Jump to content
Shiloh Discussion Group
idaho native

Wounds of War - That May Never Heal

Recommended Posts

Guest 23RD TENN

definitely a sad story, I know why the north stopped the exchanges, but for the life of me what was they thinking, the south by this stage had enough trouble feeding their own armies much less taking on the feeding of so many more. I don't really know which is worse, the side who didn't have the means no matter how bad they wanted to feed the prisoners or the side who had the means and wouldn't feed them.

and if anyone thinks the north treated prisoners better read up on Elmira and Rock Island. one Union commandant bragged at the end of the war for the millions of money he returned to the treasury that he considered "saved" by not buying food.

 

23rd Tenn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Leaving Gardner's Station at daybreak, the men marched to Trenton, arriving there on the 26th of March.  Their captors gave them almost nothing to eat during the trip but they were able to buy biscuits for five dollars per dozen and baked chickens for five dollars each from the people of Trenton.  It was fortunate they could spend some of their money.  On the next day the Confederate soldiers took them into the courthouse and robbed them.  Since the men had recently been paid their back pay, the captors were able to take a sizeable amount of money from them as well as other personal articles.  Even Colonel Hawkins lost his saddle bags, extra clothes, and blanket around this time.

[align=left]Colonel Hawkins protested the robberies to Colonel Duckwork. Duckworth said that Forrest's men were responsible and that he would put his own men on guard to stop them.  When the thefts continued, Hawkins again protested to Duckworth and was told that an account was being taken of the money involved and that it would be returned.  Both sides sometimes confiscated money from prisoners in order to prevent bribery. The money would then be given back to its owner in small amounts at the prison or in a lump sum when the prisoner was exchanged.  In this case, however, the money was taken unofficiallly by the enlisted men and was never returned. In the terms of the capitulation signed by both Hawkins and Duckworth at Union City, it had been agreed that all private property belonging to the men would be respected.  Only their horses, horse equipment, and arms were to be taken from them.  This breach of the surrender terms by Forrest's men later caused much misery and even death for many of Hawkins's men."[/align]

[align=left]Of course, Forrest and his officers knew nothing of these war crimes!!!!!![/align]

[align=left]Jim [/align]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sharon,

Thanks for the interesting article which clearifys conditions in 1863-64.  It also illustrates that the "Gentleman's" style of warfare of 1861 was over as the country got serious about the war.

Ron 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest 23RD TENN

[user=28]WI16thJim[/user] wrote:

[align=left]of course, Forrest and his officers knew nothing of these war crimes!!!!!![/align]

 

[align=left]Jim [/align]

 

 

 

LOL, still nice to see the hatred for Forrest is alive and well.

ask yourself this question, if Forrest committed war crimes during the war don't you think the north would have tried and then had him hanged?  Henry Wirz was executed for a lot less lies than Forrest has had told on him over the years. For that matter even Champ Ferguson was executed for a lot less than what Forrest has been accused of.

one thing everyone needs to remember is that down here during and after the war if you wanted to get even with someone about all you had to do was bear false witness against them. 

 part of the reason there was such hatred against the members of the 7th tennessee union cavalry, they used their blue suits to take vengence on anyone who supported the south. sort of a cowardly way of making war when it was against women and children they did it against.

I'm sure that several that read this will disagree with me on this, but if your not from the area where these things happened then you just don't understand. and one other thing, I had several ancestors who joined union regiments after being in the confederate army. sort of a way of hoping that it would protect the ones at home by them being able to say they were union supporters, didn't always work, some of these rascals just wanted to rob and kill for the fun of it, all in the name of the union.

23rd tennn

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[user=75]23RD TENN[/user] wrote:

definitely a sad story, I know why the north stopped the exchanges, but for the life of me what was they thinking, the south by this stage had enough trouble feeding their own armies much less taking on the feeding of so many more. I don't really know which is worse, the side who didn't have the means no matter how bad they wanted to feed the prisoners or the side who had the means and wouldn't feed them.

and if anyone thinks the north treated prisoners better read up on Elmira and Rock Island. one Union commandant bragged at the end of the war for the millions of money he returned to the treasury that he considered "saved" by not buying food.

 

23rd Tenn.

No question that northern prisons were no picnic, although I'm not really into comparing who had it worse.

Halting the prisoner exchange was indeed an extra burden on the South, and from that perspective it benefited the North. But, that said, when the South finally agreed to treat captured Union troops who were black the same as the ones who were white, the prisoner exchange was resumed. But by then the war was nearly over.

Perry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"of course, Forrest and his officers knew nothing of these war crimes!!!!!!"

