“Repugnance and Reluctance:” The Personnel Files of Lt. Melville Loucks

First Lieutenant Melville Loucks. Date unknown.

While William Borrowe is responsible for the order to fire cannons on Ḵaachx̱ana.áakʼw, it’s Lieutenant Melville Loucks who deserves great scrutiny.

When I first wrote The Christmas Bombardment, it was the era of COVID-19 lockdown, and most archives were closed. Now that things have opened up, I’ve been excited to get occasional pieces from the U.S. National Archives.

Melville Loucks’ personnel file is astonishing. It paints a picture of a man who should have never been there in the first place. First, a little bit about him.

BIOGRAPHY

Melville Loucks born in 1841 in New York. At the age of 19, he joined West Point Academy. One year later, the Civil War began. Loucks graduated in June 1864 near the bottom of his class but became a Second Lieutenant in the 2nd Artillery. Loucks served in the final year of the Civil War among northern posts. After the war, the Army sent Loucks to San Francisco, the San Juans Islands, and finally Fort Wrangel in September 1868.

IN ALASKA

At some point in Fort Wrangel, Loucks acquired two Tlingit artifacts, a pipe and a ceremonial rattle. We know this because he carved into the rattle:

Made By the Alasky Indians — Brought by MR Loucks First Lieutenant Officer.

Illustration of Vincent Colyer. Source: Wikipedia Commons.

Two months before the bombardment, government agent Vincent Colyer visited Ḵaachx̱ana.áakʼw. He observed a badly beaten Tlingit man walking past him. He investigated, identified the drunken soldiers responsible for beating him, and demanded Fort Wrangel’s commander 1st Lt. William Borrowe have the men brought to justice. Borrowe sent Loucks. Colyer wrote:

He sent a lieutenant, with two or three men, “to quell the disturbance,” the Indians meanwhile having become excited, and to “use his own discretion about arresting the men.” Lieutenant Loucks returned soon after without the drunken soldiers, and gave as his reason that “the Indian struck Mr. Smith’s boy,” which, as I have said, was disproved.


BOMBARDMENT

Loucks would go on to be a key figure in the bombardment story.

  • Visits Ḵaachx̱ana.áakʼw late on Christmas night. Loucks claims he and a detachment entered a home and accidentally shot two Tlingit men. Tamaree claims the men were shot earlier inside the fort, and Loucks’ visit is merely to intimidate and start a fight.

  • Hears the shot that strikes Leon Smith and is first to respond.

  • The morning after Christmas, Loucks leads a detachment into Ḵaachx̱ana.áakʼw to demand the man who shot Leon Smith.

  • Loucks serves on the court-martial jury that hangs Scutdoo.

In the months following the bombardment, the Army recalled William Borrowe back to headquarters in Sitka, leaving Loucks in charge of Fort Wrangel. It would be temporary, as by July 1870, Loucks was out of Alaska forever.


EXPOSURE

We now know why. According to his records, Melville Loucks contracted bronchitis in Fort Wrangel. Shortly after leaving Fort Wrangel, on August 16, he wrote to the head of the Army: “In consequence of exposure while stationed at Fort Wrangel, Alaska, my health has suffered to such an extent that I fear I never shall be able to discharge duty again.”

Loucks reported to San Francisco for medical treatment. Perhaps seeking a more favorable climate, Loucks moved to Houston, Minnesota in October 1870. But that didn’t stop the Army from beginning proceedings to retire Melville Loucks.

In a reply to the Army on November 21, 1870, Loucks protested:

I requested that my application to go before a Retiring Board might be suspended for the present; my health having considerably improved since my arrival here where I have found a more favorable climate. In view of my improved health I would not deem it immediately necessary to be ordered before a Retiring Board unless there may be other reasons for doing so, not known to me.

But in San Francisco, proceedings advanced. On November 22, 1870, 11th Infantry Captain James McMillan wrote to Brigadier General Townsend:

Sir: I have the honor to inform you that 1st Lieut. Melville A. Loucks, 2nd Artillery has been reported to the Board constituted in accordance with Section 11 of the “Act making appropriations for the Army,” &c., as unfit for the proper discharge of his duties, from other causes than injuries incurred or disease contracted in the line of his duties (emphasis mine). I am directed by the President of the Board to request that an opportunity be given him, without delay, for a hearing, in accordance with the provisions of the law.

