is treated as a rebellion, and the settled international rules between belligerents are ignored. Instead of conducting the war as betwixt two military and political organizations, it is a war against the whole population. Houses are pillaged and burned; churches are defaced; towns are ransacked; clothing of women and infants is stripped from their persons; jewelry and mementoes of the dead are stolen; mills and implements of agriculture are destroyed; private saltworks are broken up; the introduction of medicines is forbidden; means of subsistence are wantonly wasted to produce beggary; prisoners are returned with contagious diseases; the last morsel of food has been taken from families, who are not allowed to carry on a trade or branch of industry; a rigid and offensive espionage has been introduced to ferret out “disloyalty;” persons have been forced to choose between starvation of helpless children and taking the oath of allegiance to a hated government. The cartel for the exchange of prisoners has been suspended, and our unfortunate soldiers subjected to the grossest indignities. The wounded at Gettysburgh were deprived of their nurses and inhumanly left to perish on the field. Helpless women have been exposed to the most cruel outrages and to that dishonor which is infinitely worse than death. Citizens have been murdered by the Butlers and McNeils and Milroys, who are favorite generals of our enemies. Refined and delicate ladies have been seized, bound with cords, imprisoned, guarded by negroes, and held as hostages for the return of recaptured slaves. Unoffending non-combatants have been banished or dragged from their homes to be immured in filthy jails. Preaching the Gospel has been refused, except on condition of taking the oath of allegiance. Parents have been forbidden to name their children in honor of “rebel” chiefs. Property has been confiscated. Military governors have been appointed for States, satraps for provinces, and Haynaus for cities. These cruelties and atrocities of the enemy have been exceeded by their malicious and blood-thirsty purpose and machinations in reference to the slaves. Early in this war, President Lincoln averred his constitutional inability and personal unwillingness to interfere with the domestic institutions of the States and the relation between master and servant. Prudential considerations may have been veiled under conscientious scruples. Mr. Seward, in a confidential instruction to Mr. Adams, the Minister to Great Britain, on tenth March, 1862, said: “If the Government of the United States should precipitately decree the immediate abolition of slavery, it would reinvigorate the declining insurrection in every part of the South.” Subsequent reverses and the refractory rebelliousness of the seceded States caused a change of policy, and Mr. Lincoln issued his celebrated proclamation, a mere brutem fulmen, liberating the slaves in the “insurrectionary districts.” On the twenty-fourth June, 1776, one of the reasons assigned by Pennsylvania for her separation from the mother country was that, in her sister colonies, the “King had excited the negroes to revolt” and to imbue their hands in the blood of their masters, in a manner unpractised by civilized nations. This, probably had reference to the proclamation of Dunmore, the last royal Governor of Virginia, in 1775, declaring freedom to all servants or negroes, if they would join “for the reducing the colony to a proper sense of its duty.” The invitation to the slaves to rise against their masters, the suggested insurrection, caused, says Bancroft, “a thrill of indignation to run through Virginia, effacing all differences of party, and rousing one strong, impassioned purpose to drive away the insolent power by which it had been put forth.” A contemporary annalist, adverting to the same proclamation, said: “It was received with the greatest horror in all the colonies.” “The policy adopted by Dunmore,” says Lawrence in his notes on Wheaton, “of arming the slaves against their masters, was not pursued during the war of the Revolution; and when negoes were taken by the English, they were not considered otherwise than as property and plunder.” Emancipation of slaves as a war measure has been severely condemned and denounced by the, most eminent publicists in Europe and the United States. The United States, “in their diplomatic relations, have ever maintained,” says the Northern authority just quoted, “that slaves were private property, and for them, as such, they have repeatedly received compensation from England.” Napoleon I. was never induced to issue a proclamation for the emancipation of the serfs in his war with Russia. He said: “I could have armed against her a part of her population, by proclaiming the liberty of the serfs. A great number of villages asked it of me, but I refused to avail myself of a measure which would have devoted to death thousands of families.” In the discussions growing out of the treaty of peace of 1814, and the proffered mediation of Russia, the principle was maintained by the United States that “the emancipation of enemy's slaves is not among the acts of legitimate warfare.” In the instructions from John Quincy Adams, as Secretary of State, to Mr: Middleton, at Saint Petersburgh, October eighteenth, 1820, it is said: “The British have broadly asserted the right of emancipating slaves (private property) as a legitimate right of war. No such right is acknowledged as a law of war by writers who admit any limitation. The right of putting to death all prisoners in cold blood, and without special cause, might as well be pretended to be a law of war, or the right to use poisoned weapons, or to assassinate.” Disregarding the teachings of the approved writers on international law and the practice and claims of his own Government in its purer days, President Lincoln has sought to convert the South into a St. Domingo, by appealing to the
This text is part of:
Table of Contents:
Doc . 3 .-attack on the defences of Mobile .
Surrender of Fort Powell .
Battle of Olustee .
Battle of Pleasant Hill .
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.
An XML version of this text is available for download, with the additional restriction that you offer Perseus any modifications you make. Perseus provides credit for all accepted changes, storing new additions in a versioning system.