Full download ebook at ebooksecure.

com

Encyclopedia of Materials: Composites: Composites.

Volume 1 1st Edition Dermot Brabazon (Editor) -
eBook PDF

https://ebooksecure.com/download/encyclopedia-of-materials-
composites-composites-volume-1-ebook-pdf/

OR CLICK BUTTON

DOWLOAD EBOOK

Download more ebook from https://ebooksecure.com

More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Wool Fiber Reinforced Polymer Composites 1st edition -

eBook PDF

https://ebooksecure.com/download/wool-fiber-reinforced-polymer-
composites-ebook-pdf/

Non-Thermal Plasma Technology for Polymeric Materials:

Applications in Composites, Nanostructured Materials,
and Biomedical Fields 1st edition - eBook PDF

https://ebooksecure.com/download/non-thermal-plasma-technology-
for-polymeric-materials-applications-in-composites-
nanostructured-materials-and-biomedical-fields-ebook-pdf/

Encyclopedia of Materials: Technical Ceramics and

Glasses, 3-Volume Set 1st edition - eBook PDF

https://ebooksecure.com/download/encyclopedia-of-materials-
technical-ceramics-and-glasses-3-volume-set-ebook-pdf/

(eBook PDF) Analysis and Performance of Fiber

Composites 4th Edition

http://ebooksecure.com/product/ebook-pdf-analysis-and-
performance-of-fiber-composites-4th-edition/
Multiscale Modeling Approaches for Composites 1st
Edition George Chatzigeorgiou - eBook PDF

https://ebooksecure.com/download/multiscale-modeling-approaches-
for-composites-ebook-pdf/

Encyclopedia of Renewable and Sustainable Materials 1st

edition - eBook PDF

https://ebooksecure.com/download/encyclopedia-of-renewable-and-
sustainable-materials-ebook-pdf/

Elastomer Blends and Composites: Principles,

Characterization, Advances, and Applications 1st
Edition- eBook PDF

https://ebooksecure.com/download/elastomer-blends-and-composites-
principles-characterization-advances-and-applications-ebook-pdf/

Progress in Heterocyclic Chemistry Volume 29 1st

Edition - eBook PDF

https://ebooksecure.com/download/progress-in-heterocyclic-
chemistry-ebook-pdf/

Advances in Metal Oxides and Their Composites for

Emerging Applications 1st edition - eBook PDF

https://ebooksecure.com/download/advances-in-metal-oxides-and-
their-composites-for-emerging-applications-ebook-pdf/
ENCYCLOPEDIA OF MATERIALS:
COMPOSITES

Volume 1
 ENCYCLOPEDIA OF MATERIALS:
COMPOSITES

EDITOR IN CHIEF

Dermot Brabazon
I-Form, Advanced Manufacturing Research Centre, and Advanced Processing Technology
Research Centre, School of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering,
Dublin City University, Dublin, Ireland

Volume 1

Section Editors
Section 1: Metal Matrix Composite Materials, Edited by Manoj Gupta
Section 2: Polymer Matrix Composite Materials, Edited by Dermot Brabazon

AMSTERDAM  BOSTON  HEIDELBERG  LONDON  NEW YORK  OXFORD

PARIS  SAN DIEGO  SAN FRANCISCO  SINGAPORE  SYDNEY  TOKYO
Elsevier
Radarweg 29, PO Box 211, 1000 AE Amsterdam, Netherlands
The Boulevard, Langford Lane, Kidlington, Oxford OX5 1GB, United Kingdom
50 Hampshire Street, 5th Floor, Cambridge MA 02139, United States

Copyright r 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved

No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including
photocopying, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Details on how to seek permission, further information about the Publisher’s permissions policies and our arrangements
with organizations such as the Copyright Clearance Center and the Copyright Licensing Agency, can be found at our website:
www.elsevier.com/permissions.

This book and the individual contributions contained in it are protected under copyright by the Publisher (other than as may be
noted herein).

Notices
Knowledge and best practice in this field are constantly changing. As new research and experience broaden our understanding,
changes in research methods, professional practices, or medical treatment may become necessary.

Practitioners and researchers may always rely on their own experience and knowledge in evaluating and using any information,
methods, compounds, or experiments described herein. In using such information or methods they should be mindful of their
own safety and the safety of others, including parties for whom they have a professional responsibility.

To the fullest extent of the law, neither the Publisher nor the authors, contributors, or editors, assume any liability for any injury
and/or damage to persons or property as a matter of products liability, negligence or otherwise, or from any use or operation of
any methods, products, instructions, or ideas contained in the material herein.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

A catalog record for this book is available from the Library of Congress

British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

ISBN 978-0-12-819724-0

For information on all publications visit our

website at http://store.elsevier.com

Publisher: Oliver Walter

Acquisitions Editor: Ruth Rhodes and Kelsey Connors
Content Project Manager: Laura Jackson
Associate Content Project Manager: Sajana Devasi
Designer: Mark Rogers

.
CONTENTS OF VOLUME 1

Contents of Volume 1 v

List of Contributors for Volume 1 xi

Editorial Board xvii

Preface xix

VOLUME 1

Section 1: Metal Matrix Composite Materials, Edited by Manoj Gupta

Introduction to Metal Matrix Composite Materials: An Introduction

Manoj Gupta 1
Fundamentals of Metal Matrix Composites
Sankaranarayanan Seetharaman and Manoj Gupta 11
An Insight Into Metal Matrix Composites With Micron Size Reinforcement
Arsha Antony Geetha, Madhusoodhanan Geethakumari Akhil, Thazhavilai Ponnu Devaraj Rajan, and
Ballambettu Chandrasekhara Pai 30
An Insight Into Metal Matrix Composites With Nano Size Reinforcement
Massoud Malaki 42
An Insight Into Magnesium Based Metal Matrix Composites With Hybrid Reinforcement
Sankaranarayanan Seetharaman, Subramanian Jayalakshmi, Ramachandra Arvind Singh, and Manoj Gupta 52
Metal Based Composites With Metastable/Amorphous Reinforcements
Penchal Reddy Matli and Manoj Gupta 78
Development and Properties of Amorphous Particles Reinforced Al Matrix Nanocomposites
Adnan Khan, Mattli M Reddy, Penchal Reddy Matli, Rana A Shakoor, and Manoj Gupta 96
Metal Matrix Syntactic Composites
Vyasaraj Manakari, Gururaj Parande, Manoj Gupta, and Mrityunjay Doddamani 109
Insight Into Layered Metal Matrix Composites
Akshay Padnuru Sripathy and Manoj Gupta 121
Eco-friendly Metal Matrix Composites
Gururaj Parande, Vyasaraj Manakari, and Manoj Gupta 140
Liquid Phase Processing of Metal Matrix Composites
Madhusoodhanan Geethakumari Akhil, Kaimanikal Madhurananthan Nair Sree Manu, Thazhavilai Ponnu
Devaraj Rajan, and Ballambettu Chandrasekhara Pai 160
Solid Phase Processing of Metal Matrix Composites
Mingyang Zhou, Lingbao Ren, Gaofeng Quan, and Manoj Gupta 173
Two Phase Processing of Metal Matrix Composites
Penchal Reddy Matli, Tirumalai Srivatsan, and Manoj Gupta 197

v
vi Contents of Volume 1

Additive Manufacturing of Metal Matrix Composites

Sankaranarayanan Seetharaman and Manoj Gupta 209
Severe Plastic Deformation Processing of Metal Matrix Composites
Sankaranarayanan Seetharaman, Ankita Mandal, and Manoj Gupta 230
Friction Stir Processing of Metal Matrix Composites
VK Bupesh Raja and Manoj Gupta 247
An Insight Into Processing Maps of Metal Matrix Composites
Biranchi N Sahoo and Sushanta K Panigrahi 257
Microstructural Aspects of Metal-Matrix Composites
Devadas Bhat Panemangalore and Rajashekhara Shabadi 274
Tensile Characteristics of Metal Matrix Composites
Milli S Kujur, Ved P Dubey, Ashis Mallick, and Manoj Gupta 298
Tensile Response of Al-Based Nanocomposites
Penchal Reddy Matli, Vyasaraj Manakari, Gururaj Parande, and Manoj Gupta 313
Compressive Response of Aluminum Metal Matrix Composites
Ramanathan Arunachalam and Pradeep K Krishnan 325
Fatigue Behavior of Magnesium Matrix Composites
Sravya Tekumalla and Manoj Gupta 344
High-Temperature Properties of Metal Matrix Composites
Oluseyi P Oladijo, Samuel A Awe, Esther T Akinlabi, Resego R Phiri, Lebudi L Collieus, and Rebaone E Phuti 360
Creep Characteristics of Metal Matrix Composites
Hong Yang, Sarkis Gavras, and Hajo Dieringa 375
Tribological Properties of Light Metal Matrix Composites
Jitendra K Katiyar, Jaafar Al Hammad, and Abdul Samad Mohammed 389
Mechanical and Tribological Properties of Aluminum Based Metal Matrix Nanocomposites
Mir Irfan Ul Haq, Sanjay Mohan, Ankush Raina, Subramanian Jayalakshmi, Ramachandra Arvind Singh,
Xizhang Chen, Sergey Konovalov, and Manoj Gupta 402
Damping Characteristics of Metal Matrix Composites
Penchal Reddy Matli and Manoj Gupta 415
Electromagnetic Shielding Capabilities of Metal Matrix Composites
Anisha Chaudhary, Vinay Gupta, Satish Teotia, Subhash Nimanpure, and Dipen K Rajak 428
Corrosion Characteristics of Metal Matrix Composites
Devadas Bhat Panemangalore and Udaya Bhat K 442
Coating Technologies for Metal Matrix Composites
Sumit Pramanik and Kamal K Kar 454
Biocompatibility of Metal Matrix Composites Used for Biomedical Applications
Somasundaram Prasadh, Santhosh Suresh, Vaishnavi Ratheesh, Raymond Wong, and Manoj Gupta 474
Joining of Metal Matrix Composites
VK Bupesh Raja and Manoj Gupta 502
High Performance Machining of Metal Matrix Composites
Keng S Woon 512
Application of Metal Matrix Composites in Engineering Sectors
Dipen K Rajak and Pradeep L Menezes 525
 Contents of Volume 1 vii

