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: Non-Sequitur
The tariff enacted in May 1861 slapped a tariff on virtually every conceivable import including things like all types of clothing, iron goods, tobacco products, and cotton fabrics.

The following site says the 1861 Confederate tariff only generated 3.5 million dollars revenue in four years. Tax Revenue. Most of the Confederate government income came from bonds and loans. I was surprised to see a picture of a Confederate $100 bill on this site -- I have about 10 of that particular bill with the train and lady.

Thanks for the information on the Supreme Court.

61 posted on 08/21/2002 5:59:22 PM PDT by rustbucket
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: rustbucket
Here is a link that shows the tariff legislation with all the different rates and what was covered. If if wasn't much of a money maker then perhaps it's due in part to the blockade and in part to the fact that the southern market for imported goods was small to begin with. But mainly the blockade.
62 posted on 08/21/2002 6:06:11 PM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
The number of Confederates courts-martialed for for rape. Zero!

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

Why is it that I am desperately suppressing the urge to cite some particularly appropriate lines from "Blazing Saddles" ?????

63 posted on 08/21/2002 6:21:10 PM PDT by muleboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: one2many
..A Guide to Cherokee Confederate Military Units, 1861 - 1865
64 posted on 08/21/2002 6:54:37 PM PDT by Consort
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
Do you mean the confederate army punishing such actions? Again, the evidence exists that seems to suggest that the army washed it's hands of the actions of its soldiers.

I find it hard to believe that rapists would be tolerated when deserters were shot. Where did these events occur? Which army are we talking about? Whose command?

Are you equating the Southern command's failure to prosecute instances of pillage and rape with Sherman and Halleck's adoption of it as policy?

65 posted on 08/22/2002 12:24:10 PM PDT by tsomer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: tsomer
I find it hard to believe that rapists would be tolerated when deserters were shot. Where did these events occur? Which army are we talking about? Whose command?

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

Which army we are talking about would be the confederate army in northern Virginia. In November 1861 I believe Johnston was in command. As you can see he is talking about crimes committed against the people of Virginia by its own army, and is washing his hands of any responsibility for those responsible.

Are you equating the Southern command's failure to prosecute instances of pillage and rape with Sherman and Halleck's adoption of it as policy?

It could be said that pillage was the policy of both armies. One mans pillaging is another mans foraging. Lee's army left a trail of empty storehouse and bare farmyards during all their campaigns in the north. And burned and looted houses and factories as well. Free blacks were taken south and towns were threatened with destruction if they didn't pay up. As for rape being a policy, I think the fact that your southron compatriots have listed so many Union soldiers tried and punished for the crime is an indication that that accusation is incorrect.

66 posted on 08/22/2002 12:56:21 PM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: tsomer
Ya'll still fightin' dat war, boy? Gividdup. Don't nobody care!
67 posted on 08/23/2002 6:08:22 PM PDT by bubbafree
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: one2many
And what would it cost should your have to pay for your sins?
68 posted on 08/23/2002 6:13:31 PM PDT by Godfollow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bubbafree
fergit HELL!
I don' 'speck anybody to understand or care if they do.
Jess keep clear if I start up, and nobody gets hurt.
69 posted on 08/23/2002 8:11:15 PM PDT by tsomer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: Jimer
Thanks, that is a good webpage with an excellent bibliography.
70 posted on 08/24/2002 3:17:29 PM PDT by one2many
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: one2many

71 posted on 08/24/2002 3:39:03 PM PDT by Consort
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: Jimer
Excellent. Is that for sale somewhere on a license plate?
72 posted on 08/26/2002 3:08:15 PM PDT by one2many
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: one2many
I found it here.
73 posted on 08/26/2002 5:26:08 PM PDT by Consort
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: yankhater; flicker
Bump to an older thread. Interesting.
74 posted on 09/10/2002 2:20:43 PM PDT by sultan88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sultan88; flicker; Mudboy Slim; goodell70
Seems the writer is telling only one portion of the history. Reparations for anyone not directly affected (i.e. the Holocaust or Japanese Americans) is a silly venture. I am against all reparations; not just for slavery. The reason? Where do you draw the line? Should the Romans repay my ancestors in England and Germany for conquering us? Should the descendants of the Mohicans repay my New Hampshire ancestors for their massacre?

