Above: Photo of the South Gate at Andersonville Prison, Ga.

In an article entitled: Worse Than Wirz?, published in this magazine's previous issue, I described the ill-treatment experienced by POW's (including my great-grandfather) confined to the Florence, South Carolina prison pen by a certain Confederate Lieutenant named Thomas Barrett. That article perhaps prompted some righteous indignation on the part of some southerners who felt it was biased and one-sided, and who would hasten to point out equally reprehensible conduct on the part of certain officers in charge of Union prison camps. Rather than debate that issue, however, I believe it will be more useful to take a look at the policies which led to the abuse and maltreatment of POW's on both sides.

My primary source for this investigation will be articles published in 1879 in a most interesting and informative book entitled: Annals of the War, reprinted in 1996 by the Blue and Grey Press. Our two chief protagonists will be an attorney by the name of Robert Ould, who will speak for the South, and General R.S. Northcott, speaking for the North. Ould was the Confederate Commissioner of Exchange during the war, while Northcott does not indicate his wartime role, but seems quite knowledgeable on the subject of prisoner exchange.

Ould's article was evidently published first, then responded to by Northcott, who declared in his very first paragraph that, "all the obstructions to the exchange of prisoners during the late war were the result of bad faith [on the part of] the President of the Southern Confederacy."

Before being too quick to "push blame", however, we ought to start with the premise that neither side had a policy of deliberately mistreating their captives, and that most of the abuses which occurred were the result of the severe breakdown of the prisoner exchange system, which began to occur about midway through the war. Once the exchange ceased, both sides were faced with caring for many more thousands of POW's than anticipated; the South being far more hard-pressed in that regard, due to its ever-dwindling resources.

At the beginning of the war, captured soldiers were usually paroled right on the battlefield by agreement between the opposing commanders, or else exchanged fairly promptly on a one-for-one basis. Up until July of 1862 there was no formal agreement on procedures for such exchange. On July 22, 1862 Generals John A. Dix and Daniel Harvey Hill signed a formal agreement which specified that, "all prisoners of war were to be discharged on parole in ten days after their capture", at agreed upon exchange points. The agreement stipulated that both sides were to keep detailed and accurate records of both those released and returned to them, and that the men returned could take up arms again once properly exchanged- on a man for man and officer for officer (of equal rank) basis. Needless to say, that system (which required a mind-boggling amount of back and forth paperwork) soon broke down, not only because of the sheer numbers involved, but also over disputes having to do with the handling of "special cases" and the "tit-for-tat" which ensued from them.

In July of 1863 great numbers of prisoners were taken at both Vicksburg and Gettysburg and, as Ould writes, "from that day began the serious troubles of the exchange question, ending finally in the cessation of all deliveries, except in special cases."

Two major issues leading to the breakdown were Negro troops fighting for the North and the poor physical condition of Union soldiers when exchanged. With regard to the black Yankee soldiers (who were always led by white officers), the southern authorities sometimes took the position that, if white men wished to lead Negroes, they should be content to also be confined with them- as opposed to separately. Needless to say, that idea (which involved the quartering of officers with enlisted men) did not sit well with many in the North. Further compounding the problem was the fact that the Confederates refused to exchange Negro soldiers, meaning that their officers must remain confined along with them, possibly for the rest of the war.

In December of 1863, the infamous General Benjamin ("Spoons") Butler, a politician Lincoln couldn’t ignore, was named Federal Commissioner of Exchange after having been removed from command of the Federal garrison occupying New Orleans. Jefferson Davis at first issued orders prohibiting Ould from dealing with Butler, on the grounds that his conduct in New Orleans had been barbarous and ungentlemanly. But Ould gradually established a correspondence with Butler anyway, and finally managed to meet him face-to-face at Fortress Monroe early in 1864. Ould states that, "We mutually yielded our opposing views, and at length there remained but one matter upon which we could not agree, and that was Negro slaves." A draft agreement which sidestepped the question of the black captives was hammered out, nevertheless, and forwarded to Washington for consideration.

By that time General Grant had been brought east and made commander of all Union forces. Although Grant grudgingly agreed to accept Butler as commander of the Army of the James- headquartered at Fortress Monroe (effectively diverting him as an obstacle to the continuation of the exchange program), in consort with Secretary of War Edwin M. Stanton he rejected the draft agreement and instead declared the complete cessation of prisoner exchange. His reason was that the poor condition of the Union troops being returned made them unable to return to action, while the supposedly well-fed and well treated Confederates exchanged would be healthy enough to get back into the fight. Thus, from Grant’s point of view, any further exchange would be to the advantage of the enemy.

By the summer of 1864 the overcrowding at Andersonville had become so severe that the POW’s took it upon themselves to circulate a petition to be sent to the authorities in Washington, pleading with them to resume the exchange process. Although many of the Andersonville unfortunates declined to sign (signing might be construed as disloyalty to their country and giving aid and comfort to the enemy) a delegation of four sergeants was allowed to travel to Washington to present the petition. These heroic four individuals all pledged to Wirz that they would return and three of them kept to their word. Unfortunately, they came back empty-handed. Stanton and Grant (and ultimately Lincoln himself, of course- since he would surely have known of their mission) declined to reinstate the exchange process.