Metal Matrix Composites for Automotive Components in Depth Case Study: Development
of Automotive Brake Disc
Nanang Fatchurrohman and Shamsuddin Sulaiman 540
Application of Metal Matrix Composites in Non-Structural Applications
Mubarak Ali M, Mohamed Thariq, Vishwesh Dikshit, and Bhudolia S Kumar 557

Section 2: Polymer Matrix Composite Materials, Edited by Dermot Brabazon

Introduction: Polymer Matrix Composite Materials

Dermot Brabazon 563

Particulate Reinforced Polymer Matrix Composites

Overview of Mechanical and Physicochemical Properties of Polymer Matrix Composites

Kai Bin Liew, Choon Fu Goh, Sajid Asghar, and Haroon K Syed 565
Processing of Polymers and Their Composites: A Review
Jaspreet Singh, Kulwinder Singh, JS Saini, and Mohammed SJ Hashmi 577
Tailored Behavior of Polymer Matrix Composite Materials
Yousef Tamsilian, Samira Alvani, Fatemeh Abdolkhani, and Elham Khademi Moghadam 604
Effect of Particle Size and Content of Crumb Rubber on the Dynamic Properties of Passenger Tyre
Tread Using Finite Element Method
Adnan A Alshukri, Faieza A Aziz, Mohd S Salit, Nuraini A Aziz, and Mohammed Al-Maamori 615
Overview of Surface Roughness Effect on Silver Nanoparticle Filled Epoxy Composites
MA Salim, R Hamidi, and AM Saad 628
Polymer Single-Screw Extrusion With Metal Powder Reinforcement
Rupinder Singh, N Singh, P Bedi, and IPS Ahuja 671
Polymer Twin Screw Extrusion With Filler Powder Reinforcement
Rupinder Singh, Sunpreet Singh, and Mohammed SJ Hashmi 691
The Effect of In-Situ-Formed Silver Nanoparticles on the Morphological Properties of Epoxy Resin
Filled Composites
MA Salim, R Hamidi, and AM Saad 706
Toughening Mechanisms of Devulcanized Rubber Modified Epoxy Based Composites Reinforced
With Zirconia
Alaeddin B Irez, Emin Bayraktar, and Ibrahim Miskioglu 713
Polymer Nanocomposite Characterization and Applications
Mahsa Shirazi, Gholamreza Masoudi Rad, and Yousef Tamsilian 725

Fibre Reinforced Polymer Matrix Composites

Effect of Fiber Orientation on the Mechanical Properties of Laminated Polymer Composites

N Ghamarian, Mohamed AA Hanim, P Penjumras, and Dayang LA Majid 746
Tensile Properties of Woven Intra-Ply Carbon/Kevlar Reinforced Epoxy Hybrid Composite at Sub-
Ambient Temperature
Nurain Hashim, Dayang LA Majid, Danish M Baitab, Noorfaizal Yidris, and Rizal Zahari 766
Thermoplastic Composites for Fused Deposition Modeling Filament: Challenges and Applications
Kamaljit S Boparai and Rupinder Singh 774
viii Contents of Volume 1

Biomedical Applications of Polymer Matrix Composites

Hydroxyapatite Based Polymer Composites for Regenerative Medicine Applications

Luis J del Valle and Jordi Puiggalí 785
Biopolymer Matrix Composite for Drug Delivery Applications in Cancer
Ankit Jain, Madhavi Tripathi, Shiv K Prajapati, and Ashok M Raichur 804
Covalent and Electrostatic Protein-Polysaccharide Systems for Encapsulation of Nutraceuticals
Hadis Rostamabadi, Seid Reza Falsafi, and Seid Mahdi Jafari 818
Polymer Matrix Composites Containing Carbon Nanomaterials for Medical Applications
Maryam Ahmadzadeh Tofighy, Soha Habibi, and Toraj Mohammadi 832
Biopolymer Matrix Composites for New Medical Applications
Zahra Shariatinia 842
Poly(methyl methacrylate)-Based Composite Bone Cements With Different Types of Reinforcement
Agents
Sanaz Soleymani Eil Bakhtiari, Hamid Reza Bakhsheshi-Rad, Saeed Karbasi, Ahmad Fauzi Ismail,
Safian Sharif, Alexander Seifalian, Houman Savoji, and Filippo Berto 867
Hydrogel Composite Films for Wound Healing
Ikram U Khan, Huma Mahmood, Yasser Shahzad, Sajid Asghar, and Haroon K Syed 887
Polymer Composites for Organ Reconstruction
Haroon K Syed, Sajid Asghar, Kai Bin Liew, Ikram U Khan, Fizza A Razzaq, and Saba Rafique 905
Overview of Additive Manufacturing Biopolymer Composites
Bankole I Oladapo, S Abolfazl Zahedi, Vincent A Balogun, Sikiru O Ismail, and Yarjan A Samad 915
Marine Polysaccharide-Based Composite Hydrogels
Saad Salman, Syed H Khalid, Ikram U Khan, Sajid Asghar, Fahad H Shah, and Muniba Tariq 929

Other Application Areas for Polymer Matrix Composites

Multifunctional Polymer Matrix Composites

Sajid Asghar, Haroon K Syed, Kai Bin Liew, Ikram U Khan, and Saad Salman 937
Polymer Matrix Composite Materials for Aerospace Applications
Subramani Devaraju and Muthukaruppan Alagar 947
Tribology of Polymer Matrix Composites Within the Automotive Industry
Leonardo I Farfan-Cabrera, Monica Tapia-Gaspar, and José Pérez-González 970
Polymer Matrix Composites Materials for Water and Wastewater Treatment Applications
Maryam Ahmadzadeh Tofighy and Toraj Mohammadi 983
Nanomaterial-Incorporated Polymer Composites for Industrial Effluent: From Synthesis to
Application
Yousef Tamsilian, Mahsa Shirazi, and Gholamreza Masoudi Rad 998

New and Emerging Processing Methods for Polymer Matrix Composites

Additive Manufacturing of Polymer Matrix Composites

Farnoosh Pahlevanzadeh, Hamid Reza Bakhsheshi-Rad, Dermot Brabazon, Mahshid Kharaziha,
Ahmad Fauzi Ismail, Safian Sharif, Mahmood Razzaghi, and Filippo Berto 1013
New Design Consideration of Polymer Matrix Composite Materials
Peng Liu 1029
 Contents of Volume 1 ix

Thermal and Morphological Analyses of Polymer Matrix Composites

Subramani Devaraju, Arumugam Hariharan, Krishnasamy Balaji, and Muthukaruppan Alagar 1038
A New Design of Epoxy Based Composites Reinforced With Devulcanized Rubber, Alumina Fiber
and BN
Alaeddin B Irez, Emin Bayraktar, and Ibrahim Miskioglu 1069
Development of Low-Cost Graphene-Polymer Blended In-House Filament for Fused Deposition
Modeling
Rupinder Singh and Ranvijay Kumar 1081
PLA Composite Matrix as Functional Prototypes for Four Dimensional Applications
Sudhir Kumar, Rupinder Singh, Tajinder P Singh, and Ajay Batish 1091
Extrusion-Based Additive Manufacturing Techniques for Biomedical Applications
Ghazal Tadayyon, Daniel J Kelly, and Michael G Monaghan 1101
Preparation and Applications of Synergically Combined Polymer Matrix Composites
Shashank T Mhaske and Arjit Gadgeel 1112
LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS FOR VOLUME 1

Fatemeh Abdolkhani Danish M. Baitab

Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz, Ahvaz, Iran University Putra Malaysia, Serdang, Selangor Darul
Ehsan, Malaysia
I.P.S. Ahuja
Punjabi University Patiala, Patiala, India Hamid Reza Bakhsheshi-Rad
Advanced Materials Research Center, Department of
Madhusoodhanan Geethakumari Akhil
Materials Engineering, Najafabad Branch, Islamic Azad
Council of Scientific & Industrial Research, National
University, Najafabad, Iran and Faculty of Engineering,
Institute for Interdisciplinary Science and Technology,
Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Johor Bahru, Johor,
Trivandrum, Kerala, India and Academy of Scientific
Malaysia
and Innovative Research, Ghaziabad, New Delhi, India
Krishnasamy Balaji
Esther T. Akinlabi
PSG Institute of Technology and Applied Research,
Pan African University for Life and Earth Sciences
Coimbatore, India
Institute, Ibadan, Nigeria
Mohammed Al-Maamori Vincent A. Balogun
University of Babylon-Iraq, Babylon, Iraq Edo University Iyamho, Iyamho, Edo State, Nigeria

Muthukaruppan Alagar Ajay Batish

PSG Institute of Technology and Applied Research, Thapar Institute of Engineering and Technology, Patiala,
Coimbatore, India India

