to both black and white I see no reason to recommend his being relieved. (Sg'd) T. Frank. P. Crandon Bvt Maj A Q M & Supt 4th Dist
Transcription Notes:
In paragraph 4 of the first letter "celebrate" is misspelt as "clebrate"
----------
Reopened for Editing 2024-04-22 19:56:17