AN EFFORT TO BLACKEN THE CHARACTER OF THE SOUTH--THE PERSECUTION OF
MR. DAVIS AS THE SUBSTITUTE FOR THE ASSUMED OFFENSES OF THE SOUTH--
REPUTATION OF THE SOUTH FOR HUMANITY--TREATMENT OF PRISONERS OF WAR--
EARLY ACTION OF THE CONFEDERATE GOVERNMENT UPON THE SUBJECT--MR.
DAVIS' LETTER TO MR. LINCOLN--THE COBB-WOOL NEGOTIATIONS--PERFIDIOUS
CONDUCT OF THE FEDERAL AUTHORITIES--A CARTEL ARRANGED BY GENERALS DIX
AND HILL--COMMISSIONER OULD--HIS CORRESPONDENCE WITH THE FEDERAL AGENT
OF EXCHANGE--REPEATED PERFIDY OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT--SUSPENSION OF
THE CARTEL CAUSED BY THE BAD FAITH OF THE FEDERAL ADMINISTRATION, AND
THE SUFFERING WHICH IT CAUSED--EFFORTS OF THE CONFEDERATE AUTHORITIES
TO RENEW THE OPERATION OF THE CARTEL--HUMANE OFFER OF COMMISSIONER
OULD--JUSTIFICATION OF THE CONFEDERATE AUTHORITIES--GUILT OF THE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT--MR. DAVIS' STATEMENT OF THE MATTER--COLONEL OULD'S
LETTER TO MR. ELDRIDGE--NORTHERN STATEMENTS: GENERAL BUTLER, NEW YORK
TRIBUNE, ETC.--THE CHARGE OF CRUELTY AGAINST THE SOUTH--A CONTRAST
BETWEEN ANDERSONVILLE AND ELMIRA--IMPOVERISHMENT OF THE SOUTH--
DISREPUTABLE MEANS EMPLOYED TO AROUSE RESENTMENT OF THE NORTH--THE
VINDICATION OF THE SOUTH AND OF MR. DAVIS--HIS STAINLESS CHARACTER,
HIS HUMANITY AND FORBEARANCE--AN INQUIRY OF HISTORY.
It is in vain to invoke the admiration of mankind for qualities of
greatness, displayed either in the history of a nation or the life of an
individual, unless those qualities shall have been adorned by the practice
of humanity and the observance of high moral obligation. Since the
political fabric of the South has been overthrown, a brave and virtuous
people cherish with a more tenacious affection than ever, that honorable
reputation which was their birthright, and which they worthily
illustrated during the late war. The violent commotion with which the
American Union was but lately convulsed has renewed the historical analogy
of revolutions, not less in the sequel than in its progress. When the
strife of arms was ended, and the two great armies ceased their death
struggles, and parted with that mutual respect which is characteristic of
brave antagonists, events were far from encouraging the cessation of
sectional bitterness which was to be hoped for.
The dominant party at the North, apparently not satisfied with the
political overthrow of the South, and the complete extinction of its
social system, has followed up the triumphs of the Federal armies with a
persistent and implacable war upon the character and reputation of the
South. To affix a stigma upon a conquered foe, to brand with infamy a
class of their own countrymen--the descendants of the compatriots of
Franklin, Hancock, and Adams--and to consign to perpetual obloquy a cause
which enlisted the sympathies of five millions of people, are the aims of
a malignant and remorseless faction. These are the motives which have
instigated the effort to frame an indictment against the Christianity, the
morality, and the humanity of the South, and to visit every form of
degradation, to practice every refinement of cruelty upon its most
distinguished representative.
It is impossible to explain, upon any other theory, the exceptional rigor
with which, since the termination of the war, Mr. Davis has been pursued.
As the most honored by the South, he has been selected as the proper
substitute upon whom to visit the offenses of his people. To convict
Jefferson Davis of heinous offenses against humanity is to blacken the
cause which he represented--to degrade the people of whom he was the
chosen ruler. The North should have been admonished, by previous
examples, of the futility of its attempts to prejudge historical questions
of such moment. Of what avail were the malignity, the misrepresentation,
and the unrelenting vindictiveness of England against Napoleon?
As yet, the North has been unable, even by _ex parte_ evidence, to obtain
a pretext for the arraignment of Jefferson Davis for those atrocious
crimes of which it was pretended he was guilty. Even perjury has proven
inadequate to the invention of material with which to sustain a complicity
in guilt, from which his previous character alone should have vindicated
him. Who can doubt the inevitable recoil when the investigations of
history, unobstructed by prejudice and passion, shall lay bare the _facts_
upon which posterity will render its verdict? History, in such a question,
will know neither North nor South, nor will it accept all testimony as
_truth_ which comes under the guise of "_loyalty_," nor reject as
_falsehood_ all upon which has been placed the odium of "_disloyalty_."
In this volume, we could not, even if so disposed, avoid reference to that
question which so involves the honor and humanity of the South--_the
extent of her regard, in the conduct of the late war, for those moral
obligations which are recognized by all Christian and civilized
communities_. The course of her enemies has left the South no alternative,
and she can not be apprehensive of the result when the record is fairly
consulted.
We have now reached, with a due regard for chronological order, a point
where naturally arises the subject of the treatment of prisoners, which,
in the later months of 1863, assumed its most interesting phase. We
approach the subject not with any expectation of enlightenment of the
Northern mind. Upon this subject a large portion of the Northern people
have resolutely turned their backs upon all statements which do not favor
their sectional prejudices. Calumnies are often believed by mere force of
iteration; and so persistent has been the effort to poison the Northern
mind with falsehood that at least a generation must pass away before the
South can expect an impartial hearing. Nevertheless, by grouping together,
in these pages, important testimony from various sources, and _confined to
neither section_, we hope to promote, however feebly, the great end of
historic truth.