Mubarak Ali M Emin Bayraktar

TKM College of Engineering, Kollam, Kerala, India Supmeca-Paris, School of Mechanical and
Manufacturing Engineering, Saint-Ouen, France
Adnan A. Alshukri
University Putra Malaysia, Serdang, Selangor, Malaysia P. Bedi
and State Company for Rubber and Tyres Industry, Guru Nanak Dev Engineering College, Ludhiana, India
Najaf, Iraq Filippo Berto
Samira Alvani Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering,
Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz, Ahvaz, Iran Norwegian University of Science and Technology,
Trondheim, Norway
Ramanathan Arunachalam
Sultan Qaboos University, Muscat, Oman Udaya Bhat K
Department of Metallurgical and Materials Engineering,
Sajid Asghar National Institute of Technology Karnataka, Surathkal,
Department of Pharmaceutics, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Srinivasnagar, Karnataka, India
Sciences, Government College University Faisalabad,
Faisalabad, Pakistan Devadas Bhat Panemangalore
Department of Metallurgical and Materials Engineering,
Samuel A. Awe National Institute of Technology Karnataka, Surathkal,
Automotive Components Floby AB, Floby, Sweden Srinivasnagar, Karnataka, India
Faieza A. Aziz
Kamaljit S. Boparai
University Putra Malaysia, Serdang, Selangor, Malaysia
MRS Punjab Technical University, Bathinda, India
Nuraini A. Aziz
Dermot Brabazon
University Putra Malaysia, Serdang, Selangor, Malaysia
I-Form, Advanced Manufacturing Research Centre, and
Jaafar Al Hammad Advanced Processing Technology Research Centre, School
King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals, of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering, Dublin
Dhahran, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia City University, Dublin, Ireland
Mohamed A.A. Hanim Anisha Chaudhary
Universiti Putra Malaysia, Serdang, Selangor, Malaysia University of Delhi, New Delhi, India

xi
xii List of Contributors for Volume 1

Xizhang Chen Manoj Gupta

Wenzhou University, Wenzhou, China National University of Singapore, Singapore
Lebudi L. Collieus Vinay Gupta
Botswana International University of Science and University of Delhi, New Delhi, India
Technology, Palapye, Botswana
Soha Habibi
Luis J. del Valle Iran University of Science and Technology, Tehran, Iran
Chemical Engineering Department, Polytechnic
University of Catalonia, Barcelona, Spain R. Hamidi
Technical University of Malaysia Melaka, Durian
Subramani Devaraju Tunggal, Melaka, Malaysia
Vignan’s Foundation for Science, Technology and
Research, Guntur, India Arumugam Hariharan
PSG Institute of Technology and Applied Research,
Hajo Dieringa Coimbatore, India
Helmholtz-Zentrum Geesthacht, Geesthacht, Germany
Nurain Hashim
Vishwesh Dikshit University Putra Malaysia, Serdang, Selangor Darul
Nanyang Technological University, Singapore Ehsan, Malaysia
Mrityunjay Doddamani Mohammed S.J. Hashmi
National Institute of Technology Karnataka, Surathkal, Dublin City University, Dublin, Ireland
Karnataka, India
Alaeddin B. Irez
Ved P. Dubey CentraleSupélec, University Paris-Saclay, Gif-sur-Yvette,
Indian Institute of Technology (Indian School of Mines) France and University Paris-Saclay, Gif-sur-Yvette,
Dhanbad, Dhanbad, India France
Seid Reza Falsafi Sikiru O. Ismail
Gorgan University of Agricultural Sciences and Natural University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, United Kingdom
Resources, Gorgan, Iran
Seid Mahdi. Jafari
Leonardo I. Farfan-Cabrera Gorgan University of Agricultural Sciences and Natural
Tecnologico de Monterrey, Escuela de Ingeniería y Resources, Gorgan, Iran
Ciencias, Monterrey, México
Ankit Jain
Nanang Fatchurrohman Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, Karnataka, India
Universiti Malaysia Pahang, Pekan, Pahang, Malaysia
Subramanian Jayalakshmi
Ahmad Fauzi Ismail Wenzhou University, Wenzhou, China
Advanced Membrane Technology Research Center
(AMTEC), Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Johor Bahru, Kamal K. Kar
Johor, Malaysia Department of Mechanical Engineering and Materials
Science Programme, Indian Institute of Technology
Arjit Gadgeel
Kanpur, Kanpur, India
Institute of Chemical Technology, Mumbai, India
Saeed Karbasi
Sarkis Gavras
Biomaterials and Tissue Engineering Department, School
Helmholtz-Zentrum Geesthacht, Geesthacht, Germany
of Advanced Technologies in Medicine, Isfahan
Arsha Antony Geetha University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran
Council of Scientific & Industrial Research–National
Jitendra K. Katiyar
Institute for Interdisciplinary Science and Technology,
SRM Institute of Science and Technology, Chennai,
Trivandrum, Kerala, India and Academy of Scientific
Tamil Nadu, India
and Innovative Research, Ghaziabad, New Delhi, India
Daniel J. Kelly
N. Ghamarian
Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland; Advance
Universiti Putra Malaysia, Serdang, Selangor, Malaysia
Materials and BioEngineering Research(AMBER) Centre
Choon Fu Goh at Trinity College Dublin and the Royal College of
Universiti Sains Malaysia, Penang, Malaysia Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland; and Centre for
 List of Contributors for Volume 1 xiii

Research in Medical Devices (CURAM), National Vyasaraj Manakari

University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland National University of Singapore, Singapore
Syed H. Khalid Ankita Mandal
Department of Pharmaceutics, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi, India
Sciences, Government College University Faisalabad,
Kaimanikal Madhurananthan Nair Sree Manu
Faisalabad, Pakistan
Council of Scientific & Industrial Research, National
Adnan Khan Institute for Interdisciplinary Science and Technology,
Qatar University, Doha, Qatar Trivandrum, Kerala, India and Brunel University,
London, United Kingdom
Ikram U. Khan
Department of Pharmaceutics, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Pradeep L. Menezes
Sciences, Government College University Faisalabad, University of Nevada, Reno, NV, United States
Faisalabad, Pakistan
Shashank T. Mhaske
Mahshid Kharaziha Institute of Chemical Technology, Mumbai, India
Department of Materials Engineering, Isfahan University
Ibrahim Miskioglu
of Technology, Isfahan, Iran
Michigan Technological University ME-EM Department,
Sergey Konovalov Houghton, MI, United States
Samara National Research University, Samara, Russia Elham Khademi Moghadam
Pradeep K. Krishnan Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz, Ahvaz, Iran
National University of Science and Technology, Muscat, Toraj Mohammadi
Oman Iran University of Science and Technology, Tehran, Iran
Milli S. Kujur Abdul Samad Mohammed
Indian Institute of Technology (Indian School of Mines) King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals,
Dhanbad, Dhanbad, India Dhahran, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
Bhudolia S. Kumar Sanjay Mohan
Nanyang Technological University, Singapore Shri Mata Vaishno Devi University, Katra, Jammu,
Ranvijay Kumar India
Guru Nanak Dev Engineering College, Ludhiana, India Michael G. Monaghan
Sudhir Kumar Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland; Advance
Thapar Institute of Engineering and Technology, Patiala, Materials and BioEngineering Research(AMBER) Centre
India at Trinity College Dublin and the Royal College of
Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland; and Centre for
Kai Bin Liew Research in Medical Devices (CURAM), National
University of Cyberjaya, Cyberjaya, Selangor, Malaysia University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland
Peng Liu Subhash Nimanpure
Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China Council of Scientific and Industrial Research, National
Physical Laboratory, New Delhi, India
Huma Mahmood
Department of Pharmaceutics, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Bankole I. Oladapo
Sciences, Government College University Faisalabad, De Montfort University, Leicester, United Kingdom
Faisalabad, Pakistan
Oluseyi P. Oladijo
Dayang L.A. Majid Botswana International University of Science and
University Putra Malaysia, Serdang, Selangor Darul Technology, Palapye, Botswana and University of
Ehsan, Malaysia Johannesburg, Johannesburg, Gauteng, South Africa
Massoud Malaki Akshay Padnuru Sripathy
Isfahan University of Technology, Isfahan, Iran National University of Singapore, Singapore
Ashis Mallick Farnoosh Pahlevanzadeh
Indian Institute of Technology (Indian School of Mines) Department of Materials Engineering, Isfahan University
Dhanbad, Dhanbad, India of Technology, Isfahan, Iran
xiv List of Contributors for Volume 1

Ballambettu Chandrasekhara Pai V.K. Bupesh Raja

Council of Scientific & Industrial Research, National Sathyabama Institute of Science and Technology,
Institute for Interdisciplinary Science and Technology, Chennai, India
Trivandrum, Kerala, India
Dipen K. Rajak
Sushanta K. Panigrahi Sandip Institute of Technology and Research Centre,
Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Chennai, India Nashik, Maharashtra, India
Gururaj Parande Thazhavilai Ponnu Devaraj Rajan
National University of Singapore, Singapore Council of Scientific & Industrial Research, National
Institute for Interdisciplinary Science and Technology,
P. Penjumras
Trivandrum, Kerala, India and Academy of Scientific
Universiti Putra Malaysia, Selangor, Malaysia and
and Innovative Research, Ghaziabad, New Delhi, India
Maejo University-Phrae Campus, Phrae, Thailand
José Pérez-González Vaishnavi Ratheesh
Instituto Politécnico Nacional, Escuela Superior deFísica National University Centre for Oral Health, Singapore
y Matemáticas, Ciudad de México, México
Mahmood Razzaghi
Resego R. Phiri Advanced Materials Research Center, Department of
Botswana International University of Science and Materials Engineering, Najafabad Branch, Islamic Azad
Technology, Palapye, Botswana University, Najafabad, Iran

Rebaone E. Phuti Fizza A. Razzaq

Botswana International University of Science and Department of Pharmaceutics, Faculty of Pharmaceutical
Technology, Palapye, Botswana Sciences, Government College University Faisalabad,
Faisalabad, Pakistan
Shiv K. Prajapati
Ram-Eesh Institute of Vocational and Technical Mattli M. Reddy
Education, Greater Noida, Uttar Pradesh Qatar University, Doha, Qatar
Sumit Pramanik Penchal Reddy Matli
Department of Mechanical Engineering, SRM Institute National University of Singapore, Singapore
of Science and Technology, Kancheepuram, Tamil Nadu,
India Lingbao Ren
Xi’an Jiaotong University, Xi’an, China
Somasundaram Prasadh
National University Centre for Oral Health, Singapore Hadis Rostamabadi
Gorgan University of Agricultural Sciences and Natural
Jordi Puiggalí Resources, Gorgan, Iran
Chemical Engineering Department, Polytechnic
University of Catalonia, Barcelona, Spain A.M. Saad
Technical University of Malaysia Melaka, Durian
Gaofeng Quan
Tunggal, Melaka, Malaysia
Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu, China

Gholamreza Masoudi Rad Biranchi N. Sahoo

Petroleum University of Technology, Ahvaz, Iran Sardar Vallabhbhai National Institute of Technology,
Surat, Gujarat, India
Saba Rafique
Department of Pharmaceutics, Faculty of Pharmaceutical J.S. Saini
Sciences, Government College University, Faisalabad, Thapar Institute of Engineering and Technology, Patiala,
Faisalabad, Pakistan Punjab, India

Ashok M. Raichur M.A. Salim

Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, Karnataka, India Technical University of Malaysia Melaka, Durian
Tunggal, Melaka, Malaysia
Ankush Raina
Shri Mata Vaishno Devi University, Katra, Jammu, Mohd S. Salit
India University Putra Malaysia, Serdang, Selangor, Malaysia
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
 BATTLE AT BACHELOR’S CREEK, N. C.
February 1, 1864.

