Camp Douglas

Thanks for mentioning it. Civil War prisons are a neglected area of study. The suffering was real as was the negligence, incompetence, and cruelty.

Its hard to not notice prison camps were yet another case where the Lieber code was seldom enforced........Which I have always pointed out a code seldom or only selectively enforced........isn't much a code at all........
 
Its hard to not notice prison camps were yet another case where the Lieber code was seldom enforced........Which I have always pointed out a code seldom or only selectively enforced........isn't much a code at all........
I believe the code they were going by on prisoners was a Military code which is mentioned in the OR's often.
 



to me its the no code at all, per the constitution military law is set by congress.......general orders 100 wasnt....

It was asked by Halleck as cover to execute guerrillas and imprison civilians in Missouri which it did...…...though to make a presentation of being legal its went beyond that, defining prisoner treatment and treatment of civilians by military...…...yet its only used to execute guerrillas.......jayhawkers, shermans bummers, Union prison authorities who all violated the Lieber code...…..oddly enough are never prosecuted....though technically general orders 100 was to define Union conduct...…….no one else.
 
to me its the no code at all, per the constitution military law is set by congress.......general orders 100 wasnt....

It was asked by Halleck as cover to execute guerrillas and imprison civilians in Missouri which it did...…...though to make a presentation of being legal its went beyond that, defining prisoner treatment and treatment of civilians by military...…...yet its only used to execute guerrillas.......jayhawkers, shermans bummers, Union prison authorities who all violated the Lieber code...…..oddly enough are never prosecuted....though technically general orders 100 was to define Union conduct...…….no one else.

It wasn't officially a "code." Lincoln bypassed the lengthy congressional debates that would ensue and congressional requirement of approval of any codification by dropping the word "code" and replacing it as "instructions" and then issuing the instructions under his authority as Commander in Chief and Chief Executive, as a general order. There is no use of the word "code" in any part of Lincoln's general order.

edited to change "executive order" to "general order"
 
Last edited:
General Orders do not need Congressional approval. I am not sure the president has to issue an executive order. In the end a General Order is just a written order of how the army or unit will do something. Most Civil War Camps had seveal General Orders on how a camp would function. General Orders can be army wide or limited to the solders of a regiment.
 
General Orders do not need Congressional approval. I am not sure the president has to issue an executive order. In the end a General Order is just a written order of how the army or unit will do something. Most Civil War Camps had seveal General Orders on how a camp would function. General Orders can be army wide or limited to the solders of a regiment.

You are correct and I should have said that he issued it as a general order. I've gone back and corrected that portion of my post.
 
It wasn't officially a "code." Lincoln bypassed the lengthy congressional debates that would ensue and congressional requirement of approval of any codification by dropping the word "code" and replacing it as "instructions" and then issuing the instructions under his authority as Commander in Chief and Chief Executive, as a general order. There is no use of the word "code" in any part of Lincoln's general order.

edited to change "executive order" to "general order"
Doesn't matter what you refer to it as....lieber code is frequently used, GO 100, military law or executive orders.... or my favorite the no code at all.........if it's not enforced, it's meaningless.

And for the purpose of this thread, article 56 seems to have been conviently forgotten........
"A prisoner of war is subject to no punishment for being a public enemy, nor is any revenge wreaked upon him by the intentional infliction of any suffering, or disgrace, by cruel imprisonment, want of food, by mutilation, death, or any other barbarity."

So we are left with the code/orders/law that were no code/orders/law at all

Also love "the law of nations knows of no distinction of color" yet the first black confederate is instantly shot......seems a distinction......
 
Last edited:
Doesn't matter what you refer to it as....lieber code is frequently used, GO 100, military law or executive orders.... or my favorite the no code at all.........if it's not enforced, it's meaningless.

And for the purpose of this thread, article 56 seems to have been conviently forgotten........
"A prisoner of war is subject to no punishment for being a public enemy, nor is any revenge wreaked upon him by the intentional infliction of any suffering, or disgrace, by cruel imprisonment, want of food, by mutilation, death, or any other barbarity."

So we are left with the code/orders/law that were no code/orders/law at all

Also love "he law of nations knows of no distinction of color" yet the first black confederate is instantly shot......seems a distinction......

I challenge you to find any contemporary use of the phrase "Lieber code" by Lincoln or the Congress or anyone as a commanding officer in the federal armies. The term "Lieber code" was not used until after the war, but I will wait 4 your links 2 actual quotes that used it prior to May of 1865.
 