At an early period of the contest, the Confederate Government recognized
its obligation to treat prisoners of war with humanity and consideration.
Before any action was taken by Congress upon the subject, the executive
authorities provided prisoners with proper quarters and barracks, and with
rations--the same in quantity and quality as those furnished to the
Confederate soldiers who guarded them. The first action of Congress with
reference to prisoners was taken on the 21st of May, 1861. Congress then
provided that "all prisoners of war taken, whether on land or at sea,
during the pending hostilities with the United States, shall be
transferred by the captors from time to time, and as often as convenient,
to the Department of War; and it shall be the duty of the Secretary of
War, with the approval of the President, to issue such instructions to the
Quartermaster-General and his subordinates as shall provide for the safe
custody and sustenance of prisoners of war; _and the rations furnished
prisoners of war shall be the same in quantity and quality as those
furnished to enlisted men in the army of the Confederacy_." This declared
policy of the Confederate authorities was adhered to, not only in the
earlier months of the war, when provisions were abundant, but was
afterwards pursued as far as possible under the _peculiar style of warfare
waged by the North_. Even amid the losses and privations to which the
enemy subjected them, they sought to carry out the humane purpose of this
solemn declaration.
The first public announcement by President Davis, with respect to
prisoners, was made in a letter to President Lincoln, dated July 6th,
1861. This letter was called forth by the alleged harsh treatment of the
crew of the Confederate vessel _Savannah_, then prisoners in the hands of
the enemy. We extract a paragraph of this letter:
"It is the desire of this Government so to conduct the war now
existing, as to mitigate its horrors as far as may be possible; and,
with this intent, its treatment of the prisoners captured by its
forces has been marked by the greatest humanity and leniency
consistent with public obligation; some have been permitted to return
home on parole, others to remain at large under similar condition
within this Confederacy, and all have been furnished with rations for
their subsistence, such as are allowed to our own troops. It is only
since the news has been received of the treatment of the prisoners
taken on the _Savannah_, that I have been compelled to withdraw these
indulgences, and to hold the prisoners taken by us in strict
confinement."
In his message, dated July 20th, 1861, he mentioned this letter, and thus
alluded to the expected reply from President Lincoln:
"I earnestly hope this promised reply (which has not yet been
received) will convey the assurance that prisoners of war will be
treated, in this unhappy contest, with that regard for humanity, which
has made such conspicuous progress in the conduct of modern warfare."
Several months elapsed, after the beginning of hostilities, before the
captures on either side were sufficiently numerous to demand much
consideration. A proposition was even made in the Confederate Congress, to
return the Federal prisoners, taken at the first battle of Manassas,
without any formality whatever.
In February, 1862, negotiations occurred between the two governments, with
a view to the arrangement of a system of exchange. In these negotiations
Generals Howell Cobb and Wool represented their respective Governments.
The result was a cartel, by which prisoners of either side should be
paroled within ten days after their capture, and delivered on the frontier
of their own country. A point of difference was, however, raised, as to a
provision requiring each party to pay the expense of transporting their
prisoners to the frontier. This difference General Wool reported to the
Federal Government, which refused to pay these expenses. At a second
interview, March 1st, 1862, this action of the Federal authorities being
made known to General Cobb, the latter immediately conceded the point, and
proposed to make the cartel conform in all its features to the wishes of
General Wool. The latter declined any arrangement, declaring "that his
Government had changed his instructions," and abruptly terminated the
negotiations.
The explanation of this conduct was apparent. While the negotiations
between Generals Wool and Cobb were pending, Fort Donelson had fallen,
reversing the previous state of things, and giving the North an excess of
prisoners. These prisoners, instead of being sent South on parole, were
carried into the interior of the North, and treated with severity and
indignity. Repudiating this agreement, just as soon as it was ascertained
that their captures at Donelson placed the South at disadvantage, the
Federal authorities foreshadowed that "consistently perfidious conduct,"
which President Davis declared to be characteristic of their entire course
upon the subject.
It was impossible to bring the Federal Government to any arrangement,
until the fortune of war again placed the Confederates in possession of
the larger number of prisoners. An immediate consequence of the
Confederate successes in the summer of 1862, was the indication of a more
accommodating spirit by the enemy. Negotiations between General D. H.
Hill, on behalf of the Confederate authorities, and General John A. Dix,
on behalf of his Government, resulted in the adoption of a new cartel of a
completely satisfactory and humane character. Under this cartel, which
continued in operation for twelve months, the Confederate authorities
restored to the enemy many thousands of prisoners in excess of those whom
they held for exchange, and encampments of the surplus paroled prisoners
were established in the United States, where the men were able to receive
the comforts and solace of constant communication with their homes and
families. In July, 1863, the fortune of war again favored the enemy, and
they were enabled to exchange for duty the men previously delivered to
them, against those captured and paroled at Vicksburg and Port Hudson. The
prisoners taken at Gettysburg, however, remained in their hands, and
should have been at once returned to the Confederate lines on parole, to
await exchange. Instead of executing a duty imposed by the plainest
dictates of justice and good faith, pretexts were instantly sought for
holding them in permanent captivity. General orders rapidly succeeded each
other from the bureau at Washington, placing new constructions on an
agreement which had given rise to no dispute while the Confederates
retained the advantage in the number of prisoners. With a disregard of
honorable obligations, almost unexampled, the Federal authorities did not
hesitate, in addition to retaining the prisoners captured by them, to
declare null the paroles given by the prisoners captured by the
Confederates in the same series of engagements, and liberated on condition
of not again serving until exchanged. They then openly insisted on
treating the paroles given by their own soldiers as invalid, and those of
Confederate soldiers, given under precisely similar circumstances, as
binding. A succession of similar unjust pretensions was maintained in a
correspondence tediously prolonged, and every device employed, to cover
the disregard of an obligation, which, between belligerent nations, is
only to be enforced by a sense of honor.