Before daylight on the 1st of February, a Federal outpost at

Bachelor’s Creek, eight miles from Newbern, was attacked by a
Confederate force under General Picket, consisting of a portion of
Hoke’s, Corse’s and Clingman’s brigades. The Federal force was
surprised by a superior force, and after a gallant resistance were
defeated, with a loss of about one hundred in killed, wounded and
missing, and three hundred taken prisoners. The Confederate loss
was about forty in killed and wounded. While it was yet dark, the
same force of rebels descended the creek in barges, and captured and
burned the United States gunboat Underwriter, which was aground
between Forts Anderson and Stephen, within a mile and a half of
Newbern.
 CAPTURE OF PLYMOUTH, N. C.
April 19, 1864.

A serious misfortune befell the Federal arms on the above date in

the capture of Plymouth, an important town on the Roanoke river,
eight miles from its mouth. This town had been in possession of the
Union forces for about two years, by whom it had been almost
destroyed at the time of its capture. It had since been strongly
fortified, and placed in charge of a brave and competent officer, who
added new lustre to his well earned reputation, by a skillful and
soldierly defence. The town was on the south bank of the river. A
breastwork, with several strong forts along its line, had been
constructed, while about a mile up the river, another defence, called
Fort Gray, had been built, which was protected on the water front by
a triple row of piles, with a number of torpedoes attached.
The rebels had constructed a powerful iron-clad ram, called the
Albemarle, in the river above, which had been equipped for some
time, and was now only waiting the cooperation of land forces to join
in assailing the Federal defences.
Two Union gunboats, the Southfield and Miami, were anchored in
the river opposite the town. General Wessels’ garrison consisted of
two thousand five hundred men, and was composed of the One
Hundred and First, and the One Hundred and Third Pennsylvania
infantry, the Eighty-fifth New York, the Sixteenth Connecticut, two
companies of Massachusetts heavy artillery, two companies of North
Carolina volunteers, and the Twelfth New York cavalry.
About three P. M. on the 17th, the enemy made known his presence
by a fierce artillery fire upon Fort Gray, which continued till
midnight, and was commenced with increased force at daylight the
next morning. Before noon two charges were made on the works,
which were repulsed. The gunboats took position on either side of
the town, and did effective service in driving back the enemy. But
now a formidable opponent was approaching to attack them on their
own element. A picket boat stationed up the river gave warning that
the ram was coming down, and preparations were made to meet the
dreaded enemy. The two boats were lashed together, and thus
awaited the onset. When within one hundred yards the gunboats
opened fire, but made no impression on the iron-clad. The ram now
bore down on the Miami, upon whom she inflicted a slight blow, and
gliding off, struck the Southfield on her left side, crushing in her
timbers for a space of six or eight feet square. A shell thrown from
the Miami now struck the ram on her invulnerable sides, and
rebounding to the deck of the gunboat, killed her captain, Flusser,
and wounded eight persons. The boats were torn asunder by their
concussion with the ram, and as the Southfield was rapidly sinking,
her crew escaped in the boats; while the Miami, swinging round with
the current, was glad to make her escape from the unequal contest.
The Albemarle now came down to the mouth of the river, and in
that position held complete command of the town and its
approaches, and effectually shut off all hope of reinforcements or
supplies to the beleaguered garrison, who surrendered to Brigadier-
General Hoke, commander of the Confederate forces, on the ensuing
day. General Peck, the commander of the department, thus
eloquently conveyed the intelligence to his companions in-arms.

“Headquarters of the Army and District of }

North Carolina, Newbern, N. C., April 21, 1864. }

“With feelings of the deepest sorrow the commanding general announces the fall
of Plymouth, N. C., and the capture of its gallant commander, Brigadier-General H.
W. Wessels, and his command. This result, however, did not obtain until after the
most gallant and determined resistance had been made. Five times the enemy
stormed the lines of the general, and as many times were they repulsed with great
slaughter; and but for the powerful assistance of the rebel iron-clad ram, and the
floating sharpshooter battery, the Cotton Plant, Plymouth would still have been in
our hands. For their noble defence the gallant General Wessels and his brave band
have, and deserve the warmest thanks of the whole country, while all will
sympathize with them in their misfortune.
“To the officers and men of the navy the commanding general tenders his thanks
for their hearty cooperation with the army, and the bravery, determination, and
courage that marked their part of the unequal contest. With sorrow he records the
death of the noble sailor and gallant patriot, Lieutenant-Commander C. W. Flusser,
U. S. Navy, who in the heat of battle fell dead on the deck of his ship, with the
lanyard of his gun in his hand.
“The commanding general believes that these misfortunes will tend, not to
discourage, but to nerve the army of North Carolina to equal deeds of bravery and
gallantry hereafter.”

Sixteen hundred men, and twenty-five pieces of artillery were

captured. The rebel loss in the attack nearly equalled the number of
prisoners taken.

The town of Washington, on the Tar river, was burned in the

month of April, at the time it was evacuated by the Federal forces, by
unknown persons. This act of vandalism, uncalled for and inhuman,
was condemned in unmeasured terms by General Palmer, the
Federal commander. The majority of the inhabitants were loyal in
their sentiments, and many had enlisted in the Federal army.
Captain Melancthon Smith, who was shortly afterwards appointed
to command the navy in the waters of the Sound, adopted vigorous
measures of preparation to meet and subdue the Albemarle, which
for the space of one month had held undisputed possession of the
inner waters. On the 5th of May, with the Sassacus, the Wyalusing,
and four other vessels, he appeared at the mouth of the Roanoke
river, when the Albemarle, followed by a small tender, named the
Bombshell, came out to attack the Union gunboats. It was the design
of Captain Smith that the larger gunboats should get alongside their
antagonist, and fire upon her ports or roof, which were her most
vulnerable parts; but the eagerness of the smaller vessels to engage
rendered a near approach dangerous for some time, despite the
signals of the commander; and for half an hour the contest was
without result. The gunboats eluded the efforts of the Albemarle to
ram them, while their fire in turn was harmless to the enemy. But the
Sassacus, watching a favorable opportunity, struck the ram squarely
across her starboard beam, which caused her to careen until the
water washed over her deck and casemates, while from the close
proximity of the vessels, the crew of the Sassacus were enabled to
throw hand-grenades down the deck-hatch of the ram, while they
also made fruitless efforts to get powder into her smoke-stack. But
the Albemarle soon swung clear of her opponent, and in parting sent
a hundred-pounder rifle shot through her starboard boiler,
enveloping the Federal vessel in clouds of steam, and compelling her
to withdraw from the contest. The Bombshell was captured by the
Federal vessels, and the engagement closed without further result,
and with no serious injury.
 DESTRUCTION OF THE ALBEMARLE.

On the night of the 27th of October, Lieutenant W. B. Cushing, a

young naval officer who had already evinced great coolness and
daring in hazardous enterprises, was selected to take charge of a
small launch to which was attached a torpedo, and sent on the
dangerous mission of attempting the destruction of the Albemarle.
Selecting a crew of thirteen officers and men who volunteered for the
service, he passed several miles of the enemy’s pickets unobserved,
and arrived within twenty yards of the Albemarle before being hailed
by her lookouts. The torpedo boat was then steered under a full head
of steam direct for the ram, which lay at her wharf at Plymouth,
protected by a raft of logs extending outwards about thirty feet. Upon
the alarm being given by the lookouts, a confused fire of musketry
was opened by the rebels, which had little effect. “Passing her
closely,” says Lieutenant Cushing, “we made a complete circle, so as
to strike her fairly, and went into her bows on. By this time the
enemy’s fire was very severe, but a dose of canister at short range
served to moderate their zeal, and disturb their aim. In a moment we
had struck the logs, just abreast of the quarter-port, breasting them
in some feet, and our bows resting on them. The torpedo boom was
then lowered, and by a vigorous pull I succeeded in driving the
torpedo under the overhang, and exploded it at the same time the
Albemarle’s gun was fired. A shot seemed to go crashing through my
boat, and a dense mass of water rushed in from the torpedo, filling
the launch, and completely disabling her. The enemy then continued
to fire at fifteen feet range and demanded our surrender, which I
twice refused, ordering the men to save themselves, and removing
my own coat and shoes. Springing into the river, I swam with others
into the middle of the stream, the rebels failing to hit us.” Lieutenant
Cushing succeeded in reaching the opposite shore, and during the
next day made his way by stealth through the surrounding swamps
to a creek some distance below Plymouth, where he found a skiff
belonging to a rebel picket, in which he effected his escape to the
fleet. Only one other of his party succeeded in escaping, the rest
being either captured, killed, or drowned. The Albemarle was
completely submerged by the explosion of the torpedo, and so
remained long subsequent to the evacuation of Plymouth by the
rebels. This daring feat excited the admiration of the rebel no less
than of the Federal authorities, and obtained for Lieutenant Cushing
the thanks of Congress, and promotion to the next highest grade in
the service.
Capture of Plymouth—The main rebel defence of Plymouth
being thus removed, Commander Macomb, the senior naval officer
in the Sounds, with the vessels under his command immediately
pushed up the river to Plymouth, drove the rebels from their rifle-
pits and batteries, and on October 31st retook the town, capturing a
few prisoners, besides cannon, small arms, and ammunition.
 CAPTURE OF FORT FISHER, AND
WILMINGTON, N. C.
December 24, 1864-January 22, 1865.

