Volume II Part 47 (1/2)
”It now appears, by statements made without contradiction in newspapers published in New York, that the prisoners above mentioned were conveyed to that city, and have been treated not as prisoners of war, but as criminals; that they have been put in irons, confined in jail, brought before courts of justice on charges of piracy and treason; and it is even rumored that they have been convicted of the offenses charged, for no other reason than that they bore arms in defense of the rights of this Government and under the authority of its commission.
”I could not, without grave discourtesy, have made the newspaper statements above referred to the subject of this communication, if the threat of treating as pirates the citizens of this Confederacy, armed for its service on the high-seas, had not been contained in your proclamation of the 19th of April last. That proclamation, however, seems to afford a sufficient justification for considering these published statements as not devoid of probability.
”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 conditions, 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.
”A just regard to humanity and to the honor of this Government now requires me to state explicitly that, painful as will be the necessity, this Government will deal out to the prisoners held by it the same treatment and the same fate as shall be experienced by those captured on the Savannah; and, if driven to the terrible necessity of retaliation by your execution of any of the officers or crew of the Savannah, that retaliation will be extended so far as shall be requisite to secure the abandonment of a practice unknown to the warfare of civilized man, and so barbarous as to disgrace the nation which shall be guilty of inaugurating it.
”With this view, and because it may not have reached you, I now renew the proposition made to the commander of the blockading squadron, to exchange for the prisoners taken on the Savannah an equal number of those now held by us according to rank.”
This communication was taken by Colonel Thomas Taylor, who was permitted to visit Was.h.i.+ngton, but was refused an audience with President Lincoln. He was obliged to content himself with a verbal reply from General Winfield Scott that the communication had been delivered to President Lincoln, and that he would reply in writing as soon as possible. No answer ever came. We were compelled to select by lot from among the prisoners in our hands a number to whom we proposed to mete out the same fate which might await the crew of the Savannah. These measures of retaliation arrested the cruel and illegal purposes of the enemy.
Meantime, as early as May 21, 1861, the Confederate Congress pa.s.sed an act which provided that--
”All prisoners of war taken, whether on land or 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 quant.i.ty and quality as those furnished to enlisted men in the army of the Confederacy.”
This law of Congress was embodied in the orders issued from the War Department and from the headquarters in the field, and no order was ever issued in conflict with its humane provisions.
Nevertheless, the Government of the United States, forgetful of the conduct of Great Britain toward her revolted colonies, apparently refused all consideration of the question of exchange of prisoners, as if impressed with the idea that it would derogate from the dignity of its position to accept any interchange of courtesy. An exchange was therefore occasionally made by the various commanders of troops under flags of truce, while the Federal Government made the paltry pretense of not knowing it. We released numbers at different points on parole, and the matter was compromised in various ways.
Fifty-seven wounded soldiers were unconditionally released at Richmond and sent home. In response, twenty of our soldiers, mostly North Carolinians, were released from Bedloe's Island, New York, and sent to Fortress Monroe, to be discharged on condition of taking the oath, so called, of loyalty to the United States Government.
Thirty-seven confined in the military prison at Was.h.i.+ngton were released on taking the oath. On September 3d an exchange was made between General Pillow and Colonel Wallace, of the United States Army. Whereupon General Polk proposed an exchange to General Grant, who replied, on October 14th:
”I can, of my own accordance, make none. I recognize no 'Southern Confederacy' myself, but will communicate with higher authorities for their views.”
An exchange was made on October 23d between General McClernand and General Polk. Subsequently, on November 8th, General Grant offered to surrender to General Polk certain wounded men and invalids unconditionally. To this proposition General Polk replied:
”My own feelings would prompt me to waive again the unimportant affectation of declining to recognize these States as belligerents in the interest of humanity; but my Government requires all prisoners to be placed at the disposal of the Secretary Of War.”
On November 1st General Fremont made an agreement with General Price, in Missouri, by which certain persons named were authorized to negotiate for the exchange of any persons who might be taken prisoners of war, upon a plan previously arranged. General Hunter, who succeeded General Fremont, on November 7th, repudiated this agreement. A proposition made in the Confederate Congress to return the prisoners captured by us at first Mana.s.sas, without any formality whatever, would doubtless have prevailed but for the difficulty in reference to the crew of the Savannah.
But this determination of the United States Government, not to meet us on the equal footing consistent with the modern usages of war and exchange prisoners, thus far prevented any general arrangement for that object. In consequence, however, of the clamors of the Northern people for the restoration of their friends, both Houses of Congress united in a request to President Lincoln to take immediate steps for a general exchange. Instead of complying with this request, two respectable commissioners were, however, appointed to visit the prisoners we held, relieve their necessities, and provide for their comfort at the expense of the United States. It is impossible to conceive any reason for such conduct, unless it was to exasperate and ”fire up the Northern heart,” as it was expressed, and thus cause the people to make greater efforts for our devastation. This action on the part of the Government was at a later day known by the expression ”waving the b.l.o.o.d.y s.h.i.+rt.”