We have not space sufficient for even a sketch of the protracted
correspondence, which ensued between the commissioners of exchange,
respecting the suspension of the cartel. In its progress Commissioner Ould
triumphantly vindicated the action of the Confederate Government, in every
instance meeting in an unanswerable manner, the counter-charges of the
Federal authorities. The South can require no better record of its
honorable and humane conduct, than is furnished by this correspondence.
The Confederate Government was singularly fortunate in the selection of
Mr. Ould, who unites to a most honorable and amiable character, an
intellect of unusual vigor and astuteness, as was abundantly shown in his
conclusive demonstrations of the perfidious conduct of the authorities at
Washington.
For twelve months after the date of the cartel (that is, until after the
battle of Gettysburg), the Confederates held a considerable excess of
prisoners. It has never been alleged, amid all the calumny which has
assailed the South, that during this period, the Federal prisoners (unless
held on serious charges), were not promptly delivered. Commissioner Ould
several times urged the Federal authorities to send increased
transportation for their prisoners. On the other hand, numbers of
Confederate officers and soldiers were kept in irons and dungeons, in many
instances without even having charges preferred against them.
On the 26th July, 1863, Commissioner Ould said in a letter to the Federal
Agent of Exchange: "Now that our official connection is being terminated,
I say to you in the fear of God--and I appeal to him for the truth of the
declaration--that there has been no single moment, from the time we were
first brought together in connection with the matter of exchange, to the
present hour, during which there has not been an open and notorious
violation of the cartel, by your authorities. Officers and men, numbering
over hundreds, have been, during your whole connection with the cartel,
kept in cruel confinement, sometimes in irons, or doomed to cells, without
charges or trial.... The last phase of the enormity, however, exceeds all
others. Although you have many thousands of our soldiers now in
confinement in your prisons, and especially in that horrible hold of
death, Fort Delaware, you have not, for several weeks, sent us any
prisoners.... For the first two or three times some sort of an excuse was
attempted. None is given at this present arrival. I do not mean to be
offensive when I say that effrontery could not give one."
In reply to these and similar charges by Commissioner Ould, which he, in
repeated instances, substantiated by naming the Confederate officers and
soldiers thus shamefully treated, the enemy retorted with a charge of
similar treatment of Federal prisoners. Yet the prison records of the
Confederacy, in no instance, show the detention of prisoners while the
cartel was in operation, unless held under grave charges. Commissioner
Ould, in his letter of August 1, 1863, effectually silenced this
replication. Said he: "You have claimed and exercised the right to retain
officers and men indefinitely, not only upon charges actually preferred,
but upon mere suspicion. You have now in custody officers who were in
confinement when the cartel was framed, and who have since been declared
exchanged. Some of them have been tried, but most of them have languished
in prison all the weary time without trial or charges. _I stand prepared
to prove these assertions._ This course was pursued, too, in the face not
only of notice, but of protest. Do you deny to us the right to detain
officers and men for trial upon grave charges, while you claim the right
to keep in confinement any who may be the object of your suspicion or
special enmity?"
The paroles issued after capture were respected by both parties, until,
about the middle of 1863, the Federal authorities declared void the
paroles of thousands of their soldiers, who had been sent North by the
Confederate Government. At that time, it is noteworthy, the Federal
Government had no lists of paroled prisoners to be charged against the
Confederacy. The latter had previously discharged all its obligations from
its large excess of prisoners, leaving still a large balance in their
favor unsatisfied. In this condition of affairs, Commissioner Ould was
notified that "exchanges will be confined to such equivalents as are held
in confinement on either side." After such a display of perfidy, no
surprise should be occasioned by the subsequent action of the Federal
authorities. This announcement, in unmistakable phraseology, meant simply
that, as the Confederates had returned equivalents for all paroles held
against them, and the Federals held no paroles to be charged against the
Confederacy, hereafter no exchange would be made except for men actually
in captivity. In other words, having received all the benefits which they
could from the observance of the cartel, the Federal Government openly
repudiated it, the moment that its operation would favor their
antagonists. Commissioner Ould promptly declined the perfidious
proposition of the enemy, which would have continued thousands of
Confederate soldiers in prison, after their Government had returned all
prisoners in their possession, and yet held the paroles of Federal
soldiers, largely exceeding in number the Confederate soldiers held
captive by the enemy. Subsequently the Federal officers and soldiers, in
violation of their paroles, and without being declared exchanged, were
ordered back to their commands. Commissioner Ould then very properly
declared exchanged an equal number of Confederate officers and men, who
had been paroled by the enemy at Vicksburg.
With these transactions ended all exchanges under that provision of the
cartel which provided the delivery of prisoners within ten days. All
subsequent deliveries of prisoners were made by special agreement. The
facts which we have stated, showing the suspension of the cartel to have
been occasioned by the _bad faith of the Federal Government, are upon
record_, and can not be disputed. They are accessible to every Northern
reader, who may feel disposed to satisfy his judgment, _by facts_, rather
than to foster prejudices based upon the most monstrous falsehoods, ever
invented in the interest of fanaticism and hate. The suspension of the
cartel was the direct cause of those terrible sufferings which were
afterwards endured by the true men of both sides. It led directly to the
hardships, the exposure, and hunger of Andersonville, the cruelties of
Camp Douglas, the freezing of Confederate soldiers upon the bleak shores
of the Northern lakes, and those countless woes which are endured by the
occupants of military prisons, even when conducted upon the most humane
system. Having been guilty of a shameful violation of faith, the Federal
Government persisted in a policy, which was not only cruel to the South,
but brought upon the brave men who were fighting its battles, the
sufferings which the North has falsely pictured with every conceivable
feature of horror and atrocity.