During the earlier years of the rebellion, an extensive trade was

carried on through the port of Wilmington, N. C., and her merchants
were growing rich through a traffic with foreign nations, which the
most vigilant efforts of the numerous vessels employed on the
blockade were insufficient to prevent. The many shoals and inlets
which traversed and intersected her coast, the foggy and dark nights,
and the experienced eyes of the native pilots, combined to enable the
fleet steamers of light draught, which were employed in the trade, to
make many successful voyages, with but little risk; while the State
government was in receipt of handsome revenues, her perquisites in
a commerce of vast profit and extent.
Wilmington was the most important sea-coast port left to the
enemy, and besides was a point of great strategic value for army
movements, which had been long coveted by the Federal
Government. The navy had been making strenuous exertions to seal
the harbor of Wilmington, but with only partial effect. The nature of
the outlet of Cape Fear river was such that it required watching for so
great a distance, that, without possession of the land north of New
Inlet, or Fort Fisher, it was impossible for the navy to entirely close
the harbor against the entrance of blockade-runners.
The Federal Government had long sought an opportunity to break
up this trade, but it was not until September, 1864, that the
exigencies of the war permitted the equipment of an expedition
adapted to the capture and occupation of Fort Fisher and
Wilmington. A large fleet was collected in Hampton Roads, in the
earlier part of that month, under the command of Admiral D. D.
Porter, but it was late in December before all the vessels and
transports connected with the enterprise were prepared to sail for
their destination.
General Grant, in his report of this campaign, gives the following
details of the preliminary operation:

“To secure the possession of these places required the cooperation of a land
force, which I agreed to furnish. Immediately commenced the assemblage in
Hampton Roads, under Admiral D. D. Porter, of the most formidable armada ever
collected for concentration upon one given point. This necessarily attracted the
attention of the enemy, as well as that of the loyal North; and through the
imprudence of the public press, and very likely of officers of both branches of
service, the exact object of the expedition became a common subject of discussion
in the newspapers both north and south. The enemy, thus warned, prepared to
meet it. This caused a postponement of the expedition until the latter part of
November, when being again called upon by Honorable G. V. Fox, Assistant-
Secretary of the Navy, I agreed to furnish the men required at once, and went
myself, in company with Major-General Butler, to Hampton Roads, where we had
a conference with Admiral Porter as to the force required and the time of starting.
A force of six thousand five hundred men was regarded as sufficient. The time of
starting was not definitely arranged, but it was thought all would be ready by the
6th December, if not before. Learning on the 30th November that Bragg had gone
to Georgia, taking with him most of the forces about Wilmington, I deemed it of
the utmost importance that the expedition should reach its destination before the
return of Bragg, and directed General Butler to make all arrangements for the
departure of Major-General Weitzel, who had been designated to command the
land forces, so that the navy might not be detained one moment.
“On the 6th of December the following instructions were given:
“‘City Point, Va., December 6, 1864.

“‘General: The first object of the expedition under General Weitzel is to close to
the enemy the port of Wilmington. If successful in this, the second will be to
capture Wilmington itself. There are reasonable grounds to hope for success, if
advantage can be taken of the absence of the greater part of the enemy’s forces now
looking after Sherman in Georgia. The directions you have given for the numbers
and equipment of the expedition are all right, except in the unimportant matter of
where they embark and the amount of intrenchment tools to be taken. The object
of the expedition will be gained by effecting a landing on the main land between
Cape Fear river and the Atlantic, north of the north entrance to the river. Should
such landing be effected while the enemy still holds Fort Fisher, and the batteries
guarding the entrance to the river, then the troops should entrench themselves,
and, by cooperating with the navy, effect the reduction and capture of those places.
These in our hands, the navy could enter the harbor, and the port of Wilmington
would be scaled. Should Fort Fisher and the point of land on which it is built fall
into the hands of our troops immediately on landing, then it will be worth the
attempt to capture Wilmington by a forced march and surprise. If time is
consumed in gaining the first object of the expedition, the second will become a
matter of after consideration.
“‘The details for execution are intrusted to you and the officer immediately in
command of the troops.
“‘Should the troops under General Weitzel fail to effect a landing at or near Fort
Fisher, they will be returned to the armies operating against Richmond without
delay.
“‘U. S. GRANT, Lieutenant-General.

“‘Major-General B. F. Butler.’”

“General Butler commanding the army from which the troops were
taken for this enterprise, and the territory within which they were to
operate, military courtesy required that all orders and instructions
should go through him. They were so sent; but General Weitzel has
since officially informed me that he never received the foregoing
instructions, nor was he aware of their existence until he read
General Butler’s published official report of the Fort Fisher failure,
with my endorsement and papers accompanying it. I had no idea of
General Butler’s accompanying the expedition until the evening
before it got off from Bermuda Hundreds, and then did not dream
but that General Weitzel had received all the instructions, and would
be in command. I rather formed the idea that General Butler was
actuated by a desire to witness the effect of the explosion of the
powder-boat. The expedition was detained several days at Hampton
Roads, awaiting the loading of the powder-boat.
“The importance of getting the Wilmington expedition off without
any delay, with or without the powder-boat, had been urged upon
General Butler, and he advised to so notify Admiral Porter.
“The expedition finally got off on the 13th of December, and
arrived at the place of rendezvous, off New Inlet, near Fort Fisher, on
the evening of the 15th. Admiral Porter arrived on the evening of the
18th, having put in at Beaufort to get ammunition for the monitors.
The sea becoming rough, making it difficult to land troops, and the
supply of water and coal being about exhausted, the transport fleet
put back to Beaufort to replenish; this, with the state of the weather,
delayed the return to the place of rendezvous until the 24th.”
On the 25th a landing was effected without opposition, and a
reconnoissance, under Brevet Brigadier-General Curtis, pushed up
toward the fort.
The army consisted of General Ames’s division of the Twenty-
fourth corps, and of General Paine’s colored division of the Twenty-
fifth corps, numbering together six thousand five hundred effective
men.
The attacking force of Admiral Porter consisted of thirty-seven
vessels, five of which were iron-clads, with a reserve of thirteen
vessels, while the transports and smaller vessels were seventy in
number.
Colonel Comstock, chief military engineer of the expedition, thus
describes the defences of the inlet and Fort Fisher:
“The land front consists of a half bastion on the left or Cape Fear
river side, connected by a curtain with a bastion on the ocean side.
The parapet is twenty-five feet thick, averages twenty feet in height,
with traverses rising ten feet above it and running back on their tops,
which are from eight to twelve feet in thickness, to a distance of from
thirty to forty feet from the interior crest. The traverses on the left
half bastion are about twenty-five feet in length on top. The earth for
this heavy parapet and the enormous traverses at their inner ends,
more than thirty feet in height, was obtained partly from a shallow
exterior ditch, but mainly from the interior of the work. Between
each pair of traverses there was one or two guns. The traverses on
the right of this front were only partially completed. A palisade,
which is loopholed and has a banquette, runs in front of this face, at
a distance of fifty feet in front of the exterior slope, from the Cape
Fear river to the ocean, with a position for a gun between the left of
the front and the river, and another between the right of the front
and the ocean. Through the middle traverse on the curtain is a
bomb-proof postern whose exterior opening is covered by a small
redan for two field-pieces, to give flank fire along the curtain. The
traverses are generally bomb-proofed for men or magazines. The
slopes of the work appear to have been revetted with marsh sod or
covered with grass, and have an inclination of forty-five degrees or a
little less. * * * There were originally on this front twenty-one guns
and three mortars. * * * The sea front consists of a series of batteries,
mounting in all twenty-four guns, the different batteries being
connected by a strong infantry parapet so as to form a continuous
line. The same system of heavy traverses for the protection of the
guns is used as on the land front, and these traverses are also
generally bomb-proofed.” There was also a rebel battery,
commanding the channel, on Zeeke’s island, two miles southeast of
Fort Fisher, and several miles north of the latter were the Flag Pond
Hill and Half Moon batteries, serving as outworks to it.

The expedition was delayed two days waiting for the equipment of
a powder-boat, on which two hundred and fifteen tons of powder
were stored, with the hope of destroying the face of Fort Fisher, by its
explosion on the edge of the beach opposite the works. The gunboat
Louisiana was selected for the purpose, and disguised as a blockade-
runner, she approached the fort before daylight on the morning of
December 24th, was anchored four hundred yards from the works
without observation, and there exploded, producing no sensible
effect on the works. The rebels were not aware of the object of this
expedition, until informed through the northern papers.

VIEW OF A PARROTT GUN BURST ON BOARD THE SUSQUEHANNA AT THE

ATTACK ON FORT FISHER.
 At noon on the same day, the fleet got into position, and
bombarded the fort until dark. They renewed fire on the next
morning, and continued it without intermission all day. More than
twenty thousand shots were thrown from fifty vessels of war, while
the rebel response numbered only about twelve hundred shots.
Under cover of this tremendous fire, a body of troops was landed, on
the afternoon of the 25th, with the intention of storming the fort. The
ground in front and rear of the fort was torn up with shells, and some
of the guns dismounted; but a careful reconnoissance, under the eyes
of General Weitzel, revealed the fact that the fort was uninjured, and
that an attempt to storm the place with the force and material then at
the disposal of the commander-in-chief, could not be undertaken
with any probability of success. This view was sustained by other
engineer officers attached to the expedition, and was confirmed by
the evidence of the rebel commander of the fort. The troops were
accordingly reembarked on the transports, and returned to their
former position in the army of the James. The Committee on the
Conduct of the War, after a rigid examination of General Butler’s
conduct in this affair, acquitted him of all blame in the matter.
Almost from the first inception of the enterprise, there was a want
of harmony between General Butler and Admiral Porter, which
destroyed all unity of action, and contributed in great measure, to the
failure of the expedition. General Butler also incurred the severe
displeasure of General Grant, first in accompanying the expedition as
its commander, and finally by his conduct in withdrawing the troops,
which General Grant regarded as a breach of orders, for which
General Butler was immediately relieved from command.
The embarkation was accomplished on the morning of the 27th.
General Grant thus details the preliminaries of a subsequent
expedition in which Major-General A. H. Terry was appointed to
command the land forces:

“Soon after the return of the expedition, I received a dispatch from the Secretary
of the Navy, and a letter from Admiral Porter, informing me that the fleet was still
off Fort Fisher, and expressing the conviction that, under a proper leader, the place
could be taken. The natural supposition with me was that, when the troops
abandoned the expedition, the navy would do so also. Finding it had not, however,
I answered on the 30th of December, advising Admiral Porter to hold on, and that
I would send a force, and make another attempt to take the place. This time I
selected Brevet Major-General (now Major-General) A. H. Terry to command the
expedition. The troops composing it consisted of the same that composed the
former, with the addition of a small brigade, numbering about fifteen hundred, and
a small siege train. The latter it was never found necessary to land. I
communicated direct to the commander of the expedition, the following
instructions:
“City Point, Va., January 3, 1865.

