Branded 'D' for Deserter

[Nathan Stuart]

So I am not familiar with how the CS government functioned.
Why would the the War Dept request the governor's assistance?
If in the service of the CSA, I would think it his issue- not Vance?

Apparently there were significantly more deserters from North Carolina than any other Confederate state during the war. The abnormally high number of desertions by North Carolina soldiers might explain why Governor Zeb Vance's extra help and support was sought in particular, to try and quell the exodus from Lee's Army of troops from his own state.

 

[Nathan Stuart]

The Confederate Congress adopted military laws, which included Articles of War, for regulating the operation of its military forces.

Under Article 20, convicted army deserters (officers or soldiers) were subject to any punishment, including death, imposed by the judgement of a court-martial. This meant that the court-martial had a discretion to unrestrictedly impose a wide range of punishments for desertion, and that presumably included branding. As far as I can ascertain, the punishment of branding was never officially banned by the Confederacy during the war.

However, the Confederate Congress passed legislation, as from April 13, 1863, making it unlawful for any court-martial or military court to impose the punishment of whipping on any Confederate soldier. (The U.S. Congress prohibited whipping of Union soldiers as from August 5, 1861).

 

[Josh The Lighthouse Guy]

Pvt. W F Dover, Co F, 16th NC Regt.
William F Dover, age 18, residence Buncombe County. Enlisted 7 May 1861 at Asheville for 12 months, Promoted to 1st Corporal 16 March 1864. Deserted 26 March 1865, pledged the Oath and furnished transportation to Columbus, Ohio.
Court Martial 11 February 1863
"To be branded on the left hip with the letter 'D' three inches in length."

Amazing that he got promoted a year after being branded for desertion.

Also interesting that after desertng the second time, the day after Fort Stedman, he went to Ohio.

Well…… placing a red hot iron on any part of my body (concealed or no) would serve as a deterrent- to me.

Not joining the Yellowstone ranch then?

 

[Nathan Stuart]

Amazing that he got promoted a year after being branded for desertion.

Think that might reflect the manpower shortage they had by this latter stage of the war. (They perhaps had to scrape the bottom of the barrel).

 

[Sheltowee]

Think that might reflect the manpower shortage they had by this latter stage of the war. (They perhaps had to scrape the bottom of the barrel).

Maybe he got his mind right.

 

[Nathan Stuart]

Also interesting that after desertng the second time, the day after Fort Stedman, he went to Ohio.

Maybe, because of his two desertions, he felt that the shame and reputational damage would be too much for him to bear if he returned home to his local community in North Carolina. Perhaps, sensing that the end of the war was near, he chose to travel far away to Ohio, to escape any scrutiny.

Nothwithstanding both desertions, it looks like his period of active service in the Confederate Army was still a fair stint.

 

[Reconstructed Rebel]

Maybe, because of his two desertions, he felt that the shame and reputational damage would be too much for him to bear if he returned home to his local community in North Carolina. Perhaps, sensing that the end of the war was near, he chose to travel far away to Ohio, to escape any scrutiny.

Nothwithstanding his two desertions, it looks like the period of active service in the Confederate Army was still a fair stint.

I don't think he would be alone in not returning to his community after the war if his actions were less than idealized. Men went north, South and West to start new lives for all sorts of reasons and that would be a good one.

I also think as many small farmers in western Virginia, western North Carolina and eastern Tennessee, did not want to leave the Union and did not support the Confederacy. The ones in western Virginia had an easy solution, and Tennessee was reclaimed fairly early in the war, but the North Carolina men were trapped. They were conscripted against their will and desertion at the first opportunity might have been seen as their best option. The NC desertion rate had more to do with principle than any unusual lack of courage.

 

[d17574]

Thank you for this reference.

While researching something else, I came across the site - "Connecticut Civil War Executions' (for desertion). At the bottom of the page are links to Civil War Executions in other states.

Connecticut Civil War Executions – Genealogy Quest

genealogy-quest.com

 

[Nathan Stuart]

While researching something else, I came across the site - "Connecticut Civil War Executions' (for desertion). At the bottom of the page are links to Civil War Executions in other states.

Connecticut Civil War Executions – Genealogy Quest

genealogy-quest.com

Interesting information. This list of Connecticut CW Executions support claims that the vast majority of execution punishments imposed by military authorities for the offense of desertion were by firing squad.

 

[Tom Elmore]

Another example:

"A French Canadian who left without permission on our march to Gettysburg was tried, sentenced … half of his head shaved close, shoulder branded with letter D." (The Story of the Thirty-Second Regiment Massachusetts Infantry, by Francis J. Parker, Colonel, Boston: C. W. Calkins & Co., Publishers, 1880)

 

[rbasin]

Back in 1840, my g g grandfather was court martialed for deserting Ft Tampa. I have the record. He was sentenced to 50 lashings and had to pay the cost of finding him. It was reduced to 25. He skipped out again I think in 1841. Ended up in Lockport NY somehow.

 

[Sharon C.]

Thank you for this specific information.

Given the frequency of desertions, especially by 1863, it would be interesting to know the gravity of the crime here – in other words, what was so peculiar or unique about these particular circumstances to warrant such an unusual punishment administered here. Also realize, that unit commanders inconsistently applied a range of punishments.

To me, the punishment of branding was designed to be a drastic and harsh punitive measure, by leaving a permanent reminder. It seems that branding a concealed part of the body, like the hip, rather than a visible area, like the face, is somewhat counter-productive and would not serve as much of a punitive punishment deterrent (if that was the intent).

That NC boy lasted throughout the whole war, than at the eleventh hour, decided to run... makes not sense, does it? Having never served in the military, I don't have a clue what he went thru, saw done, or had to do himself! Maybe March 1865 was just the last straw for this (seemingly) 22 year old??? Sharon

 

[Nathan Stuart]

Was interested to read that during Sherman's march through the Carolinas a soldier of the 48th​ Illinois was found guilty by military court-martial of commiting the crime of rape back in Georgia. For punishment, his head was shaved, his eyes were blackened (presumably from a beating) and his forehead was painted in red ink with the letters 'D R', to brand him as both a deserter and rapist. He was then drummed out of the unit and driven into enemy country at the point of bayonets, leaving him to find his own way home.

Am wondering what type of ink was used to brand him. Was it a permanent type of tattoo ink or some temporary erasable kind of marking? Any permanent ink markings would surely have made the convicted offender's lone journey through hostile territory much more hazardous.

 

[SeaTurtle]

Was interested to read that during Sherman's march through the Carolinas a soldier of the 48th​ Illinois was found guilty by military court-martial of commiting the crime of rape back in Georgia. The punishment was his head was shaved, his eyes were blackened (presumably from a beating) and his forehead was painted in red ink with the letters 'D R', to brand him as both a deserter and rapist. He was then drummed out of the unit and driven into enemy country at the point of bayonets, leaving him to find his own way home.

Am wondering what type of ink was used to brand him. Was it a permanent type of tattoo ink or some temporary erasable kind of marking? Any permanent ink markings would surely have made the convicted offender's lone journey through hostile territory much more hazardous.

I don't know about the US/CS, but I've read that the British army between the 1820s-70s replaced branding with tattooing to mark deserters. Here's an example of what the Brits used, circa 1850, to tattoo deserters: https://collection.nam.ac.uk/detail.php?acc=1960-01-167-1

Anyone know if the US/CS military did the same?