1st Lieutenant Charles Wright Wills: July 17, 1862

Camp at Rienzi, July 17, 1862.

I think there is more point and policy in that General Order 92 than in any one that has yet been issued in the West, or East either for that matter; but still I do not think it remarkable for perspicuity, and it is neither as strong nor as definite as the army demands. If I know anything of the “laws of war and humanity,” the soldiers will bless “92” for one thing, its relieving them from guarding the property of secessionists, and if they don't make sundry potato patches, cabbage gardens and fields of roasting ears that I know of, “hop” ’twill surprise me much. There will be some wondrous sudden conversions to Unionism when these butternuts get the drift of that order. An old pup in this town that drank “Southern Independence or the World in Flames” the other evening, in the presence of several United States officers has Union soldiers guarding his property, to preserve it from the Northern vandals, and he has used language equally insulting, times without number, yet the guard is kept up. I suppose, to conciliate him. General Ashboth visits all the secesh and rides around town with the daughter of the man I've been speaking of, who is more intensely secesh than her father, if that is possible. Maybe I'm jealous of him, for the girl is very handsome, but I don't think a United States general at all excusable in such conduct, though it may be overlooked in a lieutenant. Did you see Beauregard's answer to Halleck? I honestly think there is more truth in that document, than in any other military paper of the kind I have seen. Suppose you have seen Granger's review thereof. You notice he don't touch any of the principal points and shows his whole object in publishing the article, in these four words, “I led the pursuit.” I'll swear we haven't taken, in deserters, prisoners and sick, since the evacuation of Corinth, 500 men (although hundreds have doubtless deserted who did not enter our lines.) I know this because we have had the advance all the time, and on the only roads there have been fighting and prisoners, and all the deserters have passed through our hands. There were about 18 cars burned, but the ruins show there was nothing of much value on them. ’Twas not intentional, of course, but Elliott did burn several men in the depot, or else the people of Boonville are liars, to a man. That fight the other day at Boonville amounted to nothing. The enemy's official report of their loss is four killed and ten wounded. There is an awful sight of bombast and lying about army reports. Beat politicians all hollow. We have had very heavy rains for the last 36 hours, and as water can now be procured on the hitherto dry ground between the armies, I expect some cavalry skirmishing, at least, and if the enemy is yet in force at Tupelo, now is the time for them to attack us, for our army is scattered for 300 miles, almost along the Tennessee line, and cannot be concentrated in time to resist a large force. Many of the officers expect a big fight, but your brother don't.

SOURCE: Charles Wright Wills, Army Life of an Illinois Soldier, p. 114-6

Major-General William S. Rosecrans’ General Orders No. 92, July 14, 1862

GENERAL ORDERS No. 92.

HDQRS. ARMY OF THE MISSISSIPPI,

July 14, 1862.

For the information of all in this command the following explanations are given in reference to the rights and duties of citizens of the States in which we may be stationed:

1. All citizens of the States claiming the rights and holding themselves bound to the duties of citizens of the United States are entitled to the same protection of person and property which we claim for ourselves.

2. We hold citizens to the performance of active duties only when they receive protection. If left without protection they are only bound to good will and abstinence from acts of hostility to the Government.

3. Persons denying that they are citizens of the United States, repudiating the duties of citizens by words or actions, are entitled to no rights save those which the laws of war and humanity accord to their characters. If they claim to belong to a hostile Government they have the rights of belligerents and can neither justly claim nor have anything more from this army. If they are found making war without lawful organization or commission they are enemies of mankind and have the rights due to pirates and robbers, which it will be a duty to accord them. It is not our purpose to admit the slaves of loyal masters within our lines or use them without compensation, or prevent their recovery when consistent with the interests of the service. The slaves of our enemies may come or go wherever they please, provided they do not interfere with the rules and orders of camp discipline. They deserve more at our hands than their masters.

By order of General Rosecrans:

 W. L. ELLIOTT,

 Brigadier-General and Chief of Staff.

SOURCE: The War of the Rebellion: A Compilation of the Official Records of the Union and Confederate Armies, Series II, Volume 3 (Serial No. 117), p. 211; Charles Wright Wills, Army Life of an Illinois Soldier, p. 113-4

Francis Lieber to Major-General Henry W. Halleck, October 15, 1864

New YorK, October 15, 1864.

. . . I dare say you have already attended to the subject I am going to write about; still I feel prompted to say what follows. From the “New York Times” of this day I observe that much noise is made about the Rebels using our men, captured by them, for working in the fortifications, and that General Butler seems to fall into the error of considering it a grievous offence on the part of the enemy. We ought always to take care not to make ourselves ridiculous. Not to speak of 76 of General Orders No. 100, the employment of prisoners of war is universal: employment for domestic ends (such as when Russia distributed Frenchmen to the farmers, or Napoleon set Prussians to dig one of the chief canals of France) ; or for military purposes, such as working in army factories; or, lastly, for actual army purposes, such as working at fortifications, building roads, bridges near armies, &e. General Meigs asked my opinion on this very subject some months ago, and I wrote him a somewhat elaborate letter, which, were it necessary, might be referred to. That we have abstained from doing so until now, and have fed all along some fifty thousand idle prisoners, is another question. I believe it was done because we have a barbarous and reckless enemy, who threatened to use our men in pestiferous swamps if we should utilize the prisoners in our hands. That we tell them, “If you use our men, we shall use yours,” is all right; but let us not talk of unheard cruelty if they simply set the prisoners to work. We expose ourselves, especially when we do this in the face of our own general order and our own acknowledgment of the law of war. I, for one, am in favor of setting Rebel prisoners to work, — especially now, when the Rebels have used United States prisoners for fortifying Richmond, &c, although I think we must be prepared for insolent resistance and proportionate coercion on our part. . . .

SOURCE: Thomas Sergeant Perry, Editor, The Life and Letters of Francis Lieber, p. 351-2

The 1864 Republican Platform: Adopted June 7, 1864

1. Resolved, That it is the highest duty of every American citizen to maintain against all their enemies, the integrity of the Union and the paramount authority of the Constitution and laws of the United States; and that, laying aside all differences of political opinion, we pledge ourselves as Union men, animated by a common sentiment and aiming at a common object, to do everything in our power to aid the government in quelling by force of arms the rebellion now raging against its authority, and in bringing to the punishment due to their crimes the rebels and traitors arrayed against it.

2. Resolved, That we approve the determination of the government of the United States not to compromise with rebels, or to offer them any terms of peace except such as may be based upon an unconditional surrender of their hostility and a return to their just allegiance to the Constitution and laws of the United States; and that we call upon the government to maintain this position and to prosecute the war with the utmost possible vigor, to the complete suppression of the rebellion, in full reliance upon the self-sacrificing patriotism, the heroic valor, and the undying devotion of the American people to the country and its free institutions.

3. Resolved, That as slavery was the cause and now constitutes the strength of this rebellion, and as it must be always and everywhere hostile to the principles of, republican government, justice and the national safety demand its utter and complete extirpation from the soil of the republic; and that while we uphold and maintain the acts and proclamations by which the government, in its own defense, has aimed a deathblow at this gigantic evil, we are in favor, furthermore, of such an amendment to the Constitution, to be made by the people in conformity with its provisions, as shall terminate and forever prohibit the existence of slavery within the limits of the jurisdiction of the United States.

4. Resolved, That the thanks of the American people are due to the soldiers and sailors of the army and navy who have periled their lives in defense of the country and in vindication of the honor of its flag; that the nation owes to them some permanent recognition of their patriotism and their valor, and ample and permanent provision for those of their survivors who have received disabling and honorable wounds in the service of the country; and that the memories of those who have fallen in its defense shall be held in grateful and everlasting remembrance.

5. Resolved, That we approve and applaud the practical wisdom, the unselfish patriotism, and the unswerving fidelity to the Constitution and the principles of American liberty with which Abraham Lincoln has discharged, under circumstances of unparalleled difficulty, the great duties and responsibilities of the presidential office; that we approve and indorse, as demanded by the emergency and essential to the preservation of the nation, and as within the provisions of the Constitution, the measures and acts which he has adopted to defend the nation against its open and secret foes; that we approve especially the proclamation of emancipation and the employment as Union soldiers of men heretofore held in slavery; and that we have full confidence in his determination to carry these and all other constitutional measures essential to the salvation of the country into full and complete effect.

6. Resolved, That we deem it essential to the general welfare that harmony should prevail in the national councils, and we regard as worthy of public confidence and official trust those only who cordially indorse the principles proclaimed in these resolutions, and which should characterize the administration of the government.

7. Resolved, That the government owes to all men employed in its armies, without regard to distinction of color, the full protection of the laws of war; and that any violation of these laws, or of the usages of civilized nations in time of war, by the rebels now in arms, should be made the subject of prompt and full redress.

8. Resolved, That foreign immigration, which in the past has added so much to the wealth, development of resources, and increase of power to the nation — the asylum of the oppressed of all nations — should he fostered and encouraged by a liberal and just policy.

9. Resolved, That we are in favor of the speedy construction of the railroad to the Pacific coast.

10. Resolved, That the national faith, pledged for the redemption of the public debt, must be kept inviolate, and that for this purpose we recommend economy and rigid responsibility in the public expenditures, and a vigorous and just system of taxation; and that it is the duty of every loyal state to sustain the credit and promote the use of the national currency.

11. Resolved, That we approve the position taken by the government, that the people of the United States can never regard with indifference the attempt of any European power to overthrow by force, or to supplant by fraud, the institutions of any republican government on the western continent; and that they will view with extreme jealousy, as menacing to the peace and independence of their own country, the efforts of any such power to obtain new footholds for monarchical governments, sustained by foreign military force, in near proximity to the United States.

SOURCE: Thomas Hudson McKee, The National Conventions and Platforms of All Political Parties, 1789 to 1904, 5th Edition Revised and Enlarged, p. 124-6

Review: Lincoln's Code, The Laws of War in American History

Lincoln's Code: The Laws of War in American History

By John Fabian Witt

The laws of war govern the conduct of nations at war.  They are generally agreed terms that are internationally recognized as to how warfare is to be conducted, and what actions are not sanctioned by it.  Today we familiar with them as the Geneva Conventions.  They are result of hundreds of years of negotiations between nations and adapted to meet the evolving mores of their time.  But how were they developed and who was their author?  John Fabian Witt’s book “Lincoln’s Code: The Laws of War in American History” has the answer.

What we recognize today as the rules and laws of war were largely authored by a German-American jurist and political philosopher Frances Lieber.  His laws of war were encoded as Abraham Lincoln’s General Orders, No. 100 issued April 24, 1863 at the height of the American Civil War.  Before that however Professor Witt traces the rules of war from the Revolutionary War and the War of 1812 to the Mexican War, The Civil War until the issuance of General Orders No. 100. 

A good deal of time is spent in the discussion of what to do with slaves during a time of war.  Once captured are they to be set free?  Are they to be enlisted by the conquering foe and used as combatants against their former owners?  Or are they to be returned to their owners once the hostilities have ceased?  These questions were debated and argued over from the outbreak of the American  Revolution until slavery was at last abolished at the close of the Civil War.

Professor Witt deftly handles Major-General William T. Sherman’s idea of a harsh and total war against civilians and soldiers alike, employed during his March to the Sea and the Carolina Campaign, and argues it benefitted the Union by lessening the length of the war.  It therefore the “hard hand of war” was the most humane way of bringing hostilities to a close with the least amount of human suffering.  A view later endorsed by German Field Marshal Helmuth von Moltke.

Prize Courts and trials of civilians by Military Commissions are also thoroughly discussed, by the author.  Through it all Professor Witt shows how the guiding hand of Francis Lieber shaped the laws of war which are still largely in effect today.

“Lincoln’s Code,” is expertly researched and wonderfully written.  Its title may lead you to think it is exclusively Abraham Lincoln’s military policy during the Civil War, but it is so much more than that.  It is a book that not only belongs on the shelves of every student of the Civil War, but should also be equally shelved in law libraries across the country.

ISBN 978-1416569831, Free Press, © 2012, Hardcover, 512 pages, Photographs & Illustrations,  End Notes, Appendix & Index. $32.00.  To purchase this book click HERE.