Until the end of the war, the Confederate Government continued its efforts
to secure the renewed operations of the cartel--a policy which humanity to
its own defenders demanded. Why it was not renewed, the motives which
dictated a policy which occasioned an almost unexampled degree of human
suffering, is a question abundantly answered in the testimony here
adduced, the most conclusive portions of which comes from Northern
sources.
In January, 1864, it was plain from the disposition of the enemy that the
majority of the prisoners of both sides were doomed to confinement for
many weary months, if not until the end of the war. Under this impression,
Commissioner Ould wrote the following letter, which was promptly delivered
to the Federal Agent of Exchange:
"CONFEDERATE STATES OF AMERICA, WAR DEPARTMENT,
"RICHMOND, VA., January 24, 1864.
"_Major-General E. A. Hitchcock, Agent of Exchange_--
"SIR: In view of the present difficulties attending the exchange and
release of prisoners, I propose that all such on either side shall be
attended by a proper number of their own surgeons, who, under rules to
be established, shall be permitted to take charge of their health and
comfort. I also propose that these surgeons shall act as commissaries,
with power to receive and distribute such contributions of money,
food, clothing, and medicines as may be forwarded for the relief of
the prisoners. I further propose that these surgeons shall be selected
by their own Government, and that they shall have full liberty, at any
and all times, through the Agents of Exchange, _to make reports not
only of their own acts, but of any matters relating to the welfare of
the prisoners_.
"Respectfully, your obedient servant,
"ROBERT OULD,
"_Agent of Exchange_."
To this humane proposition _no answer was ever made_. It is needless to
depict the alleviation of misery which its adoption would have secured.
Can there be but one interpretation of the motives of those who rejected
this noble offer? These propositions are indeed extraordinary, in view of
the obloquy heaped upon the Confederate authorities for their alleged
indifference to the health and comfort of their prisoners. Most
noticeable, however, is the invitation extended to the Federal authorities
to investigate, and report to the world, the treatment and condition of
Federal soldiers in Southern prisons.
But this is far from completing the evidence which convicts the Federal
Government of a purpose to trade upon the sufferings of their prisoners,
and thus inflame the resentment of the North during the war, and shows the
malignant purpose of a faction to establish a foul libel upon the South in
the mind of posterity. On the 10th of August, 1864, Commissioner Ould
wrote as follows:
"_Major John E. Mulford, Assistant Agent of Exchange_--
"SIR: You have several times proposed to me to exchange the prisoners
respectively held by the two belligerents, officer for officer, and
man for man. The same offer has also been made by other officials
having charge of matters connected with the exchange of prisoners.
This proposal has heretofore been declined by the Confederate
authorities, they insisting upon the terms of the cartel, which
required the delivery of the excess on either side upon parole. In
view, however, of the very large number of prisoners now held by each
party, and the suffering consequent upon their continued confinement,
I now consent to the above proposal, and agree to deliver to you the
prisoners held in captivity by the Confederate authorities, provided
you agree to deliver an equal number of Confederate officers and men.
As equal numbers are delivered from time to time, they will be
declared exchanged. This proposal is made with the understanding that
the officers and men, on both sides, who have been longest in
captivity, will be first delivered, where it is practicable. I shall
be happy to hear from you as speedily as possible, whether this
arrangement can be carried out.
"Respectfully, your obedient servant,
"ROBERT OULD,
"_Agent of Exchange_."
It will be seen that the Confederate authorities, by this proposition,
consented to waive all previous questions, to concede every point to the
enemy, that could facilitate the release from captivity of its own
soldiers and those of the North. As an inducement to action by the Federal
authorities, this letter was accompanied by a _statement exhibiting the
mortality among the prisoners at Andersonville_. Receiving no reply,
Commissioner Ould made the same proposition to General Hitchcock, in
Washington. The latter making no response, application was made again to
Major Mulford, who replied as follows:
"_Hon. R. Ould, Agent of Exchange_--
"SIR: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your favor of
to-day, requesting answer, etc., to your communication of the 10th
inst., on the question of the exchange of prisoners, to which, in
reply, I would say, I have no communication on the subject from our
authorities, nor am I yet authorized to make any.
"I am, sir, very respectfully, your obedient servant,
"JOHN E. MULFORD,
"_Assistant Agent of Exchange_."
Nothing could exceed the generosity of this offer. When it was made, the
North had a large excess of prisoners. By this arrangement every Federal
soldier would have been released from captivity, while a large surplus of
Confederates would have remained in the enemy's hands. The brutal
calculation of the Federal authorities was that an exchange would add so
many thousands of muskets to the depleted ranks of the Confederacy, and
would, besides, deprive them of every pretext for the manufacture of
chapters of "rebel barbarities."
It was known to the world that the means of subsistence in the South was
so reduced--chiefly through the cruel warfare waged by the North--that
Confederate soldiers were then subsisting upon a third of a pound of meat,
and a pound of indifferent meal or flour each day. Upon such rations, half
naked, thousands of them barefooted, Confederate soldiers were exposed to
sufferings unexampled in history. How could it be possible, under such
circumstances, to prevent suffering among the prisoners? Military prisons,
under the most favorable circumstances, are miserable enough, but the
Federal prisoners in the South were compelled to endure multiplied and
aggravated miseries, imposed by the condition of the South--shared by
their captors, and by the women and children of the country which they
invaded. But what possible palliation can there be for the guilt of a
Government which willfully subjected its defenders to horrors which it so
blazoned to the world? Declaring that "rebel pens" were worse than
Neapolitan prisons and Austrian dungeons, the Federal authorities yet
persistently rejected offers of exchange.
