Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Other Reparations Movement
LewRockwell.com ^ | August 19, 2002 | Thomas J. DiLorenzo

Posted on 08/19/2002 5:48:34 AM PDT by one2many

<!-- a{text-decoration:none} //-->

CONTENT="">

 

The Other Reparations Movement

by Thomas J. DiLorenzo

Jack Kershaw of Memphis, Tennessee, wants to file a class-action lawsuit against the US government for reparations. Not on behalf of the descendants of slaves but on behalf of Southerners of all races whose ancestors were the victims of the US government’s rampage of pillaging, plundering, burning, and raping of Southern civilians during the War for Southern Independence.

 
Sherman the Mass Murderer
 

In 1860 international law – and the US government’s own military code – prohibited the intentional targeting of civilians in war, although it was recognized that civilian casualties are always inevitable. "Foraging" to feed an army was acceptable, but compensation was also called for. The kind of wanton looting and destruction of private property that was practiced by the Union army for the entire duration of the war was forbidden, and perpetrators were to be imprisoned or hanged. This was all described in great detail in the book, International Law, authored by San Francisco attorney Henry Halleck, who was appointed by Lincoln as general in chief of the Union armies in July 1862.

International law, the US army’s own military code, and common rules of morality and decency that existed at the time were abandoned by the Union army from the very beginning. A special kind of soldier was used to pillage and plunder private property in the South during the war. In The Hard Hand of War Mark Grimsley writes that the federal Army of the Potomac "possessed its full quotient of thieves, freelance foragers, and officers willing to look the other way," and that "as early as October 1861" General Louis Blenker’s division "was already burning houses and public buildings along its line of march" in Virginia. Prior to the Battle of First Manassas in the early summer of 1861 the Army of the Potomac was marked by "robbing hen roosts, killing hogs, slaughtering beef cattle, cows, the burning of a house or two and the plundering of others."

In Marching through Georgia Sherman biographer Lee Kennett noted that Sherman’s New York regiments "were filled with big city criminals and foreigners fresh from the jails of the Old World."

Unable to subdue their enemy combatants, many Union officers waged war on civilians instead, with Lincoln’s full knowledge and approval. Grimsley describes how Union Colonel John Beatty warned the residents of Paint Rock, Alabama, that "Every time the telegraph wire was cut we would burn a house; every time a train was fired upon we would hang a man; and we would continue to do this until every house was burned and every man hanged between Decatur and Bridgeport." Beatty ended up burning the entire town of Paint Rock to the ground.

The Union army did not merely gather food for itself; it pillaged, plundered, burned, and raped its way through the South for four years. Grimsley recounts a first hand account of the sacking of Fredericksburg, Virginia, in December of 1862:

Great three-story houses furnished magnificently were broken into and their contents scattered over the floors and trampled on by the muddy feet of the soldiers. Splendid alabaster vases and pieces of statuary were thrown at 6 and 700 dollar mirrors. Closets of the very finest china were broken into and their contents smashed . . . rosewood pianos piled in the street and burned . . . Identical events occurred in dozens of other Southern cities and towns for four years.

Sherman was the plunder-in-chief, and he had three solid years of practice for his March to the Sea. In the autumn of 1862 Confederate snipers were firing at Union gunboats on the Mississippi River. Unable to apprehend the combatants, Sherman took revenge on the civilian population by burning the entire town of Randolph, Tennessee, to the ground. In a July 31, 1862 letter to his wife Sherman explained that his purpose in the war was "extermination, not of the soldiers alone, that is the least part of the trouble, but the people."

In the spring of 1863, after the Confederate Army had evacuated, Sherman ordered his army to destroy the town of Jackson, Mississippi. They did, and in a letter to General Ulysses S. Grant Sherman boasted that "The inhabitants [of Jackson] are subjugated. They cry aloud for mercy. The land is devastated for 30 miles around."

Meridian, Mississippi was also destroyed after the Confederate Army had evacuated, after which Sherman wrote to Grant: "For five days, ten thousand of our men worked hard and with a will, in that work of destruction, with axes, sledges, crowbars, clawbars, and with fire, and I have no hesitation in pronouncing the work well done. Meridian . . . no longer exists."

In Citizen Sherman Michael Fellman describes how Sherman’s chief engineer, Captain O.M. Poe, advised that the bombing of Atlanta was of no military significance (the Confederates had already abandoned the city) and implored Sherman to stop the bombardment after viewing the carcasses of dead women and children in the streets. Sherman coldly told him the dead bodies were "a beautiful sight" and commenced the destruction of 90 percent of all the buildings in Atlanta. After that, the remaining 2,000 residents were evicted from their homes just as winter was approaching.