“General: The expedition entrusted to your command has been fitted out to
renew the attempt to capture Fort Fisher, N. C., and Wilmington ultimately, if the
fort falls. You will, then, proceed with as little delay as possible to the naval fleet
lying off Cape Fear river, and report the arrival of yourself and command to
Admiral D. D. Porter, commanding North Atlantic blockading Squadron.
“It is exceedingly desirable that the most complete understanding should exist
between yourself and the naval commander. I suggest, therefore, that you consult
with Admiral Porter freely and get from him the part to be performed by each
branch of the public service, so that there may be unity of action. It would be well
to have the whole programme laid down in writing. I have served with Admiral
Porter, and know that you can rely on his judgment and his nerve to undertake
what he proposes. I would, therefore, defer to him as much as is consistent with
your own responsibilities. The first object to be attained is to get a firm position on
the spit of land on which Fort Fisher is built, from which you can operate against
that fort. You want to look to the practicability of receiving your supplies, and to
defending yourself against superior forces sent against you by any of the avenues
left open to the enemy. If such a position can be obtained, the siege of Fort Fisher
will not be abandoned until its reduction is accomplished, or another plan of
campaign is ordered from these headquarters.
“My own views are that, if you effect a landing, the navy ought to run a portion of
their fleet into Cape Fear river, while the balance of it operates on the outside.
Land forces cannot invest Fort Fisher or cut it off from supplies or reinforcements,
while the river is in possession of the enemy.
“A siege train will be loaded on vessels and sent to Fort Monroe, in readiness to
be sent to you if required. All other supplies can be drawn from Beaufort as you
need them.
“Keep the fleet of vessels with you until your position is assured. When you find
they can be spared, order them back, or such of them as you can spare, to Fort
Monroe, to report for orders.
“In case of failure to effect a lauding, bring your command back to Beaufort, and
report to these headquarters for further instructions. You will not debark at
Beaufort until so directed.
“General Sheridan has been ordered to send a division of troops to Baltimore,
and place them on sea-going vessels. These troops will be brought to Fort Monroe
and kept there on the vessels until you are heard from. Should you require them
they will be sent to you.
 “U. S. GRANT, Lieutenant-General.

“Brevet Major-General A. H. Terry.”

“Lieutenant-Colonel C. B. Comstock, aide-de-camp (now brevet

brigadier general), who accompanied the former expedition, was
assigned in orders as chief engineer to this.
“It will be seen that these instructions did not differ materially
from those given for the first expedition; and that in neither instance
was there an order to assault Fort Fisher. This was a matter left
entirely to the discretion of the commanding officer.”
The expedition sailed from Fort Monroe on the morning of the 6th,
arriving on the rendezvous, off Beaufort, on the 8th, where, owing to
the difficulties of the weather, it lay until the morning of the 12th,
when it got under way and reached its destination that evening.
The severity of the storm had scattered the vessels of the fleet, as
well as the transports, but on the 12th, the combined force was slowly
wending its way up the widely-expanded mouth of Cape Fear river.
Admiral Porter, in his flagship, the Malvern, took his station at the
head of the gunboat fleet, while the flag of General Terry was waving
from the McClellan. The ships in the long line were lost to view
beneath the roll of the waves, while the whole surface of the water,
far as the eye could reach, was dotted at short intervals by the
transports, in regular order, preceded and flanked by the guardian
gunboats.
Signal lights were rapidly interchanged between the squadron and
the blockade vessels near the shore, while an immense bonfire in the
rear of Fort Fisher, gave warning to the inhabitants of Wilmington of
the approach of the fleet.
On the morning of the 13th, the frigate Brooklyn, followed by other
vessels, skirted the shore, at the distance of a mile, throwing
enormous shells into the forest at intervals, and into every spot
where it was possible a rebel force or battery might be concealed.
After this effectual reconnoissance, preparations were made to land
the troops, and at three P. M. it was completed without loss. While
this was in progress, the New Ironsides, accompanied by the
monitors, took position within point-blank range of Fort Fisher, and
opened a terrific fire. The landing was effected upon a strip of hard
beach about two hundred feet in width, five miles above Fort Fisher.
Early in the afternoon the rebel fleet came down to Fort Fisher
from Wilmington, bringing reinforcements and supplies. At half past
four Admiral Porter signaled for the rest of the fleet to come forward
and take part in the bombardment. The fire of the ships was so
incessant that they soon became enveloped in their own smoke, and
beneath the power of the immense missiles hurled into the fort and
against its walls, the solid embankment began to crumble, and the
garrison to forsake their guns.
The troops had, meantime, slowly advanced towards the works,
hoping that a breach might soon be effected, sufficient to warrant an
assault. All night long a slow but constant fire was kept up by the
monitors, affording the garrison no opportunity of repose. At
daylight it was discovered that the flagstaff had been shot away, but
at eight o’clock it was replaced by another, showing the
determination of the garrison still to resist the tremendous force that
was arrayed against them.
The troops had now thrown up two lines of breastworks across the
peninsula, extending from the ocean to Cape Fear river, and had
advanced their line to within a mile of the fort.
During the morning of Sunday, the 15th, the bombardment still
continued, eliciting but feeble and occasional response from the
enemy, while the immense shots from the fleet were striking the fort,
for some time, at the rate of three or four a minute. By noon the sea
face of the fort was so battered that it was thought a successful
charge might be made. Under cover of the fire of the fleet, one
thousand six hundred sailors, armed with cutlasses, revolvers, and
carbines, and four hundred marines, the whole commanded by Fleet
Captain K. R. Breese, were landed on the beach, and by digging rifle-
pits worked their way up within two hundred yards of the fort. The
troops selected for the assault were Ames’s division, comprising the
brigades of Curtis, Pennypacker and Bell, while Paine’s division of
colored troops and Abbott’s brigade held the intrenchments facing
Wilmington, against which Hoke’s troops, estimated at five thousand
strong, had begun to demonstrate. At 3.30 P. M. signal was made from
the shore to the fleet to change the direction of the fire, in order that
the troops might assault; and soon afterwards the sailors rushed with
reckless energy toward the parapet of the fort, which at once
swarmed with rebel soldiers, who poured in upon them a murderous
fire of musketry. The marines, who were to have covered the
assaulting party, for some unexplained reason failed to fire upon the
rebels on the parapet, all of whom, in the opinion of Admiral Porter,
might have been killed. “I saw,” he said, “how recklessly the rebels
exposed themselves, and what an advantage they gave our
sharpshooters, whose guns were scarcely fired, or fired with no
precision. Notwithstanding the hot fire, officers and sailors in the
lead rushed on, and some even reached the parapet, a large number
having entered the ditch. The advance was swept from the parapet
like chaff, and, notwithstanding all the efforts made by the
commanders of companies to stay them, the men in the rear, seeing
the slaughter in front, and that they were not covered by the marines,
commenced to retreat; and, as there is no stopping a sailor, if he fails
on such an occasion on the first rush, I saw the whole thing had to be
given up.” The attack on this part of the fort, though a failure,
diverted a part of the enemy’s attention, and rendered the work laid
out for the main storming column of troops much easier.
At the word of command, the division of General Ames, which had
been gradually drawn forward under the shelter of hastily formed
breastworks, rushed toward the fort, the brigade of Curtis taking the
lead. The palisades had been so much injured by the fire of the fleet
that a few vigorous strokes from the axemen sufficed to clear gaps for
the passage of the troops, and, in the face of a severe enfilading fire, a
lodgment was soon effected on the west end of the land front.
Pennypacker’s and Bell’s brigades followed in rapid succession, the
latter moving between the work and the river. “On this side,” says
General Terry, “there was no regular parapet, but there was an
abundance of cover afforded to the enemy by cavities, from which
sand had been taken for the parapet, the ruins of barracks and
storehouses, the large magazine, and by traverses behind which they
stubbornly resisted our advance. Hand-to-hand fighting of the most
desperate character ensued. The first brigade dashed forward with a
run, and reaching the parapet near the western extremity of the
north face, gained a foothold within the enclosed space of the fort, by
entering within through the gaps of the palisades. They had now not
only to maintain the position they had obtained, but to advance, in
the face of a determined foe, to the succeeding traverses, over thirty
feet in height, and were compelled to capture nine or ten in
succession before the rebel forces yielded to the repeated assaults.
Each traverse was in reality an independent fort, enclosing within
its dense walls, a room entered by a passage so narrow that two men
could easily defend it against a large force. During the assault,
General Ames’ men were exposed to a galling fire of artillery and
musketry, while Fort Buchanan on the southwest also opened fire on
the Federal columns. Abbott’s brigade and a regiment of colored
troops, dispatched by General Terry, reinforced General Ames before
dark, followed soon after by the general-in-chief and his staff.
Generals Curtis and Pennybacker were badly wounded in the assault,
and Colonel Bell received mortal injuries.
It was not until after ten o’clock at night that all resistance ceased,
and the star-spangled banner floated out in the bright moonlight
unchallenged over the crumbled ramparts. When General Terry
telegraphed to Admiral Porter the final result, “we stopped fire,” says
the Admiral, “and gave them three of the heartiest cheers I ever
heard. It was the most terrific struggle I ever saw. The troops have
covered themselves with glory; and General Terry is my beau-ideal of
a general.” The garrison consisted of two thousand three hundred
men, of whom one thousand nine hundred and seventy-one, with
one hundred and twelve officers, were captured. The rest were killed
and wounded. Their commanders, General Whiting and Colonel
Lamb, were both captured, badly wounded.
The loss of the Federal army was one hundred and ten killed, and
five hundred and thirty-six wounded. That of the navy was between
two and three hundred in killed and wounded, principally in the
assaulting, column of sailors, and by the explosion of two fifteen-inch
guns on board the monitors. The ships sustained but trifling damage.
The greater part of the guns of the fort were dismounted, or
otherwise injured by the fire of the fleet, but the work itself received
no damage which was not susceptible of immediate repair, its
strength being about the same as before the bombardment.
According to Admiral Porter, who had visited the Malakoff during
the siege of Sebastopol, Fort Fisher was a much more formidable
work than that celebrated stronghold. Its capture caused an almost
unprecedented rejoicing throughout the United States. The capture
of the fort sealed the fate of the rebel supremacy in Cape Fear river.
 On the 16th and 17th the enemy abandoned and blew up Fort
Caswell and the works on Smith’s island, which were immediately
occupied by the Federal forces.
The advance up the river was a continuous battle. On the night of
the 21st, the rebels commenced destroying their materials and stores
in Wilmington. Fifteen thousand barrels of resin, and one thousand
bales of cotton were destroyed, and extensive cotton sheds, steam-
mills and turpentine works were consumed. At daylight on the
morning of the 22d, General Terry’s troops entered the city, and the
reign of the rebellion in that important city was at an end.
 KILPATRICK’S CAVALRY RAID TOWARD
RICHMOND.
February 28-March 5, 1864.