There could be no more forcible presentation of the question than that
made by President Davis:
"In the meantime a systematic and concerted effort has been made to
quiet the complaints in the United States of those relatives and
friends of the prisoners in our hands, who are unable to understand
why the cartel is not executed in their favor, by the groundless
assertion that we are the parties who refuse compliance. Attempts are
also made to shield themselves from the execration excited by their
own odious treatment of our officers and soldiers now captive in their
hands, by misstatements, such as that the prisoners held by us are
deprived of food. To this last accusation the conclusive answer has
been made, that, in accordance with our laws and the general orders of
the department, the rations of the prisoners are precisely the same,
in quantity and quality, as those served out to our own gallant
soldiers in the field, and which have been found sufficient to support
them in their arduous campaign, while it is not pretended by the enemy
that they treat prisoners by the same generous rule. By an indulgence,
perhaps unprecedented, we have even allowed the prisoners in our hands
to be supplied by their friends at home with comforts not enjoyed by
the men who captured them in battle, In contrast to this treatment,
the most revolting inhumanity has characterized the conduct of the
United States towards prisoners held by them. One prominent fact,
which admits no denial nor palliation, must suffice as a test: The
officers of our army--natives of southern and semi-tropical climates,
and unprepared for the cold of a northern winter--have been conveyed
for imprisonment, during the rigors of the present season, to the most
northern and exposed situation that could be selected by the enemy.
There, beyond the reach of comforts, and often even of news from home
and family, exposed to the piercing cold of the northern lakes, they
are held by men who can not be ignorant of--even if they do not
design--the probable result. How many of our unfortunate friends and
comrades, who have passed unscathed through numerous battles, will
perish on Johnston's Island, under the cruel trial to which they are
subjected, none but the Omniscient can foretell. That they will endure
this barbarous treatment with the same stern fortitude that they have
ever evinced in their country's service, we can not doubt. But who can
be found to believe the assertion that it is our refusal to execute
the cartel, and not the malignity of the foe, which has caused the
infliction of such intolerable cruelty on our own loved and honored
defenders?"
Since the war, Commissioner Ould has given testimony of the most
conclusive character. While the subject of the treatment of prisoners was
pending in Congress, during the past summer, he wrote the following
letter. It will be observed that he offers to _prove his statements by the
testimony of Federal officers_.
"WASHINGTON, July 23, 1867.
"_To the Editors of the National Intelligencer_--
"I respectfully request the publication of the following letter,
received by me from Colonel Robert Ould, of Richmond. It will be
perceived that it fully sustains my statement in the House, with the
unimportant exception of the number of prisoners offered to be
exchanged, without equivalent, by the Confederate authorities.
"Very respectfully,
"CHARLES A. ELDRIDGE."
"RICHMOND, July 19, 1867.
"_Hon. Charles A. Eldridge_--
"MY DEAR SIR: I have seen your remarks as published. They are
substantially correct. Every word that I said to you in Richmond is
not only true, but can be proved by Federal officers. I did offer, in
August, to deliver the Federal sick and wounded, without requiring
equivalents, and urged the necessity of haste in sending for them, as
the mortality was terrible. I did offer to deliver from ten to fifteen
thousand at Savannah without delay. Although this offer was made in
August, transportation was not sent for them until December, and
during the interval, the mortality was perhaps at its greatest height.
If I had not made the offer, why did the Federal authorities send
transportation to Savannah for ten or fifteen thousand men? If I made
the offer, based only on equivalents, why did the same transportation
carry down for delivery only three thousand men?
"Butler says the offer was made in the fall (according to the
newspaper report), and that seven thousand were delivered. The offer
was made in August, and they were sent for in December. I then
delivered more than thirteen thousand, and would have gone to the
fifteen thousand if the Federal transportation had been sufficient. My
instructions to my agents were to deliver fifteen thousand sick and
wounded, and if that number of that class were not on hand, to make up
the number by well men. The offer was made by me in pursuance of
instructions from the Confederate Secretary of War. I was ready to
keep up the arrangement until every sick and wounded man had been
returned.
"The three thousand men sent to Savannah by the Federals were in as
wretched a condition as any detachment of prisoners ever sent from a
Confederate prison.
"All these things are susceptible of proof, and I am much mistaken if
I can not prove them by Federal authority. I am quite sure that
General Mulford will sustain every allegation here made.
"Yours truly,
"R. OULD.
"P. S.--General Butler's correspondence is all on one side, as I was
instructed, at the date of his letters, to hold no correspondence with
him. I corresponded with Mulford or General Hitchcock.
"R. OULD."
In another letter, written about the same time, Colonel Ould thus invites
investigation:
"General Mulford will sustain every thing I have herein written. He is
a man of honor and courage, and I do not think will hesitate to tell
the truth. I think it would be well for you to make the appeal to him,
as it has become a question of veracity."
But though President Davis and Colonel Ould are known by thousands of
people, North and South, to be men of unimpeachable truthfulness, and
though no _honorable_ enemy would question their statements, we can not
hope that their testimony will make headway against the intolerant
prejudices and passions of faction. General B. F. Butler is doubtless
sufficiently orthodox, and, besides, his testimony is voluntary. Says this
exponent of latter-day "loyalty:"
"The great importance of the question; the fearful responsibility for
the many thousands of lives which, by the refusal to exchange, were
sacrificed by the most cruel forms of death; from cold, starvation,
and pestilence of the prison-pens of Raleigh and Andersonville, being
more than all the British soldiers killed in the wars of Napoleon;
the anxiety of fathers, brothers, sisters, mothers, wives, to know the
exigency which caused this terrible--and perhaps as it may have seemed
to them useless and unnecessary--destruction of those dear to them, by
horrible deaths, each and all have compelled me to this exposition, so
that it may be seen that these lives were spent as a part of the
system of attack upon the rebellion, devised by the wisdom of the
General-in-Chief of the armies, to destroy it by depletion, depending
upon our superior numbers to win the victory at last.
