In the Shadow of Robert Gould Shaw

A young officer with a promising future serves as colonel of a colored regiment and is killed leading his regiment into battle. His tragic death is mourned by his troops, who go on to further their hard-earned reputation as fighting men. This of course is the story of Robert Gould Shaw of the Fifty-fourth Massachusetts Infantry.

It is also the story of Charles Wesley Fribley of the Eighth U.S. Colored Infantry. He and Gould have much in common.

Both attended college. Boston-born Gould spent three years at Harvard and Fribley, born and raised on a farm in Lycoming County, Pennsylvania, attended Dickinson Seminary in Williamsport.

Both began their Civil War service in a three-month regiment and became line officers in other regiments before taking the helm of colored infantrymen. Gould served in the Seventh New York and Second Massachusetts and rose in rank from second lieutenant to captain. Fribley served in the Eleventh and Eighty-fourth Pennsylvania and rose in rank from sergeant to captain and adjutant.

Both became colonels in colored regiments in 1863. Gould became major of the Fifty-fourth in March and advanced to colonel in April. Fribley became colonel of the Eighth in November.

Both men died in action after being in charge of their regiments for three months. Gould suffered a mortal wound in the assault on Fort Wagner, South Carolina, in July 1863. He died at age twenty-five. Fribley suffered a mortal wound rallying his men in the Battle of Olustee, Florida, in February 1864. He died at age twenty-eight.

Both men were buried with their men on the field of battle. Those who survived went on to fight with distinction in other battles until the end of the war

Gould left behind more than 200 letters. His story, and those of the men of the Fifty-fourth, were told on the big screen in the movie Glory.

Fribley and the Eighth were memorialized in Hymn of the Freedman soon after the colonel's death. His story, and those of his men, have faded from national memory.

Photo credits: Robert Gould Shaw from the National Gallery of Art; Charles Wesley Fribley from the American Civil War Research Database.

Streamlining the Military Courts

The military service file of a soldier in the Eighth U.S. Colored Infantry includes a document that details the proceedings of a trial. It is fairly common to find records of this kind for individuals who have broken the rules and are brought before a formal courts martial. However, this case is different, because the soldier appeared before a less formal Field Officers Court.

This is the first time I've come across this reference, and it required me to make a side journey off the main research trial to learn more about this type of organization.

I emailed my friend Michael Schaffner, who has a keen interest in clerical and other bureaucratic functions of the volunteer armies during the war and has portrayed a clerk as a living historian. He replied quickly, and, in a follow-up discussion in person the next day, explained how the Field Officers Court came into existence by an 1862 Act of Congress. The goal was to relieve stress on the general courts martial by allowing minor infractions to be tried on the regimental level. The field officers presiding over each trial were led by the lieutenant colonel or major.

Maj. Gen. William T. Sherman was a fan of the innovation. He wrote in his Memoirs (Vol. 2, p. 397):

In camp, and especially in the presence of an active enemy, it is much easier to maintain discipline than in barracks in time of peace. Crime and breaches of discipline are much less frequent, and the necessity for courts-martial far less. The captain can usually inflict all the punishment necessary, and the colonel should always. The field-officers' court is the best form for war, viz., one of the field-officers — the lieutenant-colonel or major — can examine the case and report his verdict, and the colonel should execute it. Of course, there are statutory offenses which demand a general court-martial, and these must be ordered by the division or corps commander; but the presence of one of our regular civilian judge-advocates in an army in the field would be a first-class nuisance, for technical courts always work mischief. Too many courts-martial in any command are evidence of poor discipline and inefficient officers.

The Field Officers Court was not adopted by all regiments. The Eighth U.S. Colored Infantry did, and in the case of the soldier mentioned above, he plead guilty to being absent without leave and received a ten dollar fine: A small infraction handled appropriately and quickly be his peers, without bogging down the larger organization in extra paperwork and taking time from an already overburdened court system and the officers detailed to it.