We have a mythology created out of the Lost Cause that makes the assumption that the Northerners were responsible for all the destruction during the war.

19th century warfare was not gentlemanly. In fact no war is ever as clean as it appears on the news. For example:

Confederates regularly foraged on civilians as much as Union soldiers did. General Lee foraged in VA and MD during the Antietam campaign, as in Pennsylvania during Gettysburg. He went to Gettysburg to pick up shoes (think they had credit cards with them?). Foraging was standard practice for any army away from supply bases. Foraging is just a clean army term for taking horses and food from civilians when necessary. Its not really like asking for permission when you have 45,000 rifles. Confederates were supposed to pay for these but gave civilians worthless bonds that were hardly ever redeemed especially late in the war (Washington did the same in the Revolutionary War).

Southern soldiers also commited attrocities as well:

Forrest was responsible for the Ft. Pillow massacre of black Union soldiers who surrended. JEB Stuart raided Chambersburg, PA and nearly burnt it to the ground. Mosby's Rangers routinely pillaged southern Unionist homes. Bloody Bill Anderson and co. sacked both Union and Confederate homes in Missouri killing many civilians. John Hunt Morgan and Quantrill ransacked the Ohio river area. Rape and murder were rare in CS army but reports show that they occurred. At any given campaign 1/3 of the Confederate army were straggling. Stragglers are people who refuse to fight and usually bum around and commit crimes. Some of Sherman's men were cut down by CS irregulars in GA and had signs pinned on them warning the Union men not to come through the area. John Mobberly used his Confederate status to steal horses in Loudoun and Jefferson (WV) counties in VA. I could go on.

Neo-Confederates want to rewrite history. Their efforts to save Confederate statues will be in vain by going this route. The official reports and diaries of southern civilians and soldiers paint a different picture. If they (the Neo-Confederates) want to save the statues, this is the wrong way to do it. They do more harm than good to the memory of Civil War veterans with their revisionism.

As a final note, I recently wrote a 30 page primary source paper on Sherman's March. I tried in vain to find Confederate Georgia civilian accounts about Sherman. I found more people were angrier at the CS government for not protecting them than they were with the Yankees. In fact, the actions of the GA government were quite cowardly - conscripting 14 year old boys to fight, but excempting elected officials in the face of an 100,000 man army.

Sherman's "bummers" did their damage, to be sure, but some of his men also preformed acts of courage to help the civilians. It's all documented. What you will see is with the majority of these "neo-cornfeds" is that they watched "Gone With the Wind" twice and deemed themselves experts on the March to the Sea. Ask them who really burned Atlanta?

75 posted on 09/10/2002 2:58:08 PM PDT by yankhater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: one2many
Great. I guess I am going to start a class action suit for a hostile environment created by zealous southerners against northerners.

I only had one ancestor in country during the War Between the States(a fireman in NY) but I have to endure constant insults on threads refighting the WBTS. Somehow because I was born in NJ it's okay to throw insults and imply I wanted Southern homes burned, women raped etc. And frankly I am tired of it.

This is America and if I am offended I must be compensated.

Of course, this is completely ridiculous but at least I am the directly injured party ;-)

76 posted on 09/10/2002 3:13:46 PM PDT by amused
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yankhater; Landru
"Their efforts to save Confederate statues will be in vain by going this route."

Have you noticed that whenever the media interviews a "Confederate Flag" supporter, they always pick out the ugliest, fattest, fewest toothed, most ignorant flag wavin' representaive of the Cause they can find, just to make all pro-Southerners look like ridiculous rednecks?

77 posted on 09/10/2002 3:27:13 PM PDT by sultan88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: yankhater
Thank you for a very interesting perspective on The War Between the States, my FRiend.

"Seems the writer is telling only one portion of the history. Reparations for anyone not directly affected (i.e. the Holocaust or Japanese Americans) is a silly venture."

Yeah...I believe this Other Reparations Movement was commenced more of a publicity stunt and to make a point. I cannot see how they could possibly be seriously thinking they could receive any sort of settlement.