Ould kept trying, nevertheless, and on August 10, 1864 he sent a letter to General Mulford, the Union's Assistant Agent of Exchange. That letter purportedly offered to resume the exchange on a one-for-one basis and also called the Federal government's attention to the sad state of affairs at Andersonville. Ould claimed that, when he received no immediate reply, he wrote to General Hitchcock, the US Commissioner of Exchange, enclosing a copy of his letter to Mulford. "No answer was received to either of these letters", he writes, "nor were they ever noticed, except that General Mulford, on the 31st of August of the same year, informed me in writing that he had no communication on the subject from the United States authorities, and that he was not authorized to make any answer."

In a report to the Congressional Committee on the Conduct of the War, Butler sought to explain the reason for the Union policy which he said was, "devised by the wisdom of the general-in-chief [Grant]...to destroy [the South] by depletion, depending upon our superior numbers to win the victory at last."

He then went on to say: "I am not at liberty to state my opinions as to the correctness and propriety of this course of action of the lieutenant general ... I only desire that the responsibility of stopping exchanges of prisoners, be it wise or unwise, should rest upon the lieutenant general commanding, and not on me."

A limited exchange of sick prisoners occurred in November of 1864 at Charleston and Savannah. The Federals who were returned (fortunately including my great-grandfather, Sgt. Henry Murray of the 7th PA Reserves) were brought to Annapolis, Maryland and the Confederates to be exchanged were taken to Ft. Pulaski and thence upriver to Savannah. Ould observes that, "the photographs of the sick and diseased men at Annapolis were terrible indeed, but the misery they portrayed was surpassed at Savannah."

Due no doubt to the public outcry "at the north" which occurred once the public was made aware of what miserable wrecks their husbands, sons and brothers had become in confinement, a larger exchange occurred that winter. Ould states that exchange was, "officer for officer according to grade, and man for man, the excess remaining in captivity."

Ould then writes that ten days after Appomattox, "I was arrested by order of Mr. Secretary Stanton and thrown into prison. His order was special that I should be put in close confinement. Seven years before that, I had a professional collision with Mr. Stanton in the trial of Daniel E. Sickles for the murder of Philip Barton Key. I was then United States District Attorney for the District of Columbia and he was one of the defendant's counsel."

Ould reveals that he was indicted for treason, his house searched, and all his papers seized. A military tribunal examined his case "in absentia," and he was not allowed to be present and confront his accusers. Yet somehow, "after two months confinement" he was released, when the court was unable to convict him.

In his defense of the Federal actions during the war, General Northcott never mentions the policy devised by Grant and Stanton. He merely states that, "President Davis issued his orders declaring General Butler an outlaw, and had refused to exchange [several Union officers] before the United States government refused to return Confederate prisoners." Also that, "the truth is, the Federal government found it impossible to continue the general exchange of prisoners without giving the Confederate government the power to deal unjustly with many of the Federal officers who fell into their hands", and that, "they assumed the right to declare that officers commanding Negro troops, and Negro troops themselves, were not entitled to the humanities of war."

It’s probably best to refrain from judging either side in this matter, lest I be accused of bias due to the experience of my own ancestor. Yet I do wish to point out that although my great-grandfather served on the Union side, it was due (at least in some measure) to the policy of his own (Lincoln-led) government that he was confined for so many months at Andersonville and Florence; and that he returned from the war crippled by a debilitating and chronic lung condition which eventually ended his life in 1895.

I do believe, however, that there was "more than enough blame to go around."

About the Author:

BJT's founder & President, Ed Churchill, has had a life-long interest in the War Between the States. This interest was undoubtedly first generated by his mother's stories about her grandfather, Sgt. Henry Murray of the Army of the Potomac, who earned his stripes in many battles, was wounded, then imprisoned at Andersonville until nearly the end of the war.

Ed holds a BS degree in Civil Engineering and a Masters in Education. He has authored several books and articles on the C/W (including one published in the October '98 edition of CWTI), taught adult ed courses on the war at BCCC and spoken at C/W Roundtables as far south as Savannah, Georgia. He is a member of the Bucks County (PA) Civil War Roundtable and an honarary member of the Cumberland Guard, a group of re-enactors who portray the very same regiment his great-grandfather belonged to. He's also a member of The Friends of the Florence Stockade (where his great-grandfather was sent after Andersonville during Sherman's march to the sea), the SUV, the Winfield Scott Hancock Society, the Confederate Network and the Friends of the GAR Library & Museum in Philadelphia.

His knowledge of the war is extensive (particularly the eastern theater of operations) and his enthusiasm quite contagious -- as you'll learn for yourself if you accompany him on one of our tours. Visit Billy & Johnny Tours for more information.

TOP