"The loyal mourners will doubtless derive solace from this fact, and
appreciate all the more highly the genius which conceived the plan and
the success won at so great a cost."
The New York _Tribune_ will also be accepted as competent authority.
Referring to the occurrences of 1864, the _Tribune_ editorially says:
"In August the rebels offered to renew the exchange, man for man.
General Grant then telegraphed the following important order: 'It is
hard on our men, held in Southern prisons, not to exchange them, but
it is humanity to those left in the ranks to fight our battles. Every
man released on parole or otherwise becomes an active soldier against
us at once, either directly or indirectly. _If we commence a system of
exchange_ which liberates _all prisoners_ taken, we will have to fight
on till the whole South is exterminated. If we hold those caught, they
amount to no more than dead men. At this particular time, to release
all rebel prisoners North would insure Sherman's defeat, and would
compromise our safety here.'"
Here is even a stronger statement from a Northern source:
"NEW YORK, August 8, 1865.
"_Moreover, General Butler, in his speech at Lowell, Massachusetts,
stated positively that he had been ordered by Mr. Stanton to put
forward the negro question to complicate and prevent the
exchange...._ Every one is aware that, when the exchange did take
place, not the slightest alteration had _occurred_ in the question,
_and that our prisoners might as well have been released twelve or
eighteen_ months before as at the resumption of the _cartel, which
would have saved to the Republic at least twelve or fifteen thousand_
heroic lives. That they were not saved is due _alone to Mr. Edwin M.
Stanton's peculiar policy and dogged obstinacy_; AND, AS I HAVE
REMARKED BEFORE, HE IS UNQUESTIONABLY THE DIGGER OF THE UNNAMED GRAVES
THAT CROWD THE VICINITY OF EVERY SOUTHERN PRISON WITH HISTORIC AND
NEVER-TO-BE-FORGOTTEN HORRORS.
"I regret the revival of this painful subject, but the gratuitous
effort of Mr. Dana to relieve the Secretary of War from a
responsibility he seems willing to bear, and which merely as a
question of policy, independent of all considerations of humanity,
must be regarded as of great weight, has compelled me to vindicate
myself from the charge of making grave statements without due
consideration.
"Once for all, let me declare that I have never found fault with any
one because I was detained in prison, for I am well aware that that
was a matter in which no one but myself, and possibly a few personal
friends, would feel any interest; that my sole motive for impeaching
the Secretary of War was that the people of _the loyal North might
know to whom they were indebted for the cold-blooded and needless
sacrifice of their fathers and brothers, their husbands and their
sons_.
"JUNIUS HENRI BROWNE."
Now, what is the "inexorable logic" of this train of evidence? Either the
calumnies against the South stand self-convicted, or those who have
uttered them show themselves to have been worse fiends than they pretend
to believe the Confederate authorities to have been.
But can a candid world credit the charge of cruelty against the South?
Honorable enemies, even, will scorn the allegation of torture, of
designedly inflicting suffering upon helpless men, against a people who,
within the past six years, have so honorably illustrated the American
name. Brave men are never cruel--cowards only delight in torture of the
helpless. Cruelty to prisoners would be inconsistent not only with the
known generosity of the Southern character, but with that splendid courage
which the North will not dishonor itself by calling in question.
Until the suspension of the cartel, the Federal prisoners, even at the
risk of their recapture, were kept in Richmond convenient for exchange.
Confederate prisoners, on the other hand, were hurried to the Northern
frontier, where the rigor of the climate alone subjected them to the most
cruel sufferings. Driven by the course of the Federal Government,
respecting the subject of exchange, the Confederate authorities selected a
site for the quartering of prisoners, whom it was impossible to subsist in
Richmond or its neighborhood. Andersonville was selected, in accordance
with an official order contemplating the following objects: "A healthy
locality, plenty of pure, good water, a running stream, and, if possible,
shade trees, and in the immediate neighborhood of grist and saw-mills."
Such were the "horrors of Andersonville," which the world has been urged
to believe the Confederate Government selected with special view to the
torment and death of prisoners.
The terrible mortality among the prisoners at Andersonville was not due
either to starvation or to the unhealthiness of the locality. Federal
soldiers were unaccustomed to the scanty and indifferent diet upon which
the Confederates were fed, and which caused the death of thousands of
delicate youths in the Southern armies. By this single fact may be
explained much of the mortality at Andersonville. When to scurvy and other
fatal forms of disease, produced by inadequate and unwholesome diet, are
added the mental sufferings, which are peculiarly the lot of a prisoner,
the despondency, and, in the case of the Andersonville prisoners, the
despair occasioned by the refusal of their own Government to relieve them,
we have abundant explanation of the most shocking mortality.
But the statement that the mortality of Andersonville was in excess of
that of all other military prisons, is a willful falsehood. We present the
following extracts from a letter to the New York _World_, by a gentleman,
whose integrity will be vouched for by thousands of the best people in
Virginia:
PRISON MORTALITY--ANDERSONVILLE AND ELMIRA.
"RICHMOND, VA., August 14.