I know from past experience that Jim has very strong feelings about Forrest - so maybe I should not have brought this thread up. I did not bring it up to malign Forrest. Originally I think Duckworth was on his own & that Forrest was elsewhere when the federal garrison surrendered.

If one wants to point fingers at Forrest in turn it is easy to point the same accusatory finger against at least one prominent Union general for his conduct of the war. Since war is war and not popularity seeking I see fit not to finger him.

I was trying to get beyond this because it is difficult for me to understand from my vantage point and after so many years have passed why there are such strong feelings on both side of the fence. How do we ever get beyond this and truly heal and forgive and forget.

:?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can only speak form my side , the side that was invaded, homes burnt, livestock stolen, family's torn apart. My family lost everything of any value , oral history and written history not just my family but hunderds of familys through out the area tells of mass hangings of confederate's taken prisoner both male and female, young and old. Even slaves were hanged, whiped, shot  becouse they would not tell the invader where their master or his family were hiding. There is a family here that lost a whole generation with the exception of 1 small boy when his entire family was burned alive in there house, slaves took the boy and got him to his grandparents over in Mississippi.

My view of this is genocide plan and simple. During reconstruction here Pickens County Alabama things written record shows things were bad, x confederate's could not vote, could not hold office, could not own a business, could not speak in public against the Government , county, state, federal. Many were falsely acused of crimes and sent to jail or hanged.

I do want everyone to know I Love my Country the USA, but I have deep resentment to the Federal Gov after the War for what they did here not just to my family but hundreds of familys throught the south.

Will those feelings ever heal probably not as from a Southerners view , the South never gets any respect for standing up for what it thought was the wrong being done to the Constitution. The South will all ways be looked down upon as backwoods.

Hope this doesn't make anyone mad. Just my feelings.       

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest 23RD TENN

Perry, I want disagree with you on the issue of exchanging blacks and whites for being part of the prisoner exchange, but from all my readings the number one reason Grant put a stop to exchanges was to keep the south from putting the troops back in the field. and I wasn't comparing who had the worst prisons,  I was just pointing out that to have the means at hand ( as in the food and money) and not to feed captured men is a lot worse than what happened at Andersonville.

 

[user=29]Wrap10[/user] wrote:

[user=75]23RD TENN[/user] wrote:
definitely a sad story, I know why the north stopped the exchanges, but for the life of me what was they thinking, the south by this stage had enough trouble feeding their own armies much less taking on the feeding of so many more. I don't really know which is worse, the side who didn't have the means no matter how bad they wanted to feed the prisoners or the side who had the means and wouldn't feed them.

and if anyone thinks the north treated prisoners better read up on Elmira and Rock Island. one Union commandant bragged at the end of the war for the millions of money he returned to the treasury that he considered "saved" by not buying food.

 

23rd Tenn.

No question that northern prisons were no picnic, although I'm not really into comparing who had it worse.

Halting the prisoner exchange was indeed an extra burden on the South, and from that perspective it benefited the North. But, that said, when the South finally agreed to treat captured Union troops who were black the same as the ones who were white, the prisoner exchange was resumed. But by then the war was nearly over.

Perry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest 23RD TENN

Very well put Gregg, you hit the nail on the head about the wrong being done to our constitution and our forefathers standing up for what they believed in.

 

23rd tenn

[user=14]Gregg[/user] wrote:

Will those feelings ever heal probably not as from a Southerners view , the South never gets any respect for standing up for what it thought was the wrong being done to the Constitution. The South will all ways be looked down upon as backwoods.

Hope this doesn't make anyone mad. Just my feelings.       

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Gregg! You are helping me to understand why feelings go so deep. The war was bad & the actions by some men on both sides, like in all war, was reprehensible.

I think reconstruction was another matter. It is no one of those periods in our history no one should be proud about. I am glad Grant stood up for the paroles he had given at Appomattox or it could have been worse. I do think ex Confederate soldiers, especially those of higher rank were disenfranchised. I think that is one reason the klan was started in some areas in an attempt to thwart the inequities the Radical Republicans put in place and the military enforced. The Radical Republicans and Andrew Johnson did not do any of us a favor.

I am not trying to make anyone mad either - just get a better understanding of what went on.

I do not have any problem defending Forrest either - he might not have done everything right but he sure did some things very well & even though he was not in favor of succession when Tennessee succeeded he went with his state like many others. You cannot fault the man for his dedication and innate abilities as a leader of men - he gave up everything he had including his health for the cause which is more than can be said of many others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the reason there is so much dislike for Forrest is that he is held up as a hero by some while they try to whitewash his crimes.  I have always abhorred war crimes and the fact that the higher ranking officers get away with it while their underlings take the punishment.  My Lai, Abu Ghraib, etc., etc., etc. Military genuis does not wash clean every act one commits.