"We have a mythology created out of the Lost Cause that makes the assumption that the Northerners were responsible for all the destruction during the war."

I'm not sure how widespread that feeling is. Sure, on FR.com, we pick sides and argue with an US versus THEM passion, but I don't know that many FReepers who actually "HATE" Yanks any more than I "HATE" the Dallas Cowboys.

"At any given campaign 1/3 of the Confederate army were straggling. Stragglers are people who refuse to fight and usually bum around and commit crimes. Some of Sherman's men were cut down by CS irregulars in GA and had signs pinned on them warning the Union men not to come through the area. John Mobberly used his Confederate status to steal horses in Loudoun and Jefferson (WV) counties in VA. I could go on."

Someday, it'd be an honor to discuss this further...very interesting stuff for a Civil War neophyte such as myself. Actually, my brother who's in the Air Force is a huge Civil War buff and would be a better match for your apparent knowledge.

"Neo-Confederates want to rewrite history."

As a transplanted Richmonder with roots in Kansas, I reckon I could be considered a Neo-Confederate to some degree, but I disagree that history needs to be rewritten except in those instances where it's been written falsely in the past. There are many folks in this town who would prefer to pretend that Richmond's history never occurred, but I've seen no valid attempts to mess with our Monument Avenue other than to add an Arthur Ashe statue at one end of it. To tell you the truth, it wouldn't bug me terribly much to see L. Douglas Wilder similarly honored on this most-honorable of Avenues.

"As a final note, I recently wrote a 30 page primary source paper on Sherman's March. I tried in vain to find Confederate Georgia civilian accounts about Sherman."

History is written by those who slaughter the vanquished.

"I found more people were angrier at the CS government for not protecting them than they were with the Yankees. In fact, the actions of the GA government were quite cowardly - conscripting 14 year old boys to fight, but exempting elected officials in the face of an 100,000 man army."

If I was an elected official, I reckon I'd have had exempted myself from that suicidal duty as well...especially when you consider that most all the fight-worthy men were already killed or in action elsewhere. We've got a very interesting story to tell about Staunton River Battlefield wherein a few hundred very old men and very young kids withstood a multi-day onslaught from a Union army hell-bent on taking the Staunton River Bridge., but I reckon you've probably studied much of the campaign that occurred in Virginia.

"Sherman's "bummers" did their damage, to be sure, but some of his men also performed acts of courage to help the civilians. It's all documented. What you will see is with the majority of these "neo-cornfeds" is that they watched "Gone With the Wind" twice and deemed themselves experts on the March to the Sea. Ask them who really burned Atlanta?"

LOL...now yer calling me a "neo-cornfed"?! SHEEEESH...guess that's why I remain so uninformed on the Civil War, the "experts" are just sooooo mean to us Civil War neophytes...)8^D!!

FReegards...MUD

78 posted on 09/11/2002 4:03:25 AM PDT by Mudboy Slim
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: sultan88
"Have you noticed that whenever the media interviews a 'Confederate Flag' supporter, [read: OR ANYONE CONTRARY TO THEIR LIBERAL-SOCIALIST UTOPIAN AGENDA] they always pick out the ugliest, fattest, fewest toothed, most ignorant flag wavin' representaive of the Cause they can find, just to make all pro-Southerners look like ridiculous rednecks?"

Why, yes.
As a matter of fact, I *have* noticed this nasty li'l habit of our Liberal-Socialist quisling Lamestream media.

...just the nature of propaganda, eh?

79 posted on 09/11/2002 8:50:51 AM PDT by Landru
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: Mudboy Slim
"Yeah...I believe this Other Reparations Movement was commenced more of a publicity stunt and to make a point."

Precisely.
Here, have a ceeegarrr. ;^)

"History is written by those who slaughter the vanquished."

HA!!!
Lemme guess; this one's vieing for a PhD in history!!!
Right?
Probably intent on "teaching" the kids in some university setting, too.

...& all without the reasoning *power* God gave a fruit fly, too. ~sigh~

80 posted on 09/11/2002 9:00:53 AM PDT by Landru
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | 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