"_To the Editor of the World_--
"SIR: I have just seen, in a city paper, a paragraph, credited to the
_World_, alleging that among the Confederate prisoners at Elmira,
during the last four or five months of the use of that prison, the
deaths only amounted to a few individuals out of many thousand
prisoners. I am not able to controvert that fact, as I left there on
the 11th of October, 1864; but if the impression desired to be
produced is that the general mortality at that pen was slight, I can
contradict it from _the record_. During a portion of the period of my
incarceration in the Elmira pen, it was my duty to receive, from the
surgeon's office, each morning, the reports of the deaths of the
preceding day, and embody them in an official report, to be signed by
the commandant of the prison, and forwarded to the commandant of the
post. I entered, each morning, in a diary, which now lies before me,
the number of reported deaths; and the facts demonstrate that, in as
healthy a location as there is in New York, with every remedial
appliance in abundance, with no epidemic, and with a great boast of
humanity, the deaths were relatively larger than among the Federal
prisoners at Andersonville among a famished people, whose
quartermaster could not furnish shelter to its soldiers, and whose
surgeons were without the commonest medicines for the sick. The record
shows that at Andersonville, between the 1st of February and 1st of
August, 1864, out of thirty-six thousand prisoners, six thousand, or
one-sixth, died--a fearful rate unquestionably. But the official
report of the Elmira pen shows, that during the month of September,
1864, which was the first month after the quota of that prison was
made up, _out of less than nine thousand five hundred prisoners_, the
deaths were THREE HUNDRED AND EIGHTY-SIX. In other words, the average
mortality at Andersonville, during that period, was one thirty-sixth
of the whole per month, while at Elmira it was _one twenty-fifth_ of
the whole. At Elmira it was _four per cent._; at Andersonville, less
than _three per cent._...
"Another item, which I gather from my diary, will indicate the manner
in which the medical officer at Elmira discharged his functions. The
hospitals began to be filled, in the latter part of August, with
obstinate cases of scurvy. Men became covered with fearful sores, many
lost their teeth, and many others became cripples, and will die
cripples from that cause. The commandant of the post ordered a report
to be made of all the scorbutic cases in prison, grave and trifling;
and on the morning of Sunday, September 11, the lists were added up,
when it was found that of nine thousand three hundred prisoners
examined, _eighteen hundred and seventy_ were tainted with scurvy.
"The Federal Government, as one of its measures of reconstruction, is
officially and expensively engaged in traducing the Southern people,
and the facility with which it procures all necessary evidence,
whether the object be to hang or to calumniate, warrants the belief
that we shall have a couple of volumes a year for the rest of the
century, demonstrating the barbarity of the rebels. Against so
admirable a system of manufacturing evidence, it is, of course, idle
to oppose the feeble efforts of individuals, but I regard the duty
none the less binding on such of us as know the truth to declare it;
and I hope that, throughout the Southern States, intelligent and
credible men are now putting into authentic form, the evidences of
Federal outrages, the exploits of the Shermans and Sheridans, and
Milroys and Butlers, one day to be published by general subscription
of our people, that the world may judge between us and the spoon
thieves, the furniture thieves, the barn-burners, the bummers, and the
brutes who too often wore the uniform of the Federal army.
"A. M. K."
Can the North expect impartial history to accept its miserable subterfuge
of "disloyalty," by which such testimony as this is now excluded?
Any reference to this subject must be wholly inadequate which does not
describe the condition of the South at the period when she is alleged to
have been guilty of unexampled atrocities. The blockade of the South by
the North was stringent beyond any precedent in modern warfare.
_Medicines_ were held as contraband. Southern hospitals were not supplied,
for that reason, with all the medicaments that were needed by sick and
wounded soldiers; and those who were prisoners in our hands necessarily
shared, in this respect, the privations of the Confederate soldiers. But
if there was any thing "cruel and inhuman" in this deficiency, _whose
fault_ was it? Of _whom_ is the cruelty and inhumanity to be alleged? The
South searched her forests and meadows for restoratives. She ran in
medicines, as far as practicable, at great cost and hazard. We shared our
stores with our prisoners. If the supply was inadequate or ill-assorted,
we again ask, are _we_ to be charged with cruelty and inhumanity?
The same observations are applicable as to supplies of food and clothing.
The war was waged, by the North, on the policy of unsparing devastation.
Mills were burnt, factories demolished, barns given to the flames, and the
means of comfort and of living destroyed on system. What the South was
able to save, she shared with her prisoners. We gave them such rations as
we gave our own soldiers. Does any one suspect the Confederate Government
of deliberately stinting its own soldiers? How, then, can it be pretended
that it was "cruel and inhuman" to prisoners whom it fed as well? If we
could not maintain them as well as we wished, it was through the success
of those who wasted our subsistence, for the purpose of reducing us to
that precise condition of inability. It is obviously _monstrous_ to charge
the fact, and to charge it as blame, upon _us_--to accuse the South of
"cruelty and inhumanity."[71]
But there is still another revelation to be added to the overwhelming
evidence which demonstrates the murderous purpose of the Federal
authorities, equally toward their own men and toward Confederate soldiers,
by which they adroitly sought to cover the Confederate Government with
accusing blood. A marked feature in the policy of the Lincoln cabinet was,
at concerted intervals, to inflame the heart of the North by appeals to
passion and resentment. The supreme excellence of the Federal
administration, in this respect, was, indeed, its substitute for
statesmanship. To conceal its own iniquitous course, with reference to the
exchange of prisoners, the administration successfully sought to frenzy
the Northern masses by the most ingenious misrepresentations of the
condition of their men in the Southern prisons.
To this end the foul brood of pictorial falsifiers--the Harpers, Leslies,
etc.--gave willing and effective aid. Men in the most horrible conditions
of human suffering--ghastly skeletons, creatures demented from sheer
misery--a set of wretched, raving, and dying creatures--were photographed,
the pictures reduplicated to an unlimited extent, and scattered broadcast
over the North, as evidence of the brutality practiced upon Federal
prisoners in the South. In view of the well-known and designed influence
of these appeals upon Northern sentiment, what must be the scorn of the
civilized world for the perfidy which used the means which we here relate,
to accomplish its iniquitous ends?
