The Resignation of Major William Marsh

by Ed Stanard

Major William Robert Marsh was born in Walpole, NH, January 26, 1828, and served in the Tenth Regiment Massachusetts Militia for ten years prior to the Civil War, rising from fourth - lieutenant to captain of Company C. He was a hotel - keeper in Northampton at the start of the war. Marsh was commissioned Major of the 10th Massachusetts Volunteer Infantry Regiment upon recommendation of Colonel Henry Shaw Briggs on June 21, 1861. He resigned June 14, 1862, soon after the Battle of Fair Oaks, under what appear to be less than honorable circumstances. The following article was printed in the Greenfield, Massachusetts newspaper, June 16, 1862:

"MAJOR MARSH -- People, when they read that after Col. Briggs was wounded, in the Fair Oaks fight, Capt. Miller took command, ask where the Major of the regiment was? Lieut. - Col. Decker had been sick for a week with the rheumatism in his back, but while the action raged he went into the field on crutches and remained as long as he could, but Major Marsh is not heard of. A letter in the Springfield Republican of last Thursday, from a person who was in the action, plainly intimates that he lacked pluck, and therefore kept himself beyond the range of shot, and such is the prevailing opinion of the troops, we suppose. We learn, however, that the Major justifies his absence in this way: He was ordered by Gen. Couch to a certain place of duty, and soon after an aid [sic] of the general ordered him elsewhere. Obeying the aid [sic], he was met by Gen. Couch, who finding he was not in the post he had ordered him to, instantly put him under arrest. In this way he was prevented from taking part in the action. Generals are obliged to be arbitrary and require instant and exact obedience in time of battle, and they are obliged to act on the apparent circumstances existing, as they have no time to investigate matters then. According to this aspect of the case, Major Marsh is not culpable as a coward, but simply for a mistake in the discharge of his duty. The matter, we suppose, will be looked into by a court martial, unless Gen. Couch should be satisfied with Major Marsh’s explanation, and release him without formal investigation, which we hope will be done. The rest of the regiment behaved so well that it would be unpleasant to have the blot of a cowardly Major upon its otherwise bright escutcheon. Major Marsh belongs at Northampton."

The newspaper was probably correct in saying that the prevailing opinion of the troops was against Marsh, for Adjutant Charles Brewster “accused Marsh of ‘cowardice before the enemy.’ Rather than allow Marsh to face court-martial, members of the Tenth (Brewster included) signed a petition allowing him to resign, which he did on June 14. Marsh is also the man Brewster blamed for preventing him from receiving a commission earlier, and for forcing the contraband issue to a proslavery position." 1

Private Berea M. Willsey was less charitable, for his diary entry of June 6, 1862, says “... Our Major is under arrest for running away from the Regt. & it is hinted that our adjutant [probably Lieutenant Hiram A. Keith, who was Acting Adjutant while Adjutant Oliver Edwards was serving on General Couch’s staff] will go the same way. They are both errant cowards & not fit to be called men. I hope they will be put through."2

However, Regimental historian Joseph K. Newell, says, "After Colonel Briggs was wounded, Lieutenant - Colonel Decker being laid up with rheumatism, and Major Marsh being absent as brigade officer of the day, the command devolved upon Captain Miller, as the senior officer present."3

In his official report of the Battle of Fair Oaks (O.R., Vol. XI, Part I, p. 910) Colonel Briggs says, “Major Marsh was in the discharge of his duty with the Regiment until after it had reformed, upon retreating from the felled timber. Afterwards, he informed me he was ordered to take command of some broken detachments from other commands, that appeared in the vicinity without officers.” It appears that Colonel Briggs took Major Marsh at his word, since Briggs had been wounded and carried off the field by that time.

General Darius Couch, in his official report of Fair Oaks (O.R., Vol. XI, Part I, p. 881) states, "General Devens with only two regiments held his ground firmly, pouring in a most destructive fire at short distance, the Thirty-sixth New York not retiring until ordered, while the Tenth Massachusetts, though its colonel (Briggs) was carried off severely wounded, its lieutenant-colonel sick, and was a part of the time off the field, its major going to the rear without cause, yet under the brave Captain Miller held its position until outflanked and several orders had been given it to fall back." Newell printed the above quote, conveniently omitting the portion about the Major. Also conspicuous in the Regimental histories is the omission of any photograph of Major Marsh, though all others to the rank of Captain are included.

Newell later says, "Saturday, June 14 -- Major Marsh received his discharge to-day, and has started for home. The major was not in good repute at division head-quarters since the battle of Fair Oaks, and a court martial had been proposed. The affair was compromised by the resignation of the major."4 Adjutant Charles Brewster, in a letter date Sunday, June 15, 1862, says, "As Major Marsh’s resignation has been accepted and he is going home to day, I improved the opportunity to send home my Overcoat, my sash ands a secesh epaulette, which belonged to a major in the secesh army."5

If, as he stated, Major Marsh was ordered from his post by an aide to General Couch (could it have been Oliver Edwards?), it should have been a simple matter for him to have that officer, or other witnesses, corroborate his story. It is obvious that General Couch did not accept Major Marsh’s version of his actions at Fair Oaks and was going ahead with the court martial. Marsh resigned (before the above letter was published in Greenfield) rather than face charges of cowardice in the face of the enemy.

I leave it to the reader to decide which version of Major Marsh’s actions on the field at Fair Oaks to believe. However construed, this apparent blot on the record of the Tenth, albeit by a high ranking officer, should in no way detract from the glorious and heroic actions of the Regiment in their first, and most costly, engagement with the enemy.

1 David W. Blight, ed., When This Cruel War Is Over, The Civil War Letters of Charles Harvey Brewster (Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts Press, 1992) p. 357

2 Jessica DeMay, ed., The Civil War Diary of Berea M. Willsey, The Intimate Daily Observations of a Massachusetts Volunteer in the Union Army (Bowie, Maryland: Heritage Books Inc., 1995) p. 26

3 Captain Joseph Keith Newell, Ours, Annals of the 10th Regiment, Massachusetts Volunteers, In the Rebellion (Springfield, Massachusetts: C. A. Nichols & Co., 1875) p. 100

4 Newell, page 118

5 Blight, page54