Replies

Settle down. The scale of the taking of POWs during the Civil War was unprecedented in the history of warfare and neither side was prepared for it.

The large number of Union troops taken at First Manassas were held in various prisons until they could be exchanged (usually by late 1861). Large numbers of Confederate prisoners weren't taken until the fall of Fort Donelson and Fort Henry. They were held primarily at Camp Douglas and were gradually exchanged or paroled as battlefield conditions warranted. Federal quartermasters did provide Confederate prisoners with new uniforms (the production schedules at both the Cincinatti and St. Louis arsenals show periodic runs of Confederate uniforms "for prisoners.") Odd color and odd material, such as felt great coats, items that were produced in the early War period and not meeting regulation US Army specs were issued to Confederate POWs. A friend of mine in Missouri who reenacts with the 16th Missouri (CS) has quite a collection of original Confederate items, and one he is quite proud of is a black with red lining foot pattern greatcoat with pewter eagle buttons. It's a Federal manufacture item that was issued to a Tennessee soldier being held at Camp Douglas. The Federals were able to issue clothes and other personal needs to captured Rebs because they had the production capacity to do so, and in general did.

The problems in the camps on both sides came from different sources. At the top, the Commissary Generals of both armies (Winder on the Confederate side, Hoffman on the Federal) were notorious penny pinchers. Hoffman, it was said, took pride in being able to return money to the Federal Treasury at the end of every fiscal year....most of which came out of allotments for care of POWs. Winder was just cheap and had a tendency to ignore requests from camp commanders (Belle Isle and Andersonville in particular) for additonal supplies. I'm certain that if Winder hadn't died close to the end of the War, he, and not Wirz, would have faced a war crimes trial. By ignoring requests for supplies from his camp commanders, a case could be made for Winder acting with malice, but I'll leave that for someone else to decide.

Another problem in the camps was with the guards. Neither side had a dedicated corps of Military Police. Both had Provost Marshal Generals, and Provost Guards at divisional and Army headquarters, but no permanently assigned MPs who would handle the prisoners. This resulted in widely ranging treatment of POWs at the hands of guards.

In general, on both sides, guards who were from veteran infantry regiments treated prisoners better than those who were from green regiments or "home guard" units. In some camps (Andersonville, for instance) guards were given a thirty-day furlough if they shot a prisoner for attempting escape. The intent of the order was to make the guards more vigilant, but it had the effect of getting green guards to just engage in random gunfire at the expense of the prisoners. Members of Confederate line infantry regiments who did tours as prison guards were less prone to that sort of activity (shooting for a leave), as were members of the US Army Veteran Reserve Corps. The worst seemed to be Georgia Home Guard troops (again, Andersonville) and members of the USCTs (Camp Lookout). Combat soldiers had a high degree of mutual respect for each other, and that led to line infantry doing a more humane job of guarding than REMFs.

When the US House passed it's resolution to treat Confederate prisoners severely, that was after accounts of Federal prisoners being treated badly at the hands of the Confederates had made it north. Let's not forget that the Confederate House passed a resolution calling for the execution of US black soldiers and white officers in command of black troops immediately upon capture. Civilian poltitical leadership can often cause more trouble than it's worth in wartime.

Fifteen thousand Union troops are buried at Andersonville....the equivalent of a division. Similar numbers died at Belle Isle, VA. Those were purpose built-POW camps, and had no barracks or shelter for the prisoners. Elmyra had just a stockade, but Camp Douglas and most other Union POW camps had formerly been training camps, and did have barracks. The barracks were cheaply constructed, and poorly heated, but the barracks I was in when I was in basic training was equally cheaply constructed and poorly heated (not like it would have mattered, I went through basic in summer), so little has changed since then. The difference is that the Union had space for POWs, the Confederacy didn't.

The true test of which side's captives were better cared for is how many returned to fight after parole or exchange: The majority of Confederates held in northern camps returned to fight after parole (and often before formal exchange). There are accounts of Reb prisoners who were captured three times and released twice. Most Federals held captive by the Confederates had to be discharged as no longer fit for service. It was the fact that paroled Confederates were returning to the line in no time at all that prompted Grant to cease paroling and exchanging POWs after he became commander of all the Union armies. He knew the Confederates couldn't make up the losses from captures, but the Union could. Very effective policy, although Federal prisoners in Andersonville and Belle Isle would suffer much longer because of it.

Hyperbole aside, the condition of POWs in the Civil War was pretty bad for both sides, but not because of stated policies. Poor supply and logistical systems did more to harm prisoners than House resolutions ever could have. Say what you want, but them's the facts. History is what it is, and I will still compare Elmyra to Andersonville because it's a valid comparison, but concentration camps? Not hardly. Poor planning on both sides, political malice on both sides, and inexperience on both sides. Neither side has clean hands. To state otherwise is to deny the facts.