Jim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest 23RD TENN

Jim, I again have to ask, what crimes? if the union believed he committed crimes they would have tried and hung him. so again, be specific and not just using what some said in the hopes of having the government take vengence on him for them.

23rd Tenn

[user=28]WI16thJim[/user] wrote:

I think the reason there is so much dislike for Forrest is that he is held up as a hero by some while they try to whitewash his crimes.  I have always abhorred war crimes and the fact that the higher ranking officers get away with it while their underlings take the punishment.  My Lai, Abu Ghraib, etc., etc., etc. Military genuis does not wash clean every act one commits.

Jim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest 23RD TENN

I have Henry's book and yes it is a very good work.  notice how it tells of Pro union sentiment being the basis for what was said happened. also another thing it don't mention is that some of the civilian witnesses made claims to seeing things happen when they weren't even there.

and as some have said they don't like that people defend Forrest, who's defending him. there's nothing to defend him about. unless you want to bring up that he was the first grand wizard of the KKK, which from all indications he was. but one thing he wasn't, he was not the founder of the KKK. and lastly, yeah he was a slave trader, and to that I say so what. I know in today's time we look upon someone who dealt in human flesh as some low down person, but you need to go back in time, he provided a much needed service to the planters. his business might not look to good to us today, but back then it was a means to an end for him. to make a living for his family. just because he was a slave trader doesn't make him the founder of the slave trade. those people that brought that evil were long since dead. oh and least we forget who brought those slaves over by the thousands, just look to the yankee ship owners from New York, Boston and other points north, they sure didn't mind getting rich on the slave trade.

23rd Tenn

[user=45]idaho native[/user] wrote:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Past events cannot be judged by today's standards. Standards have changed but what was accepted 150 years ago was common accepted standards back then.  We may not like the past, we can control standards of the present but not of the past. 

IN FACT, IT DOES NO GOOD TO ARGUE THIS.  Nobody will change their mind.  Let the skelton in all of our closets rest in peace.

Amen 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[user=45]idaho native[/user] wrote:

If one wants to point fingers at Forrest in turn it is easy to point the same accusatory finger against at least one prominent Union general for his conduct of the war. Since war is war and not popularity seeking I see fit not to finger him.

Idaho Native,

One of the "tenets" of the Lost Cause propoganda spewed forth by the Southern Historical Society (Maury, Ewell, Gordon et al) is as follows:

"Confederate generals such as Lee, Stonewall, Forrest, etc. represented the virtues of Southern nobility, as opposed to most Northern generals, who were characterized as possessing low moral standards, and who subjected the Southern civilian population to such indignities as Sherman's March to the Sea & Sheridan's burning of the Shenandoah."

Both sides got their hands dirty. Should we forget Fort Pillow & the Shelton Laurel massacre, where the NC homeguard murdered southern citizens they labeled as Union sympathizers? And all POW camps were horendous.

The 23rd TN commented:

LOL, still nice to see the hatred for Forrest is alive and well.

One could take the opposing view and comment, "Nice to see the 'love fest' for Forrest is alive & well." There has to be a middle ground when researching the American Civil War. Both sides had their warts & skeletons. Neither side, if I may use a cliche, had that market cornered.

Respectfully,

Mike Peters

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest 23RD TENN

[user=25]Ron[/user] wrote:

Past events cannot be judged by today's standards. Standards have changed but what was accepted 150 years ago was common accepted standards back then.  We may not like the past, we can control standards of the present but not of the past. 

IN FACT, IT DOES NO GOOD TO ARGUE THIS.  Nobody will change their mind.  Let the skelton in all of our closets rest in peace.

Amen 

Ron,

very well put. Bravo

23rd tenn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest 23RD TENN

[user=3]54th OVI[/user] wrote:

One of the "tenets" of the Lost Cause propoganda spewed forth by the Southern Historical Society (Maury, Ewell, Gordon et al) is as follows:

 

 

Mike, 

I agree with everything you had to say in this post except the lost cause portion.

in my opinion that's a phrase, and pardon me when I say this, "some yank come up with" sounds about the same as being politically correct. and I'm about as far from that as you can get. still a good post.

23rd tenn

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

23rd TN,

I hope that this finds you & yours well.

The term "Lost Cause" comes from the title of a book written by Richmond newspaperman, & Southern sympathizer, Edward Pollard. The  book was The Lost Cause: A New Southern History of the War of the Confederates, penned by Pollard in 1866. 

