On the evening of May 2, 1918, a distant uncle of today's Republican presidential candidate John McCain sent a telegram from the nation's capital to Bristol builder Michael O'Sullivan.The telegram, from Major Gen. Henry Pickney McCain, the adjutant general of the Army, didn't say a whole lot and yet it said entirely too much.
"Deeply regret to inform you that Private William O'Sullivan, infantry, is officially reported as killed in action April twentieth," it said. The military didn't even pay the few cents to put the sender's full name. It just said "McCain, adjutant."
For the 26-year-old soldier's family, the cold, impersonal news came as a shock, though by then they knew that O'Sullivan's unit in the Yankee Division had been in the thick of a terrible battle at the village of Seicheprey in France.
The following day, The Bristol Press reported that O'Sullivan was "killed in action" along with other city soldiers from Company D of the 1st Connecticut National Guard Regiment.
The funeral mass was held at St. Matthew's Church for the deceased soldier and the city slowly came to learn the somber news that eight Bristol military men had perished at Seicheprey, one of the first battles between Americans and the Germans along the bloody trench lines that separated the competing armies in northern France.
Men in O'Sullivan's unit assumed he was dead, said Bob Kelly, whose grandmother was O'Sullivan's sister, because they found the lower half a body wearing his hip waders on the battlefield.
What nobody in O'Sullivan's family knew is that he wasn't really dead. He was, instead, sitting in a prisoner of war camp in Germany, destined to return home and live another 18 years in Bristol.
He had loaned his unique clothing to someone else that morning, Kelly said, but nobody knew that until he returned to tell the story.
In June, O'Sullivan sent a postcard home with "a few lines to let you know that I am allright" through the Red Cross. He asked his family to send him a lockable box, rice, beans, cheese and crackers.
But it took time for the postcard to find its way across the war-torn continent and the Atlantic Ocean to reach its destination.
One of O'Sullivan's cousins, Bill Haller of Unionville, who was also fighting in France, sent a letter to the family in Bristol in August telling them that "Bill is not dead" and was actually taken prisoner.
He said in the letter that the chaplain who buried the American dead at Seicheprey knew "every man killed in that battle" and was certain O'Sullivan was not among the corpses he helped put in the ground after the fighting ceased.
That letter, too, took a long time to reach Bristol.
It wasn't until October, just a month before the war ended and six months after Seicheprey, that the family received Haller's letter stating that O'Sullivan was alive, the first indication that their mourning had been unnecessary..
In short order, they also got O'Sullivan's postcards and a formal note from the French government informing them that O'Sullivan was listed among the prisoners held by the Germans.
One can only imagine the jubilation in the O'Sullivan home at the news.
There is a ceremony at 11 a.m. Saturday at the World War I memorial on Memorial Boulevard to honor the eight city soldiers who died at Seicheprey, the most deadly battle for Bristol's military in any war.
Following the ceremony, the Bristol Military Museum, now housed with the Bristol Historical Society on Summer Street, will be open. It has uniforms, weapons, pictures, letters and much more that showcase the sacrifices made by the men who fought at Seicheprey.
Thanks to the generosity of Kelly, a retired teacher, the telegram, postcards, letters and pictures about O'Sullivan will also be on display.
Check back later Friday for a complete account of the battle of Seicheprey from a Tunxis Community College history professor's thesis.
*******
Copyright 2008. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
15 comments:
Steve,
If you are going to smear McCain you have do better than that. Next thing, the headline will read that McCain personally danced on the poor man's grave. All thiss letter shows is that McCain comes from a family that has served at high levels (flag grade) for generations. Outside of the Army connection, this is well-known. But at least get your facts right.
First, an uncle is not an ancestor. At best he is relative. Given that this is WW I, to be an uncle, he was probably the uncle of his grandfather (a great great uncle).
Second, this was a form letter which, as an adjutant his signature was applied. It is kind of like blaming the treasurer of the United States for inflation since his / her signature appears on US currency.
It never occurred to me that anyone would think that I mean to smear McCain. In fact, I find it wholly admirable that his family has devoted so much service to our country. My father was a career Air Force officer. My brother served in the Army. I understand the sacrifices that come with that (my father was in Vietnam when I was in elementary school).
What I actually found interesting about the telegram and the story as a whole is how little the government did in those days for dead soldiers. Nobody came to the door with the news. They just sent a cheap telegram. And in one letter, O'Sullivan says he is paying out of his low salary something to make sure he'd have a $10,000 death benefit if he perished. The family had to return that money when he turned up alive! Can you imagine today telling the families of deceased soldiers that they don't even get a death benefit, which must have happened all the time back then?
Anway, I agree with the anonymous poster that it was undoubtedly a form telegram.
I don't think it's any kind of smear against McCain as a candidate to bring some present-day relevance to what happened almost a century ago.
Steve,
Your lead belies your denial. You could have lead with many things. Instead, you chose to link John McCain, a candidate for the presidency, to policies of 80 years ago which we would consider callous today.
The tie is happenstance. A relative - not an ancestor - was responsible for informing families that their sons were casualties. It is akin to the accident of fate that leaves Obama related to Cheney. It is a curiosity no more than that. It certainly does not bring any relevancy into the story.
It's ok Steve. In Bristol, if you don't suck up 100% to military people and stories of the military, you are going to be criticized.
In the 1860s Sherman said, "War is hell". Who cares what Steve wrote about what someone said or did in 1917.
April 19, 2008 12:22 PM:
Bad analysis on your part; the Legion in Bristol does what Ward tells them to do. Ward supports Clinton (or maybe Obama). Neither of those two Presidential candidates served in the military.
They just as soon smear McCain. Collins knows this. This article is typical "suck up" to Ward. In other words, "the military is great except for when those bad Republicans control things".
Thank God for John Mackain.
Actually, let me revise my theory. Although I don't believe Ward will publicly support McCain, I should give him the benefit of the doubt.
I think the poster at April 19, 2008 7:43 AM is correct. This is a subtle attempt by Collins at persuading Legion people and veteran activists not to support McCain.
According to Collins' subliminal message here, the old McCain is insensitive to the needs of the families of veterans just as McCain of today is insensitive to the needs of our military (that would be the need to halt end war in Iraq for the welfare of our soldiers).
Yup, from my little perch here in Bristol, I'm angling to swing the presidential election away from McCain to ... well, whoever. I spend hours on each story, trying carefully to construct the best sublimal message possible to advance my nefarious plans.
Good Lord.
Right Steve, and only a naive person believes that national campaigns are not won at the "grass roots".
Now Steve don't get all excited. The first poster overstated it a bit but was right on the money. Your bias is showing. You would not lead an article on slavery by pointing out Obama's ancestors, mother's side for sure, father's side probably, owned slaves. Then you should not link McCain to events of 80 years ago which we would consider callous today.
Steve,
You're so biased and partisan, if you weren't such a terrible writer you could certainly be working for the NYT in the future.
In keeping with my desire to direct the course of history, I could go work for the Times, but I think my influence on the presidential race is much greater writing subtle attempts to undermine McCain in stories for the BP about World War I soldiers.
hahahahhaha
Yeah I "whay" agree!
hahhahahahhaha
what ever.
Steve, why on earth do you bother?
Post a Comment