Sounds to me like the 2 companies in Battery D with the 33rd Mo and 33rd Iowa, probably wanted to take some credit for the capture of a flag and CS troops. As I stated in a post of Bryan's, many times the intel these units gathered after the battle was not true to the actual statement. While they may have thought or been told it was a new regiment, we do not know the basis for their opinion. And, as the only places mentioned of flags being captured was Battery D and down in town itself I would speculate they were refering to one taken at Battery D. I bet these two companies of 43rd Ind advanced as well and were present when the men of Bell's and Hawthornes regiments were cut off and were more than likely in on the surrounding and forcing of the surrender, so they also tried to lay claim as being "responsible" for the surrender. However, since they only mention one flag, it could have been that taken by 33rd Mo. The 43rd Ind was on the Union left in the works with the 33rd Mo to their right. They were facing west. When the CS forces deployed Hawthorne advanced by the right flank perpendicular to the road and advanced hitting the portion of Battery D held by 43rd Ind and 33rd Mo. he mentions that Bell came up and moved to their left. The 33rd Iowa was in the works to the Union right facing the NW. This would be where most of Bell's men would move. WHile the troops got mixed and some of Hawthorne's were intermingled with Bells that were captured by the 33rd Iowa, I am betting that most of Hawthorne's captured would have been in front of the 33rd MO and 43rd Ind, and since we know 33rd MO took one flag (Heath's letter) I would bet the 43rd was in on that capture of forces and "linked" themselves to the capture of a flag as their part of the over all force. Just my two cents worth based on my understanding of where the opposing forces were located. I do not have access to my files since I am 100 plus miles away preping for deployment to "over there" but I think this is a plausible explanation. Also, Hawthorne's regiment was a regiment that organized (March 1862) out of necessity due to the conscript law going into effect, so many of these men may not have been gung ho about joining but knew that it was either join a group locally or wait and be drafted into who knew what unit. So that could also be a possible explanation of the referrel to a new recruited regiment.