Loucks’ dismissal was not even about his bronchitis.


BAD REVIEWS

Around the time the Army formally retired Melville Loucks, several “interrogatories” came back from senior Army leaders who had been asked in writing to answer about Loucks’ conduct and character. Two officers who served with Loucks in Alaska tore him to shreds.

Captain Thomas Grey served with Loucks in Fort Wrangel from the beginning, until the Army sent Grey south in February 1869, leaving Borrowe and Loucks in charge. On December 14, 1870, Grey wrote:

As an “officer” I deemed him to perform his duties with reluctance and carelessness and as one of those officers that looked upon the performance of his duties as a “great bone.” As a “Gentleman” his conduct was entirely unacceptable… He was…under me at Fort Wrangle, Wrangle Island, Alaska, for some four months when he (in writing) requested to be relieved from those duties, and I immediately complied with his request. Had he not, however, been appointed to perform these duties by a direct order from the Division Commander, I should have relieved him long before — from the inefficient and careless manner in which he discharged them. He performed his duties… with repugnance and reluctance — and stated to me that he had a “preconceived prejudice” against performing them. My opinion is that he has the intelligence to make a fair officer, but not the energy, efficiency, inclination or devotion to the service, ever to make a good one. He is an amiable and agreeable gentleman, but so far as I am able to judge, takes his no interest in his profession.

Major John C. Tidbull, Commander of the Army in Alaska, wrote back to the Army on January 11, 1871:

Major John C. Tidbull, Head of the Army in Alaska

I deemed Lieutenant Loucks a very peculiar character… He was exceedingly amiable of disposition, and of an easy going turn, which caused him to be very careless and forgetful and to do what he did in a languid manner. At the time I knew him he was quite young and but a short time in the service, and I thought that under energetic command he would, to a great extent, overcome these defects to his efficiency as an officer… I did not think him at that time possessed of any aptitude for the duties of acting assistant Quartermaster and Acting Assistant Commissary…. My opinion was that, in these matters, his trade was below the medium of young officers, just commencing military life; and that his future fitness for service would depend entirely upon his first few years of training which to make him fitted, would necessarily have to be one to overcome his natural carelessness and indifference.

With such harsh reviews, it’s clear to see why the Army felt comfortable parting with Melville Loucks. These review echo the laziness observed by Vincent Colyer, as well.



SPECULATION

I’ve always speculated that Melville Loucks is the person responsible for shooting Shawaan and Esteen at the party hosted by the Army on Christmas 1869.

Tamaree’s says the shooter was an Army officer, and the only commissioned officers at the fort at Borrowe and Loucks. While Tamaree says the shooting happened in the fort on Christmas Day, Loucks says the shooting happened during an arrest inside a Tlingit clan house. I tend to believe Tamaree, because Loucks/Borrowe conspire here to hide the fact of the party happening at all. It was against Army regulation to serve alcohol to the Indians and to have them in the fort after dark. Loucks/Borrowe had motive to lie to save themselves.

That means I have to look suspiciously at Loucks’ story of a late-night incursion into Ḵaachx̱ana.áakʼw following the death of Shawaan and Esteen. Loucks had nothing to gain by marauding into the village late at night, except that it allowed for a plausible scenario in his written report where he could claim the Tlingit men were shot. Loucks and his detachment attempt to provoke the Tlingit into a fight, but are unsuccessful, and leave empty-handed.

For William Borrowe, he twice dispatches Loucks into the village before the bombardment. It’s always interested me that Borrowe did not dealt personally with Tlingit leaders before the bombardment. He fully assigned that to Loucks, as if it was his mess to fix.

But after a day of bombing, William Borrowe finally took over the matter. Borrowe sat down with two Tlingit leaders, Shakes and T’owyaat. According to Tamaree, Shakes demands the man who shot Shawaan and Esteen. Instead of a flat no, Borrowe says he’ll consider it. It’s amazing to me that he does not even hide it from these men he’s currently bombing — he’ll consider it. William Borrowe was a scheming manipulator. In effect, I think of Loucks’ two incursions into the village not as daring feats of bravery, but as Borrowe simply offering up the guilty part to any person willing to take a shot.

Christmas BombardmentRonan Rooney