In October of 1864 Sherman even ordered the murder of randomly chosen citizens in retaliation for Confederate Army attacks. He wrote to General Louis D. Watkins: "Cannot you send over about Fairmount and Adairsville, burn ten or twelve houses . . ., kill a few at random, and let them know that it will be repeated every time a train is fired upon . . ." (See John Bennett Walters, Merchant of Terror: General Sherman and Total War, p. 137).

The indiscriminate bombing of Southern cities, which was outlawed by international law at the time, killed hundreds, if not thousands of slaves. The slaves were targeted by Union Army plunderers as much as anyone. As Grimsley writes, "With the utter disregard for blacks that was the norm among Union troops, the soldiers ransacked the slave cabins, taking whatever they liked." A typical practice was to put a hangman’s noose around a slave’s neck and threaten to hang him unless he revealed where the household’s jewelry and silverware were hidden. Some slaves were beaten to death by Union soldiers.

General Phillip Sheridan engaged in the same kind of cowardly, criminal behavior in the Shenandoah Valley of Virginia in the autumn of 1864, after the Confederates had finally evacuated the valley. General Grant ordered him to turn the valley into a "desert," and he and his army did. A sergeant in Sheridan’s army, William T. Patterson, described the pillaging, plundering, and burning of Harrisonburg, Bridgewater, and Dayton Virginia:

The work of destruction is commencing in the suburbs of the town . . . The whole country around is wrapped in flames, the heavens are aglow with the light thereof . . . such mourning, such lamentations, such crying and pleading for mercy I never saw nor never want to see again, some were wild, crazy, mad, some cry for help while others throw their arms around yankee soldiers necks and implore mercy. (See Roy Morris, Jr., Sheridan, p. 184.)

It is important to recognize that at the time the Valley was populated only by women, children, and old men who were too feeble to be in the army. In letters home some of Sheridan’s soldiers described themselves as "barn burners" and "destroyers of homes." One soldier wrote that he had personally burned more than 60 private homes to the ground, as Grimsley recounts. After Sheridan’s work of destruction and theft was finished Lincoln grandly conveyed to him his personal thanks and "the thanks of a nation."

Historian Lee Kennett, author of Marching through Georgia: The Story of Soldiers and Civilians during Sherman’s Campaign, wrote an article in the Atlanta Journal and Constitution last year in which he argued that Southerners had been too critical of Sherman. His book is very favorable to Sherman and Lincoln, but he nevertheless wrote on page 286 that:

Had the Confederates somehow won, had their victory put them in position to bring their chief opponents before some sort of tribunal, they would have found themselves justified (as victors generally do) in stringing up President Lincoln and the entire Union high command for violation of the laws of war, specifically for waging war against noncombatants.

If Mr. Kershaw’s lawsuit goes to trial, Lincoln and his high command will finally be put before a tribunal, of sorts. He probably has little if any hope of winning such a case (in federal court!), but the trial record would go a long way toward combating the whitewashing of history that has occurred for the past 140 years.

August 19, 2002

Thomas J. DiLorenzo [send him mail] is the author of the LRC #1 bestseller, The Real Lincoln: A New Look at Abraham Lincoln, His Agenda, and an Unnecessary War (Forum/Random House, 2002) and professor of economics at Loyola College in Maryland.

Copyright © 2002 LewRockwell.com

Thomas DiLorenzo Archives

 

Back to LewRockwell.com Home Page



TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Government
KEYWORDS: criminal; dixielist; lincoln; sheridan; sherman; warcrimes
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081 next last
To: dighton
"The Tyrant Lincoln burned my g-g-g grandma's piano" alert.

"Hard Drinkin' Lincoln" bump...

21 posted on 08/19/2002 7:20:25 AM PDT by general_re
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: general_re
Hic!
22 posted on 08/19/2002 7:26:36 AM PDT by dighton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: one2many
Re: the debauchery and attacks against civilians perpetrated by the yankees - Dr. Thomas P. Lowry, author of Tarnished Eagles: The Court-Martial of Fifty Union Colonels and Lieutenant Colonels, researched ALL courts-martial of that war from both sides (over 22,000), and noted that there were over 300 yankees were courts-martialed and executed for raping southern women.