I challenge you to find any contemporary use of the phrase "Lieber code" by Lincoln or the Congress or anyone as a commanding officer in the federal armies. The term "Lieber code" was not used until after the war, but I will wait 4 your links 2 actual quotes that used it prior to May of 1865.
I don"t give a squat if you want to challenge it, I refer to it as Leiber code as have seen contemporary historians use the term , I never gave a date for its usage I simply assumed any student today knows the leiber code is general orders 100, if you didn't, you should now as he was the author not Lincoln...your making a straw man argument... semantics over substance is one way to distract from the simple fact of whatever you wish to call it, it was seldom followed, which left it rather meaningless imo

If orders for supposed conduct for Union troops isn't followed or enforced.......it still seems the no code at all.
 
Last edited:
I don"t give a squat if you want to challenge it, I refer to it as Leiber code as have seen contemporary historians use the term , I never gave a date for its usage I simply assumed any student today knows the leiber code is general orders 100, if you didn't, you should now as he was the author not Lincoln...your making a straw man argument... semantics over substance is one way to distract from the simple fact of whatever you wish to call it, it was seldom followed, which left it rather meaningless imo

If orders for supposed conduct for Union troops isn't followed or enforced.......it still seems the no code at all.

As usual, more blow hard bluster rather than fact. You can't even provide a single link to any contemporary use of the term "Lieber Code" from the Congress, Executive or Judicial branches or Federal military from Lincoln's General Orders # 100 proclamation onward. You claimed that "[it's] no code at all, per the constitution military law is set by congress.......general orders 100 wasnt...." I replied that it wasn't "code" or a codification that required congressional approval but rather a war power's act of a Commander in Chief and a president's constitutional authority as the Executive to provide written instructions for the conduct of the Federal military. The other two branches of the Federal government have the right and power to interpret whether Lincoln's action as commander in Chief to issue the instructions violated the Constitution, yet neither branch did and General Orders No. 100 became the basis not only for Union forces but were also adopted for the most part by the Confederacy as a guideline of her rules of warfare until the end of the War as well as many of the other nations of the world after the end of the Civil War. It matters none if some Federal soldiers escaped charges and punishment for violations of G.O. #100 which in every conflict this Nation has been involved with before and after, happened with American military personnel and the rules of warfare they operated under.
 
??? Your the one blustering.....you yourself concede Camp Douglas was inhumane and there's no excuse for it......,the substance of my statement was the code of conduct wasn't followed.........perhaps you'll provide a list of camp commanders prosecuted for allowing the inhumane conditions and treatment the Leiber code was supposed to prevent......or GO 100 if it strokes your ego.

The OP is Camp Douglas and it's inhumane conditions and treatment of prisoners, perhaps you wish to elaborate why no one was held accountable if there were these orders or law to prevent it..........
 
Last edited:
??? Your the one blustering.....you yourself concede Camp Douglas was inhumane and there's no excuse for it......,the substance of my statement was the code of conduct wasn't followed.........perhaps you'll provide a list of camp commanders prosecuted for allowing the inhumane conditions and treatment the Leiber code was supposed to prevent......or GO 100 if it strokes your ego

I can't seem to find an Article 14 in my copy of the United States Constitution.
 
More semantics over substance? Not surprised.........wish me to call it section 14, or line 14, or give me your address so I can come over and hold your hand and show you where the power to set laws for the military is specifically given to Congress and not the executive branch?
 
Last edited:
Its hard to not notice prison camps were yet another case where the Lieber code was seldom enforced........Which I have always pointed out a code seldom or only selectively enforced........isn't much a code at all........
What part of the Code was not enforced in regard to prisoners of war?
 
What part of the Code was not enforced in regard to prisoners of war?

"A prisoner of war is subject to no punishment for being a public enemy, nor is any revenge wreaked upon him by the intentional infliction of any suffering, or disgrace, by cruel imprisonment, want of food, by mutilation, death, or any other barbarity."

The documentary showed intentional suffering....just selecting a location already known to be unsuitable from it being a training camp would be intentional. Obviously something everyone here so far seems to agree was inhumane would certainly qualify as cruel imprisonment. Shooting a black confederate for simply being black.....would also seem to qualify.....as would its death rate......
 
Back
Top