The following article is transcribed verbatum from the "Selma Morning Reporter", Vol. VI, No. 220, Wednesday, July 27, 1864:

"Our Forces In The Fight At Beasly's Tank - Our forces in the fight at Beasly's Tank with the Rousseau raiders on Monday last, says the Montgomery Advertiser, consisted of the Lockhart Battalion, the conscripts from Camp Watts, under Capt. Ready, and the State Cadets from the University. All of them bore themselves most gallantly, fighting as if they were accustomed to such work, although it was the first time they were ever under fire. The State Cadets deserve all the praise bestowed on them, doing credit to themselves and the training they received. Still the battalion and the conscripts did their whole duty; evincing much coolness and courage under the fire of the raiders. The lists of casualties will show that the latter, as well as the Cadets, confronted the foe and suffered considerably. The loss of the Cadets was two wounded; that of the battalion, forty-eight killed and wounded; and that of the conscripts fifteen wounded and seventeen missing. Capt. Walthall's company of reserves lost the most."

I believe credit should be given where credit is due, and it appears to me that the boys of Lockhart's Battalion, perhaps owning to a lack of social or financial status during that time, were being given short shrift by this newspaper editor. Perhaps it is just the style of his writing, but I think not. The losses attributed to the University of Alabama Cadets, are totally out of proportion to the credit this gentleman (or someone at the Montgomery Advertiser) was seeking to bestow upon them and I believe the record should be set straight in this regard. I find the editors remarks strange, given that many of the boys of Lockhart's Battalion were from the Selma area. The most notable incident regarding the University of Alabama Cadets participation in the battle is in regard to a artillery piece and caisson which they unloaded from the train and attempted to deploy on the road on the right flank of Lockhart's Battalion. This weapon, crewed by University of Alabama Cadets was overturned into a roadside ditch when the horse team stampeded and it was supposedly rendered useless for the remainder of the fight. This information can be found in William C. Ward's (a veteran of the battle) account. I myself have many times walked this field and understand the terrain which at the time was much as it was in 1864 - obviously I am referring to the major landmarks. The ravine, hill and railroad were all still there over a decade ago and it was evident that most of Lockhart's Battalion, in the closing stage of the battle was pinned, with high ground to the front, held by the 5th Iowa Cavalry (armed with Sharps not Spencers), and the railroad to their left which was taken in a flanking movement by the 8th Indiana (armed with Spencers). These boys were caught in a classic flanking movement by battle hardened veterans and they paid dearly for it. Thus I find it somewhat offensive that someone, especially in that time, would give credit for bearing the brunt of that engagement to any group other than the boys of Lockhart's Battalion. I believe the rank and file of Lockhart's Battalion would have felt the same way too.

Greg