Page:Southern Historical Society Papers volume 03.djvu/210

200 of diplomatic action with the United States, the wrong was so great that we hesitated to believe that Mr. Davis could sanction or defend it. But it appears from this report that Mr. Davis knew General Winder's character, and we quote his own words in his letter of June 20, 1867—"was always, therefore, confident that the charge was unjustly imputed" and that everything was done that could have been expected. We must confess to a feeling of regret that an injudicious advocate has thought it necessary to publish a letter that shows the man whom half of our nation for years delighted to honor, as always knowing the charges and defending the course pursued.

The Secretary expends a considerable space upon stories of wrongs by Northern soldiers, most of which are probably true, but it is hardly worth while to analyze in detail the confused assemblage. Many of the incidents were the unavoidable atrocities of border warfare, not connected with the prisons discussed, and most of the others were exceptional, occurring under officers who were speedily removed, or under unusual circumstances, as appears by the accounts of others in the same report, showing a generally different state of affairs. That sad abuses occurred occasionally is evident enough, but that there was any general ill-treatment for which the Government was responsible there is no reason to believe, except certain suspicious statistics of prison mortality made up from statements of Secretary Stanton as to the number of prisoners taken, and a report of Surgeon Barnes giving the total number of deaths. The result of the calculation is startling, for it shows a rate of mortality in the Confederate prisons, excluding Andersonville, only about one-half of that in the Northern. Bearing in mind the great sacrifice of life at Belle Isle and Libby, and the loose way in which the estimate is made from diverse and inaccessible sources, it seems suspicious in the extreme. It has been impossible to learn anything about it from the present Adjutant-General's office, where the applicant will find himself turned off with some ambiguous statement that the mortality on one side is roughly estimated at 12 per cent., and on the other side at 16 per cent.; and if he asks on which side it was twelve and which sixteen, be refused further information on the ground that to answer such requests "would require the entire clerical force of the office for about three years." It is to be hoped that under the new Administration this stain on the national honor may be removed. But meanwhile our reputation suffers most seriously from the charge, as any one who remembers the flingsfilings? [sic] of foreign journals will recall with mortification.

Now we respectfully ask any one interested in the matter to read what we published on this question, and we feel entirely confident that any fair-minded man will agree with us that the above notice of The Nation is an unfair representation of both our argument and the spirit in which we wrote. Our discussion was not a "