Immediately preceding the return of these prisoners, the Federal Agent
applied for the delivery of the _worst_ cases of _sick_ Federal prisoners.
Said he: "Even in cases where your surgeons think the men too ill to be
moved, and not strong enough to survive the trip, if _they_ express a
desire to come, let them come." At this time, it should be remembered,
regular exchanges were intermitted. Commissioner Ould, consistently with
his known humanity and the humane disposition of his Government, consented
to send the _worst_ cases of their prisoners, provided that they would not
be accepted as representatives of the average condition of the Federal
prisoners in the South, and used as a means to inflame Northern sentiment.
This condition was sacredly pledged.
With this understanding, Commissioner Ould prepared a barge adapted
specially to the purpose, and, with the aid of the Richmond Ambulance
Committee, carefully and tenderly delivered the prisoners. The Federal
vessel that received them sailed immediately to Annapolis, where, instead
of receiving the tender treatment that their pitiable condition required,
they were made a spectacle of for an obvious purpose. Photographic artists
made portraits of them; a committee of Congress was sent to report upon
their condition; in short, they had been obtained for a purpose; and, how
well that purpose was subserved, the South, at least, well knows. These
miserable wrecks of humanity, specially asked for, specially selected as
the _worst_ cases, were pointed to as representatives of the average
state of Federal prisoners in the South, although the most sacred
assurances had been given that they would be used for no such purpose.
History will be searched in vain for such an example of mingled
wickedness, perfidy, and cruelty. Yet the faction that could practice such
treachery and barbarity has dared to impeach the honor and humanity of the
South. Through such means, it, of course, can easily be proven that the
South "starved and tortured" thousands of Union prisoners. Nor can
Stanton, Holt, and Conover have difficulty in proving that these cruelties
were by direct order of President Davis.
Need we pursue this subject further? We have not adduced one-tenth of the
evidence which completes the record of Southern justice and humanity, yet
what candid mind will deny that this testimony is ample? The vindication
of the South, too, is the assured defense of Jefferson Davis. Nay, more:
the exceptional victim of Northern malice is known to his countrymen to
have a special record of humanity which should have claimed a special
consideration from the enemy. Upon no subject was President Davis more
censured in the South than for what was termed his "ill-timed tenderness"
for the enemy. Stung to madness by the devastations and cruelties
attending the invasion of their country, the people often responded to the
clamor of the newspapers for retaliation against the harsh measures of the
enemy. Before the writer is a Richmond newspaper, of date during the war,
in which the leading editorial begins with the assertion that "The
chivalry and humanity of Mr. Jefferson Davis will inevitably ruin this
Confederacy," and the editor continues to reproach Mr. Davis for culpable
leniency.
To the same alleged cause the _Examiner_ was accustomed to attribute what
it described as the "humiliating attitude of the Confederacy." Said the
_Examiner_: "The enemy have gone from one unmanly cruelty to another,
encouraged by their impunity, till they are now, and have for some time,
been inflicting on the people of this country the worst horrors of
barbarous and uncivilized war." Yet, in spite of all this, the _Examiner_
alleged, that Mr. Davis, in his dealings with the enemy, was "as gentle as
the sucking dove." The same paper published a "bill of fare" provided for
one of the prisons, and invoked the indignation of the country upon a
policy which fed the prisoners of the enemy better than the soldiers of
the Confederacy.
Never, indeed, did the ruler of an invaded people exhibit such forbearance
in the face of so much provocation. When reminded of the relentless
warfare of the enemy, which spared neither age, sex, nor condition, of his
devastation, rapine and violence, Davis' invariable reply was: "The crimes
of our enemies can not justify us in a disregard of the duties of humanity
and Christianity." There can be little doubt that Mr. Davis occasionally
erred in his extreme generosity to the foe. Yet, how noble must be that
fame, which is marred only by such a fault. History has canonized
Lamartine for preventing the re-raising of the red flag in 1848. What will
be its award to the heroic firmness of Jefferson Davis, in preventing the
raising of the black flag, among a people, whose dearest rights were
assailed, whose homes were destroyed, and themselves subjected to the most
ruthless persecutions known in modern warfare?
But apart from the perjured testimony, which has been utterly inadequate
to establish the charge of "cruelty to prisoners," has the time passed,
when the honorable character of a people and of an individual can be
properly considered? The whole history of the United States does not
exhibit a public career more stainless than that of Jefferson Davis, while
in the service of the Union. Occupying almost every position of honor and
trust, in both houses of Congress, member of the cabinet, and as a gallant
soldier, the breath of slander never once tarnished his name. To his
incorruptible official and private integrity, to the sincerity of his
convictions, and the rectitude and honesty of his intentions, no men could
better testify than those Republican Senators, who were, for years, his
associates. Indeed, Mr. Davis has been peculiar in his complete exemption
from that personal defamation, which is almost a necessity of political
life.
But, impartial history will ask, whence come these calumnies against the
great, pure, and pious leader of a brave people, in a struggle for
liberty? Then must come that inevitable recoil, which shall bring to just
judgment, a government, which destroyed the houses and the food of
non-combatants; the fruits of the earth and the implements of tillage;
which condemned its own defenders to imprisonment and death; which
imprisoned without charges, gray-haired men, and doomed them to tortures,
which brought them to premature graves; exposed helpless women and
children to starvation, by depriving them of their natural protectors;
which declared medicines contraband of war, and finally sought, by
perjury, to justify cruelty to a helpless captive, because his people, in
the midst of starvation, could not adequately feed and nurture the captive
soldiers of the enemy.