The commissioners arrived at Norfolk, Virginia, but were not allowed to proceed any farther. A readiness on our part to negotiate for a general exchange was manifested, and agreed to by them. This was subsequently approved at Was.h.i.+ngton. Shortly afterward, on February 14, 1862, an arrangement was made between General Howell Cobb on our part and General Wool, the commander at Fortress Monroe, by the terms of which the prisoners of war in the hands of each Government were to be exchanged man for man, the officers being a.s.similated as to rank; our privateersmen were to be exchanged on the footing of prisoners of war; any surplus remaining on either side was to be released; and during the continuance of hostilities prisoners taken on either side should be paroled. The exchange proceeded, and about three hundred in excess had been delivered, when it was discovered that not one of our privateersmen had been released, and that our men taken prisoners at Fort Donelson, instead of being paroled, had been sent into the interior. Some of the hostages we held for our privateersmen had gone forward, but the remainder were retained. Being informed of this state of affairs, I recommended to Congress that all of our men who had been paroled by the United States Government should be released from the obligations of their parole so as to bear arms in our defense, in consequence of this breach of good faith on the part of that Government. It was subsequently said, on behalf of the United States Government, that the detention of our privateersmen had been intended to be only temporary, to make it certain that the hostages were coming forward.
It is further stated that the only unadjusted point between Generals Cobb and Wool was, that the latter was unwilling that each party should agree to pay the expenses of transporting their prisoners to the frontier, and this he promised to refer to his Government. At a second interview, on March 1, 1862, General Wool informed General Cobb that his Government would not consent to pay these expenses, and thereupon General Cobb promptly receded from his demand, and agreed to the terms proposed by the other side. But General Wool, who had said at the beginning of the negotiation, ”I am clothed with full power for the purpose of arranging for the exchange of prisoners,”
was now under the necessity of stating that ”his Government had changed his instructions.” And thus the negotiations were abruptly broken off, and the matter left where it was before.[112] After these negotiations had begun, the capture of Forts Henry and Donelson had given to the United States a considerable preponderance in the number of prisoners held by them, and they at once returned to their original purpose of an equal treatment.
A suspension of exchange for some months ensued. Finally, a storm of indignation beginning to arise among the Northern people at the conduct of their Government, it was forced to yield its absurd pretensions, and, on July 22, 1862, a cartel for the exchange of prisoners was executed, based on the cartel of 1812 between the United States and Great Britain. In accordance with these terms an exchange commenced, and by the middle of August most of the officers of rank on either side, who had been for any long period in captivity, were released.
On the same day on which the cartel was signed, an order was issued by the Secretary of War, in Was.h.i.+ngton, under instructions from President Lincoln, empowering the military commanders in Virginia and elsewhere ”to seize and use any property, real or personal, which may be necessary or convenient for their several commands for supplies or for other military purposes,” and ”to keep accounts sufficiently accurate and in detail to show quant.i.ties and amounts and from whom it shall come, as a basis upon which compensation can be made in proper cases.” This was simply a system of plunder, for no compensation would be made to any person unless he could prove his fidelity to the Government of the United States.
On the next day, Major-General Pope, in command of the United States forces near Was.h.i.+ngton,[113] issued a general order directing the murder of our peaceful inhabitants as spies, if found quietly tilling the farms in his rear, even outside of his lines; and one of his brigadier-generals seized upon innocent and peaceful inhabitants to be held as hostages, to the end that they might be murdered in cold blood if any of his soldiers were killed by some unknown persons, whom he designated as ”bushwhackers.” Under this state of facts, I issued a general order, recognizing General Pope and his commissioned officers to be in the position which they had chosen for themselves-- that of robbers and murderers, and not that of public enemies, ent.i.tled, if captured, to be considered as prisoners of war. Some of the military authorities of the United States seemed to suppose that better success would attend a savage war, in which no quarter was to be given and no age or s.e.x to be spared, than had hitherto been secured by such hostilities as were alone recognized to be lawful by civilized men. We renounced our right of retaliation on the innocent, and continued to treat the soldiers of General Pope's army as prisoners of war, confining our repressive measures to the punishment only of commissioned officers as were willing partic.i.p.ants in such crimes. General Pope was soon afterward removed from command.
In August a letter involving similar principles was addressed by General R. E. Lee to the commanding General at Was.h.i.+ngton, General Halleck, making inquiries as to the truth of the case of William B.
Mumford, reported to have been murdered at New Orleans by Major-General Benjamin F. Butler, and of Colonel John Owens, reported to have been murdered in Missouri by order of Major-General Pope. I had also been credibly informed that numerous other officers of the army of the United States within the Confederacy had been guilty of felonies and capital offenses, which are punishable by all laws human and divine. Inquiries were made by letter relative to a few of the best-authenticated cases. It was announced that Major-General Hunter had armed slaves for the murder of their masters, and had thus done all in his power to inaugurate a servile war, which is worse than that of the savage, inasmuch as it super-adds other horrors to the indiscriminate slaughter of all ages, s.e.xes, and conditions.
In a letter, dated Port Royal, South Carolina, June 23, 1862, General Hunter said:
”It is my hope to have organized by the end of next fall, and to be able to present to the Government, from forty-eight to fifty thousand of these hardy and devoted soldiers.”
Brigadier-General Phelps was reported to have initiated at New Orleans the example set by General Hunter in South Carolina.