The number of Confederates courts-martialed for for rape:

    Zero. Zip. Zilch. Nada. None.

23 posted on 08/19/2002 7:37:37 AM PDT by 4CJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: one2many
A very good and informative post on the declaration of causes for the Cherokee nation allying itself with the Confederacy. I had not seen this before. As a southerner who is part Cherokee I guess it makes sense why my passions run so deep as even to this day the "Union" under the guise of the alphabet gestapo tries to rewrite our history and destroy the memories of our heritage.
24 posted on 08/19/2002 9:25:28 AM PDT by sweetliberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: dighton

Your Tyrant Lincoln is no match for our g-g-g grandmother's piano.
You are DOOMED!!!!!!!
25 posted on 08/19/2002 9:50:37 AM PDT by aomagrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: one2many
Here is a link to the National Coalition of Blacks for Reparations in America, or N'COBRA for short, website. I'm sure that you two will have a lot to discuss what with you having so much in common on the reparations issue and all.
26 posted on 08/19/2002 9:54:59 AM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 4ConservativeJustices
The number of Confederates courts-martialed for for rape.

Rape wasn't a crime in the confederate army, was it?

27 posted on 08/19/2002 9:56:52 AM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: one2many
I am as opposed to this as I am to reparations for slavery. Both arguments are patently absurd.

It's 2002. Time to live in the present for a change.

28 posted on 08/19/2002 9:59:46 AM PDT by rdb3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: one2many
Everyone can find some reason that someone owes them reparations. I realize this is in response to the blacks demanding reparations for slavery, and I hope their point gets across quickly so they drop this silly lawsuit.
29 posted on 08/19/2002 10:36:37 AM PDT by MEGoody
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 4ConservativeJustices
"The number of Confederates courts-martialed for for rape"

Maybe for the south, it was not a court martial worthy offense. I wouldn't know, and don't really care. It was hundreds of years ago.

30 posted on 08/19/2002 10:40:04 AM PDT by MEGoody
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: MEGoody; Non-Sequitur
The Confederate military employed the "Articles of War" from 1806, and "Regulations for the Army of The Confederate States, 1863."

The only difference between the union & confederate versions was the substitution of "Confederate" for "United".

31 posted on 08/19/2002 11:31:15 AM PDT by 4CJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: 4ConservativeJustices
WAR DEPARTMENT, C.S.A, Richmond, November 22, 1861.
John Letcher, Governor of Virginia:
SIR:
Will not your convention do something to protect your own people against atrocious crimes committed on their persons and property? There are in the Army, unfortunately, some desperate characters - men gathered from the outskirts and purlieus of large cities - who take advantage of the absence of the civil authorities to commit crimes, even murder, rape, and highway robbery, on the peaceful citizens in the neighborhood of the armies. For these offenses the punishment should be inflicted by the civil authorities (...) There are murderers now in insecure custody at Manassas who cannot be tried for want of a court there, and who will escape the just penalty of their crimes. The crimes committed by these men are not military offenses. If a soldier, rambling through the country, murders a farmer or violates the honor of his wife or daughter, courts-martial cannot properly take cognizance of the offense, nor is it allowable to establish military commissions or tribunals in our own country. I appeal to Virginia legislators for protection to Virginians, and this appeal will, I know, be responded to by prompt and efficient action.
I am, very respectfully, your obedient servant,
J.P. Benjamin, Secretary of War

Looks like the Articles of War meant about as much to the confederate leadership as the confederate constitution did.

32 posted on 08/19/2002 12:13:32 PM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: MEGoody
Everyone can find some reason that someone owes them reparations. I realize this is in response to the blacks demanding reparations for slavery, and I hope their point gets across quickly so they drop this silly lawsuit.

After the blacks get their reparations checks, look for the Mexicans in this country - even the illegal ones - to demand reparations for having the Southwest "stolen" from them.

If the blacks think they have white hostility now, wait until they've bilked their neighbors, co-workers, friends, etc. in such a scam like this one. I don't want to be around when the race riots reignite; damn glad I live in the country with dogs and guns.

33 posted on 08/19/2002 12:20:57 PM PDT by Lizavetta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
Looks like the Articles of War meant about as much to the confederate leadership as the confederate constitution did.