Respectfully,

54th OVI

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know sometimes people do things to others with out thinking. Both sides of my family had men that served in the Confederate Army. Not bragging here but 59 men with 54 blood kin the others married sisters of a couple of the others. My grandmother Alexander was I must say a radical confederate, she had very hard feelings for the US Government.Now this story was told to my family by a buddy that was taken prisoner with my cousin John Corr  wounded at Chattanooga and taken prisoner.  Wounded in the head (mostly going to die anyway) as they were headed North to Camp Chase, John died. When the train stopped over the Ohio River , he and several  dead or dieing men where thrown off the train into the river. This buddy of his survived Camp Chase  walked home to Pickens County, he never forgot my cousin he told the family what had happened. This man in 1869 took his own life. When Grand spoke of war she only talked of when the yanks came to the South. She was a very devoted christian and each day in her prayers she all ways said a word for John. This is her prayer Dear Lord we pray to you for guidance , and to fill each one with your words. Dear Lord we pray for our ancestors that fought under the flag of truth as so many died on the battlefield. We say a special word for John Corr , my 1st cousin who was killed and never gave a Christian burial ,we pray that you welcomed him with open arms into thy kingdom.

Dear Lord we pray that on judgment day those that did not give him a proper burial my ask for forgiveness.

In your name we pray.

i know this is a little off the subject but thought I would share it with you folks. Gran was a self educated , mother to 13 kids and the stone to which our family was built.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[user=25]Ron[/user] wrote:

Past events cannot be judged by today's standards. Standards have changed but what was accepted 150 years ago was common accepted standards back then.  We may not like the past, we can control standards of the present but not of the past. 

IN FACT, IT DOES NO GOOD TO ARGUE THIS.  Nobody will change their mind.  Let the skelton in all of our closets rest in peace.

Amen 

Well, I certainly do understand this point, and it's well stated. That said, if folks want to discuss these issues on here, they can do so, as long as it remains in this forum, and no one gets personal. I don't see where that's happened, unless maybe we're counting a little raised blood pressure here and there. :)

Ron does touch on something that I believe myself, and that's the way we often take sides on issues revolving around this war as if it involved us directly, instead of people who lived well over a century ago. I'm not pointing fingers, or if I am, I'm also pointing one of them at myself, because I can get as caught up in discussions about "the past" as anyone. I think one reason for that is because in no small part, the past is still very much alive for many of us. I think that's true in more ways than one, actually.

But all that said, here's something else that I'll toss out. I like to say that we are not our ancestors, and they are not us. We don't get to take credit for their good deeds, and we cannot be held responsible for their bad ones. If my g-g-g-grandfather was a war hero and won the Medal of Honor, it tells you a lot about him, and absolutely nothing about me. The same holds if he was a mass murderer. I don't get to claim his accolades, or have to serve jail time for his crimes.

I understand about family connections, family pride, and family skeletons. Honestly, I do. It's simply that every person, and every generation, has to stand on their own, and be judged on their own merits.

I guess I say all that because we tend to take our discussions about the war pretty personally, as if we're defending ourselves rather than talking about someone we may or may not be related to from the distant past. Again, I'm not pointing fingers because I understand about getting caught up in a debate or argument. Believe me, been there done that. And will do it again. A really good debate can be grand fun, and sometimes it can be exasperating. And sometimes it can be both at once. But I do think it helps if we keep in mind that in debating about past generations, we don't always have to feel like we're defending ourselves. We aren't them, and we never were.

Perry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest 23RD TENN

[user=3]54th OVI[/user] wrote:

23rd TN,

I hope that this finds you & yours well.

The term "Lost Cause" comes from the title of a book written by Richmond newspaperman, & Southern sympathizer, Edward Pollard. The  book was The Lost Cause: A New Southern History of the War of the Confederates, penned by Pollard in 1866. 

Respectfully,

54th OVI

 

 

Thanks for the info on where the "lost cause" comes from. I stand corrected that it didn't come from some yank. I've read one of Pollard's books, Lee and his lieutenants, but hadn't read anything else of his. I did read up on him and have to say that just because he wrote a book referring to the Lost Cause, in which case I know that most people point to as being slavery. 

I have to say that just because someone writes a book it doesn't mean they speak for everyone, I know from what my grandfather told me and from knowing the region of the country I'm from that protecting slavery isn't the reason they fought.

anyways, thanks again, I'll have to check into his book and see what he has to say.

 

23rd tenn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After almost 150 years, the wound may no longer bleed, but it is still sore, especially when bumped. I suspect that after another 150 years, it will still be like an old injury that aches when the weather changes.

Grandpa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[user=64]Grandpa[/user] wrote:

After almost 150 years, the wound may no longer bleed, but it is still sore, especially when bumped. I suspect that after another 150 years, it will still be like an old injury that aches when the weather changes.

Grandpa

Priceless words Grandpa! God Bless you! Am off to learn about Ploesti.:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...