A very daring and successful expedition was undertaken by this

intrepid leader on the 28th of February, in which much damage was
inflicted on the two principal railroads on which General Lee
received supplies for his army, and a great deal of public property
was destroyed. The command left Stevensburgh, Virginia, on Sunday
night, March 28, and crossing Fly’s Ford, on the Rapidan, proceeded
thence by rapid marches to Spottsylvania, Beaver Dam Station, on
the Virginia Central railroad, to the fortifications of Richmond,
crossing the Virginia Central railroad and the Chickahominy river
near the Meadows, and the White House railroad, a little east of
Tunstall’s Station, thence to New Kent Court-House and
Williamsburgh Court-House.
General Kilpatrick was not without hopes of entering Richmond by
a surprise movement, and also of liberating many Federal prisoners,
who were confined in that city and its environs.
In order to divert the attention of the rebel commanders from the
proposed raid, and also to attract the bulk of their cavalry in other
directions, fifteen hundred cavalry, led by General Custer, under
cover of an advance by the Sixth and Third corps to Madison Court-
House, left Culpepper Court-House simultaneously with the
departure of Kilpatrick from Stevensburgh. General Custer, after
advancing to within a few miles of Charlottesville, found the
Confederates in very heavy force, and hopeful of cutting off his
command, which had now advanced twenty miles beyond infantry
support. In order to avoid the enemy, he led his men through Luray
Valley, by one of the gaps of the Blue Ridge, thus avoiding a very
formidable force that was waiting to intercept him at the road by
which he went out. Several small bodies of the enemy were
encountered, and sixty prisoners taken. Ten or twelve of the Federals
were wounded in these encounters, but no lives were lost, and
General Custer reached the infantry lines at Madison, in safety.
General Kilpatrick’s force consisted of his own division, a portion
of Merritt’s and Gregg’s divisions, and a light battery of six guns, in
all nearly eight thousand men. The troops reached Spottsylvania late
at night, and a detachment headed by Captain Estes, of Kilpatrick’s
staff, one of the bravest men in the army, moved rapidly forward to
Beaver Dam on the Virginia Central railroad, reaching that place at
five p. m on Monday, when the work of destruction commenced.
Small parties were sent up and down the railroad to tear up the
track, burn the bridges, and destroy the rails by heating and bending
them; this was comparatively an easy task, for there were thousands
of cords of pine wood piled along the track. A large new brick freight-
house, the telegraph office, passenger-depot, engine-house, water-
tank, several cars, and a number of outbuildings, were all set on fire.
While engaged in this work, a train loaded with troops appeared, and
a portion of them disembarked. A charge was made by the cavalry, in
which thirty-two of the rebels were captured.
At Frederickshall, a “court martial” was captured, consisting of a
colonel, five captains and two lieutenants.
Detachments were now sent out in various directions, in order to
destroy the railroad at other points, while the main body moved
forward, and on Monday night crossed the South Anna river. The
detached parties encountered small bodies of the enemy in all
directions, and skirmished with varied success.
Tuesday morning, at half-past ten, found the command passing
the outer earthworks on the Brook turnpike, within three and a half
miles of Richmond. Several citizen soldiers were here captured, and
many of the inhabitants encountered, who were unsuspicious of the
character of the Federal cavalry. When within the second line of
defences, the skirmishers encountered the first shots from Battery
No. 9, near the third line. Skirmishing was here kept up until
between four and five o’clock, General Kilpatrick anxiously awaiting
some tidings from Colonel Dahlgren’s command; when relinquishing
hopes of the success of that officer in his attempt to reach Richmond
by way of the James river canal, General Kilpatrick withdrew in the
direction of Mechanicsville, burning the trestle-work of the railroad
across the Chickahominy on his route.
Colonel Dahlgren, with five hundred men, was detached at
Frederickshall, with instructions to move to the right of Richmond,
and destroy as much of the James river canal as possible, and
attempt the deliverance of the prisoners at Belle Isle.
Colonel Dahlgren had taken a negro to pilot him to Richmond. His
detachment had rapidly moved across the country, destroying barns,
forage and everything which could possibly be of service to the
enemy. He soon discovered that his negro guide had betrayed him,
and led him toward Goochland instead of to Richmond, and on
Tuesday night he found himself miles in the opposite direction from
that which he wished to take. Exasperated by this treachery, the men
burned the barns and outbuildings of John A. Seddons, the rebel
Secretary-of-War. Retracing his steps, Colonel Dahlgren marched
down the river road, destroying the Dover flour mills, and several
flouring establishments and saw mills. His force also did
considerable injury to the James river canal, burning canal boats and
seriously damaging one or two locks. They did not reach the
immediate vicinity of Richmond till afternoon, when everybody was
on the alert, Kilpatrick having already made his attack.
Colonel Dahlgren’s detachment was divided into several parties for
the accomplishment of different objects, keeping together, however.
One party attempted to cross the river, but were repulsed. A very
sharp fight ensued, and, finding the enemy in superior numbers and
confronting them on every road, the force was compelled to fall back.
In attempting to cut their way out, Colonel Dahlgren and Major
Cook of the Second New York, with about one hundred and fifty men
were separated from the rest, and Colonel Cook was taken prisoner.
The other detachments succeeded in rejoining General Kilpatrick.
A Confederate correspondent thus describes the tragic close of
Colonel Dahlgren’s expedition:
“Lieutenant Pollard had been watching the movements of the
enemy all day on Wednesday, in King William, and ascertained that
night that Dahlgren, with about two hundred of his followers, had
crossed the Mattapony at Aylett’s. With his own men he crossed over
and followed the retreating raiders. On reaching the forks of the
road, a few miles above Walkertown, Lieutenant Pollard learned that
the enemy had taken the river road, leading to that place. Leaving a
few men to follow on after them, he quitted the main road with the
larger portion of the force at his disposal, and by a circuitous route
and forced march, he succeeded in throwing himself in front of the
enemy and awaited his approach. In the mean time he had been
joined by the home guards of King and Queen County, and a few men
of Robbins’s battalion. A little before eleven o’clock at night the
enemy approached on the road in which they were posted. A fire was
at once opened upon them; but their leader, Colonel Dahlgren,
relying, perhaps, upon their numbers, or stung by chagrin at his
failure to capture Richmond, determined to force his way through,
and at once forming his men, ordered a charge, which he led himself.
It proved, however, a fatal charge to him; for, in the onset, he was
pierced with a ball and fell dead. After his fall, the command could
not be rallied, but were soon thrown into confusion inextricable. Our
boys, noticing this, availed themselves of the opportunity it afforded,
and used it to the best advantage. Dashing in among the discomfited
foe, they succeeded in capturing ninety prisoners, thirty-five negroes,
and one hundred and fifty horses. The body of Dahlgren also fell into
their hands.”
A cavalry force from General Butler’s command had been sent out
from Williamsburg, to render assistance, if needed, to General
Kilpatrick. A junction was effected at Tunstall’s Station, and the
whole body, accompanied by the balance of Colonel Dahlgren’s
cavalry, proceeded to Williamsburg. The entire loss of the expedition
was about one hundred and fifty in killed and wounded, and one
hundred and sixty in prisoners and missing.
 OPERATIONS IN ARKANSAS IN 1864.

In January, 1864, a Convention of Delegates, representing the

people of Arkansas, met at Little Rock, and remodelled the State
Constitution, so as forever to abolish slavery. The Convention also
elected a Provisional Government, under which efforts were made to
restore quiet throughout the State. But the Confederates were still
powerful in Arkansas, and the current of affairs was frequently vexed
by rebel demonstrations, throughout the year. Engagements between
the Unionists and roving squads of rebels were numerous, and
sometimes disastrous. The organized forces of the Confederacy,
stationed at various points in the State, numbered upwards of
twenty-one thousand, and they were rarely idle.
Among the many minor battles which were fought at this time may
be mentioned that of Cotton Plant, which happened on the twenty-
second of April, and which may stand as a type of all the rest. It was
incidental to the progress of an expedition, which had been sent out
from Little Rock, to relieve the town of Batesville, on White river,
from a threatened attack by the rebels under General McRae. The
National force consisted of the Eighth Missouri cavalry, and was
commanded by Colonel, afterwards General Andrews. The battle
lasted four hours, and was hotly contested. The Unionists lost
twenty-seven men, killed and wounded, while the rebel loss was
upwards of one hundred. Colonel Andrews’s horse was shot beneath
him. The expedition resulted successfully.
The most important military movement, however, which took
place in Arkansas, this year, was an expedition from Little Rock, that
set forth on the twenty-third of March, moving in a southwesterly
direction, and designed to cooperate with General Banks, in his
advance on Shreveport, Louisiana. The National force consisted of
the Seventh Army Corps. The expedition was not successful in its
ultimate design, but it led to one important battle, and it enabled the
Unionists, in several encounters with the enemy, to display great
courage and endurance and to win distinction. On the fifteenth of
April, after frequent fights with detachments of the rebels, under
Marmaduke, Shelby, Cabell, and Dockery, General Steele took
possession of Camden, an important point on the Washita river.
Here he remained eleven days, when he received intelligence of
disaster to Banks, such as would preclude the proposed attack on
Shreveport, and learned, also, that Kirby Smith was advancing, with
eight thousand troops, to reinforce Price. Under those circumstances
General Steele resolved to abandon Camden and retire towards Little
Rock. This movement was begun on the night of April twenty-eighth.
On the thirtieth the enemy was encountered, near Jenkins’s Ferry, on
the river Sabine, where occurred the important fight which we have
mentioned above. The enemy’s force was found to be large, and
consisted of all his troops in southwestern Arkansas, and also some
from Louisiana, and was commanded by General Smith, General
Price, General Walker, and General Churchill. The forces under
General Steele consisted of the commands of Generals Salomon,
Rice, Thayer, Ingleman, and Colonel Benton. It was found impossible
to cross the Sabine on the night when the troops reached it, in
consequence of a heavy rainstorm and intense darkness, but the
pontoon bridge was laid, and a small force of the Unionists crossed
over. On the morning of the battle the rain poured in torrents, and in
the midst of the storm the artillery trains and men were obliged to
cross the river. Skirmishing had commenced in the rear with the first
dawn of day, and a general and fierce engagement speedily
succeeded, which continued for seven hours. The enemy fought with
the wild desperation which characterized all their pitched battles, but
were finally repulsed with very heavy loss. General Steele lost seven
hundred men in killed and wounded, but secured a safe retreat to
Little Rock, which he reached on the second day of May; and also
redeemed, for the time, that portion of Arkansas and the State of
Missouri from the hands of the rebels. The conduct of the troops
under General Steele was of the most noble description throughout
the whole campaign, as will be seen by the following address to his
men:
 Headquarters Department of Arkansas, }
Little Rock, May 9. }

“To you, troops of the Seventh Army Corps, who participated in the recent
campaign designed to cooperate with General Banks’s movement against
Shreveport, the Major-General commanding tenders his earnest and grateful
thanks. Although you were compelled to fall back without seeing the main object of
the expedition accomplished, you will have the satisfaction of knowing that you
have beaten the enemy wherever he has met you in force, and extricated yourselves
from the perilous position in which you were placed by the reverses of the
cooperating column. This let loose upon you a superior force of the enemy, under
one of their best generals, causing the loss of your trains and the total interruption
of your communications, rendering it impossible for you to obtain supplies. You
have fallen back over rivers and swamps, while pressed by a superior force of the
enemy. This you have done successfully, punishing the enemy severely at the same
time.
“The patience with which you have endured hardships and privations, and your
heroic conduct on the battle-field, have been brought to the notice of the
Government, and will furnish a page in the history of this war of which you may
well be proud.
“F. STEELE, Major-General Commanding.”

The rebel force subsequently became still more formidable in the

State of Arkansas, owing to the failure of Banks’s Red river
expedition. Large forces of Confederates, relieved from the necessity
of opposing Banks, were enabled to concentrate in Arkansas, and
keep General Steele at bay, in Little Rock. So completely, indeed, did
the rebels overrun the State, that, by the close of the year 1864, Little
Rock, Fort Smith, Pine Bluff, Duval’s Bluff, and a few other points,
were all that the National arms preserved. The State was, likewise,
furnished with a rebel State government; and, altogether its affairs
seemed anything but promising to the hopes of the Unionists within
its borders.
Having ample troops in Arkansas, and desiring to work as much
mischief as possible, the rebel General Price projected an
 INVASION OF MISSOURI.
September, 1864.

This movement, as may well be imagined, created no small

excitement. It led, moreover, to several lively encounters between the
Unionists and the Confederates, but it ended in utter discomfiture to
the rebel arms. General Price’s forces consisted of between fifteen
and twenty thousand men, while, at the time his invasion
commenced—September 21st, 1864—the Union troops in Missouri,
commanded by General Rosecrans, numbered less than seven
thousand. At the first note of danger, however, reinforcements were
hurried forward to the aid of that gallant commander. It appeared, at
first, as if the rebels proposed moving on Springfield; but, eventually,
they turned in the direction of St. Louis. They were first encountered
at Pilot Knob, which was bravely and successfully defended by the
Union forces under General Ewing, consisting of the Fourteenth
Iowa and the Forty-seventh Missouri, with detachments of the State
militia. A severe fight took place at Pilot Knob, on September 27th, in
which the rebels were discomfited. Meanwhile, St. Louis was rapidly
put into condition to meet and repel any possible rebel attack, and a
large force of State troops, under Generals Brown and Fisk, was
concentrated at Jefferson City, the capital of Missouri. Toward this
point the rebel chieftain finally led his army. His advance was
successfully withstood, however, by the Union Generals, who
succeeded in saving the State capital, and destroying the hopes of the
rebels.
Upon the 8th of October, General Pleasanton assumed command
at Jefferson City, and his first step was to send General Sanborn,
with a mounted force of four thousand men in pursuit of the enemy,
with the view of harassing and hindering them, until the remaining
Union cavalry and infantry supports should arrive at the State
capital. The enemy’s rear-guard was by this movement forced back
upon their main body at Bruenville, and so kept between the
Missouri river and the National force, until the 19th of the month,
when the Unionists were joined by Wilson’s command, fifteen
thousand strong, making the National force in all forty-five thousand
men, exclusive of escort-guards.
A small force attacked the rebels under General Fagan at
Independence on the 22d, and routed them with loss, capturing two
valuable guns. A contest with the enemy’s main force took place on
the following day, in which the rebels were driven beyond the Little
Santa Fe; and, on the 24th, after marching sixty miles, the Unionists
overtook a party of rebels, about midnight, at a place called Marais
des Cygnes. At four o’clock on the ensuing morning, sharp
skirmishing began, and the enemy was driven from the field with a
heavy loss of horses, mules, ammunition, &c. Still fighting, they
retreated to Little Osage Crossing, where the pursuing Unionists,
under Colonels Benteen and Phillips, made a charge upon them,
capturing eight pieces of artillery, and more than one thousand
prisoners, among whom were General Marmaduke and General
Cabell. The National troops, under General Sanborn, kept up the
pursuit, with many and always successful charges, until the enemy
had been driven to Marinton; where, under cover of the night, the
rebels effected their escape towards Arkansas. But they had not yet
got rid of their pursuers. A force of Kansas troops, and Colonel
Benteen’s brigade, followed close upon them, and on the 28th, they
were overtaken at Newtonia, where they made their last stand. Again
they were routed, and the final blow was struck at the unsuccessful
invasion of the State. All General Price’s schemes were signally
defeated, and he inflicted no serious injury except upon the narrow
belt of country over which his army moved. His loss was ten pieces of
artillery; a very large quantity of small arms; the greater number of
his trains and plunder; one thousand nine hundred and fifty-eight
prisoners, and a long list of killed, wounded, and deserters. The
National loss amounted to three hundred and forty-six in officers
and men.
 OPERATIONS IN GEORGIA.

GENERAL SHERMAN’S MARCH TO ATLANTA.

On the 14th of March, 1864, General Sherman, then at Memphis,
Tenn., was officially informed that he had been appointed to succeed
General Grant, as commander of the Department of the Mississippi.
Upon the same day General Sherman set out for Nashville, there to
hold a conference with General Grant. That conference took place on
the 17th, and having discussed at length the steps to be taken, and
the policy for the ensuing campaign, General Sherman accompanied
General Grant as far eastward as Cincinnati, where they parted. The
former then returned to Nashville, and undertook a tour of
inspection, visiting, in Alabama, the cities of Athens, Decatur, and
Huntsville, and Larkin’s Ferry; and in Tennessee, Chattanooga,
Loudon, and Knoxville. General Sherman had personal interviews
with each of the following generals, in command in that section of
the country;—Major-General Thomas, commanding the Army of the
Cumberland, at Chattanooga; Major-General McPherson,
commanding the Army of the Tennessee, at Huntsville; and Major-
General Schofield, commanding the Army of the Ohio, at Knoxville.
In these several interviews, the 1st of May was agreed upon as the
time for a general movement.
General Sherman next turned his attention to the question of
supplies for the army, which at first necessitated a temporary
stoppage of provisions for many of the people in Tennessee, who had
been receiving their food from the supplies intended for the army.
Fortunately no positive suffering resulted from this step, which
General Sherman was compelled to take in duty to the soldiers under
his command; and in a short time all hardships were done away with,
as the rich soil sent forth an early vegetation, and meat and grain
were brought from Kentucky in large quantities by the ox-wagons
constantly plying to and fro between that State and Chattanooga.
On the 27th of April, General Sherman put all the troops under his
command in motion for Chattanooga; and on the next day he
followed them there in person. It was his aim to make the Army of
the Cumberland number fifty thousand men; that of the Tennessee,
thirty-five thousand; and that of the Ohio, fifteen thousand; but this
he never was enabled to do, as the Army of the Tennessee failed to
receive General A. J. Smith’s divisions from the Mississippi, which
were unable to join the other forces at the time designated, in
consequence of the failure of the Red river expedition. The effective
strength of the several armies was, on the 21st of May, as follows:
Army of the Cumberland, sixty thousand seven hundred and seventy-
three men, and one hundred and thirty guns; Army of the Tennessee,
twenty-four thousand four hundred and sixty-five men, and ninety-
six guns; and the Army of the Ohio, thirteen thousand five hundred
and fifty nine men, and twenty-eight guns. On the morning of May
6th, these armies were grouped thus:—The Cumberland, at and
about Ringgold; the Tennessee, at Gordon’s Mills, on the
Chickamauga; and Ohio, close by Red Clay, on the Georgia line,
north of Dalton.
The enemy, under the rebel general, Joseph Johnston, was in and
around Dalton; the force numbering in all about sixty thousand men
—the cavalry numbering ten thousand under General Wheeler; and
the infantry and artillery—three corps—numbering fifty thousand,
under command of Generals Hardee, Hood, and Polk.
The city of Dalton was covered in front with an inaccessible ridge,
known as the Rocky Face, which rendered it impracticable to strike
at it from that direction; and on the north front the enemy was
further protected by a strong line of works along Mill Creek. General
Sherman finding these two points guarded, next turned his attention
to the south, and found, through Snake Creek Gap, a good way to
reach Resaca, an important point on the rebel line of
communication, about eighteen miles below Dalton. General
McPherson was ordered to move directly on Resaca, through Snake
Gap, while, to occupy the enemy’s attention, General Thomas was
ordered to make a strong feint in front, and General Schofield on the
north of the city. These movements were successfully carried out;