Nonsense. If anything, it serves as a distinction that under the existing Articles of War that civilian crimes could not be tried in military courts/tribunals. At that time failure of the commanding officer to deliver the suspect in question to civil authorities was itself an offense under Article 33:

If any commanding officer or officers shall wilfully neglect, or shall refuse, upon the application aforesaid, to deliver over such accused person or persons to the civil magestrate, or to be aiding and assisting to the officers of justice in apprehending such person or persons, the officer or officers so offending shall be cashiered.

Nevertheless, at the time (November 1861) the Confederate Congress had not authorized military courts to try such cases, that was remedied via legislation on 9 Oct 1862:

SEC. 4. The jurisdiction of each court shall extend to all officers now cognizable by courts martial under the rules and articles of war and the customs of war, and also to all offences defined as crimes by the laws of the Confederate States or of the several States, and when beyond the territory of the Confederate States, to all cases of murder, manslaughter, arson, rape, robbery and larceny, as defined by the common law, when committed by any private or officer in the army of the Confederate States, against any other private or officer in the army, or against the property or person of any citizen or other person not in the army."
An Act to organize military courts to attend the Army of the Confederate States in the field, and to define the powers of said courts.
The war was far from over. Yet still no Confederate courts-martial for rape occurred.
34 posted on 08/19/2002 3:08:42 PM PDT by 4CJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: 4ConservativeJustices
Rape is a civilian crime? Even when committed by soldiers? What you seem to be saying is that the Union army had processes in place to try those who committed outrages on civilians, but the confederate army couldn't be bothered. Still, when your civilian leadership has no respect for the law, that opinion is sure to trickle down to the lower ranks. On the other hand, you also seem to be implying that confederate soldiers didn't rape anyone, which is, of course, false since records exist to the contrary. They tended to confine their activities to their own civilian population and Union sympathizers.

"The men have behaved themselves the best I saw them either home or abroad. Every man has seemed to be on his good behavior since we entered Atlanta. The women have been dressed up waiting for our men to commence raping but they have waited in vain. There has not been a single outrage commited in this city, a circumstance that the people say they cannot say for the rebel army." - William Dunn, Surgeon, U.S. Army.

The soldiers "..blew out the parlor and passage lights, broke up the furniture, scattered the shrieking women like New York Zouaves before the bristling bayonets of North Carolina infantry, and to crown their unfortunate exploits, committed, it is alleged, an outrage upon the person of a "phrail phair one" named Eliza Liggon" - "The Richmond Examiner, June 13/18 1861, reporting on a visit of a detachment of McCulloch rangers of New Orleans, in the establishment of Clara Coleman at Richmond. Three men were held for rape

35 posted on 08/19/2002 5:45:15 PM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
From my #23: The number of Confederates courts-martialed for for rape: Zero. Zip. Zilch. Nada. None.

A statement of fact. As presented above, the Confederacy codified rape as an offense (previously prosecuted under civilian law as per the 1806 "Articles of War") in 1862. With that law in place there are still "0" courts-martial for the offense of rape perpetrated by a Confederate soldier.

36 posted on 08/19/2002 6:02:17 PM PDT by 4CJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: 4ConservativeJustices
So in other words, it wasn't that confederate soldiers never raped, they just weren't tried for it? That sounds like either a condemnation of the confederate military or a condemnation of what passed for the confederate legal system.
37 posted on 08/19/2002 6:07:09 PM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
That sounds like either a condemnation of the confederate military or a condemnation of what passed for the confederate legal system.

Au contraire. Along with Article 33 above, this section of Article 32 applied as well:

Every officer commanding in quarters, garrisons, or on the march, shall keep good order, and, to the utmost of his power, redress all abuses or disorders which may be committed by any officer or soldier under his command.
Again, the Confederates codified the offense so that military courts/tribunals would have jurisdiction. If a rape (or other offense) did occur the commanding officer was legally bound to arrange for judicial proceedings.
38 posted on 08/19/2002 7:07:11 PM PDT by 4CJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
Spare us your two selective examples when there's a well known website that list over 100 rapes during the war between the states
39 posted on 08/19/2002 8:05:42 PM PDT by shuckmaster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: dighton
"The Tyrant Lincoln burned my g-g-g grandma's piano" alert.

Actually the tyrant murdered mine's civilian farmer husband without legitimate reason and in cold blood. GGG grandpa's brother and the next door neighbor were also shot along side him.

I'm not sure if the tyrant ever made it to grandma's piano or if she even had one, but if she did it probably got burned with the rest of the farm after the murders.

40 posted on 08/20/2002 12:50:49 AM PDT by GOPcapitalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson