Camp Douglas

[CSA Today]

Political considerations trumped humane interests in the Lincoln regime no matter whose POWs suffered the consequences.

 

[archieclement]

Although there was immense mistreatment, suffering and high death rates, I think it's over the top that the narrator referred to Camp Douglas as an "extermination camp" which puts it on the same level as those of WW II that were purposely designed and used as such. Likewise I would not refer to any other Federal or Confederate POW camp as an "extermination camp."

Extermination camp may be a bit over the top, but one of the rather disturbing aspects I remember from reading about it, is when it was selected to be used as a prison camp, they were all ready aware of its unsuitablity and unsanitary conditions from when it had been a training camp.

It does seem whatever the motive one attributes to its selection.........they were aware it was going to be bad at capacity beforehand, much less filling it way over capacity. So whether one finds death camp appropriate........the results certainly were and should have been more then foreseeable

 

[Copperhead-mi]

Extermination camp may be a bit over the top, but one of the rather disturbing aspects I remember from reading about it, is when it was selected to be used as a prison camp, they were all ready aware of its unsuitablity and unsanitary conditions from when it had been a training camp.

It does seem whatever the motive one attributes to its selection.........they were aware it was going to be bad at capacity beforehand, much less filling it way over capacity. So whether one finds death camp appropriate........the results certainly were and should have been more then foreseeable

"They began as prisons or holding facilities but, with few exceptions, quickly became nothing more than American concentration camps. Prisoners were crammed into them with complete disregard of capacity limits, hygiene, nutrition, or sanitation needs. Within a short time neither government could cope with the problems created by such a high concentration of people in such small areas or the lack of coordination within the prison system. In the end, more than 56,000 prisoners of war died in confinement, and many more were in poor or failing health when finally released.

"Neither side was more at fault than the other. The number of deaths in Confederate prisons totaled 30,218, or a little more than 15 percent of those incarcerated. In Federal prisons, there were 25,796 deaths, or slightly more than 12 percent. Although propaganda during and after the war convinced many people that the Confederate prisons were much worse than those maintained by the Union, a close examination reveals there were few differences. If Union soldiers were stricken with fear upon entering the gates of Andersonville Prison, Confederates were shocked upon learning that they were headed for Fort Delaware or Elmira prisons.

"The death rate in all the prisons amounted to nearly 13 percent of the total confined. In comparison, those who remained on the battlefield fared much better; based on available figures there, only 5 percent of the total enlistments of both sides were killed.

"When the remaining prisoners were finally released at the end of the war, they were convinced they had suffered through a conscious government effort to reduce their ranks by starvation and disease. At the same time, the public accused both sides of having used the prisoners as pawns to be sacrificed.

"In reality, though, the high mortality rate in the prisons was never intended by either side. There was never any organized effort by one government or the other to eliminate its enemy through concentration camps."
Portals To Hell - Military Prisons of the Civil War, Lonnie R. Speer, pg. xiv

 

[archieclement]

"They began as prisons or holding facilities but, with few exceptions, quickly became nothing more than American concentration camps. Prisoners were crammed into them with complete disregard of capacity limits, hygiene, nutrition, or sanitation needs. Within a short time neither government could cope with the problems created by such a high concentration of people in such small areas or the lack of coordination within the prison system. In the end, more than 56,000 prisoners of war died in confinement, and many more were in poor or failing health when finally released.

"Neither side was more at fault than the other. The number of deaths in Confederate prisons totaled 30,218, or a little more than 15 percent of those incarcerated. In Federal prisons, there were 25,796 deaths, or slightly more than 12 percent. Although propaganda during and after the war convinced many people that the Confederate prisons were much worse than those maintained by the Union, a close examination reveals there were few differences. If Union soldiers were stricken with fear upon entering the gates of Andersonville Prison, Confederates were shocked upon learning that they were headed for Fort Delaware or Elmira prisons.

"The death rate in all the prisons amounted to nearly 13 percent of the total confined. In comparison, those who remained on the battlefield fared much better; based on available figures there, only 5 percent of the total enlistments of both sides were killed.

"When the remaining prisoners were finally released at the end of the war, they were convinced they had suffered through a conscious government effort to reduce their ranks by starvation and disease. At the same time, the public accused both sides of having used the prisoners as pawns to be sacrificed.

"In reality, though, the high mortality rate in the prisons was never intended by either side. There was never any organized effort by one government or the other to eliminate its enemy through concentration camps."
Portals To Hell - Military Prisons of the Civil War, Lonnie R. Speer, pg. xiv

That seems to be a difference......Douglas wasn't built as a prison camp to later be found unsuitable......they were aware it was unsuitable when it was selected.........

 

[Copperhead-mi]

That seems to be a difference......Douglas wasn't built as a prison camp to later be found unsuitable......they were aware it was unsuitable when it was selected.........

Actually when it was first established, Camp Douglas which was not inteneded to hold as many prisoners as it eventually did, was considered suitable by the Confederate prisoners with some complimenting that they "had kitchens supplied with stoves and cooking utensils" and had more provisions than they were able to consume. Others claimed they had as much clothing as they wanted along with a "good sutler's store" where they "could buy many luxuries that Uncle Sam failed to furnish."

It was with the rapid influx of Confederate prisoners from the Western theater that caused the rapid deterioration of conditions due to the fact that the Federal government could not find other prisoner facilities to funnel off the huge influx of prisoners - with many of them being sick and wounded- arriving at Camp Douglas. At that point things spiraled out of control, which was the point of my original post that no POW facility, Union or Confederate, was opened as or intended as an extermination camp.

 

[major bill]

Few modern scholars would call Civil War prisoner of war camps "extermination camps" or "concentration camps". Modern folks that use these terms most likely have an agenda and pay little regard to studing history in an honest way.

 

[archieclement]

Actually when it was first established, Camp Douglas which was not inteneded to hold as many prisoners as it eventually did, was considered suitable by the Confederate prisoners with some complimenting that they "had kitchens supplied with stoves and cooking utensils" and had more provisions than they were able to consume. Others claimed they had as much clothing as they wanted along with a "good sutler's store" where they "could buy many luxuries that Uncle Sam failed to furnish."

It was with the rapid influx of Confederate prisoners from the Western theater that caused the rapid deterioration of conditions due to the fact that the Federal government could not find other prisoner facilities to funnel off the huge influx of prisoners - with many of them being sick and wounded- arriving at Camp Douglas. At that point things spiraled out of control, which was the point of my original post that no POW facility, Union or Confederate, was opened as or intended as an extermination camp.

From what I read it was it was built on low laying swampy area, it had become evident it from it use as a training camp it was unhealthy, poorly drained, and prone to flooding and bringing refuse back to surface with rain............

Which is why I say regardless of motive......one can cite necessity, or that parts already existed from the training camp....but when its known beforehand its poorly suited for concentrations of people, one can certainly question malice as a motive......but in the end the motive is somewhat mute......as any nation is in the end is responsible for the prisoners in its care, and its certainly hard to make much a case for prisons such as Douglas, Rock Island, or Elmira as being successes in humane treatment and care

 

[Rebforever]

Few modern scholars would call Civil War prisoner of war camps "extermination camps" or "concentration camps". Modern folks that use these terms most likely have an agenda and pay little regard to studing history in an honest way.

What would one call a situation where food was withheld for political purposes?

 

[major bill]

What were the daily calories of rations issed at Camp Douglas and what were the ordered level of daily calories?

 

[archieclement]

Few modern scholars would call Civil War prisoner of war camps "extermination camps" or "concentration camps". Modern folks that use these terms most likely have an agenda and pay little regard to studing history in an honest way.

Just curious the first mass arrival of prisoners at Camp Douglas occur in February.....where the average high is 35 and the average low is 20………..do you not honestly think perhaps a need for cold weather clothing for prisoners from warmer climates wasnt foreseeable?

Because it would seem very forseeable to me.....and the lack thereof would seem willful neglect.

 

[Rebforever]

What were the daily calories of rations issed at Camp Douglas and what were the ordered level of daily calories?

There probably didn't keep count of calories. If there is a list of calories post it. One has to have food to even count calories. 1200 calories is a starvation diet. They were way below that according to what I have read.

 

[byron ed]

He ran the army so he is in charge. And he had the chance to feed those prisoners. Andersonville sent a Union Soldier who wanted to go talk to Lincoln about some meds, and food for the Union solders there. He and his minions wouldn't even do that

This is merely lack of knowledge about Lincoln and those reporting to him (shall they be called "minions", really?). There's plenty of period accounts of Lincoln as a manager. Reality check: He didn't personally or specifically order the cutting of rations for prisoners at either Camp Douglas or Andersonville. To even suppose he had any actual sway about the feeding of prisoners at Andersonville; that's laughable.

Demonization of historical figures doesn't really fly well here.

 

[major bill]

There probably didn't keep count of calories. If there is a list of calories post it. One has to have food to even count calories.

You claim the were intentionalty being starved. Is it not you that ahould prove this?

 

[Copperhead-mi]

From what I read it was it was built on low laying swampy area, it had become evident it from it use as a training camp it was unhealthy, poorly drained, and prone to flooding and bringing refuse back to surface with rain............

Which is why I say regardless of motive......one can cite necessity, or that parts already existed from the training camp....but when its known beforehand its poorly suited for concentrations of people, one can certainly question malice as a motive......but in the end the motive is somewhat mute......as any nation is in the end is responsible for the prisoners in its care, and its certainly hard to make much a case for prisons such as Douglas, Rock Island, or Elmira as being successes in humane treatment and care

Off the top of my head I can't think of any POW facilities after mid-1862, Federal or Confederate, that could be singled out as examples of providing humane treatment.

 

[Copperhead-mi]

There probably didn't keep count of calories. If there is a list of calories post it. One has to have food to even count calories. 1200 calories is a starvation diet. They were way below that according to what I have read.

Rock Island is the usual target from the current Lost Cause advocates who claim the Confederate prisoners were "purposely starved to death" by the rations being "cut in half."

Even with the reduced rations, they equaled the same exact rations as issued by the Confederate government to their own troops.

Colonel William H. Hoffman, the Federal Commissary General of Prisons, made the initial recommendation to Secretary of War Stanton that prisoner's rations be reduced. While by no means was the reduction of rations going leave the prisoner with a full belly, it was neither a starvation ration:


"Washington, D. C., May 19, 1864.
Honorable E. M. STANTON, Secretary of War, Washington, D.C.:
SIR: I have the honor to suggest that the ration as now issued to prisoners of war may be considerably reduced without depriving them of the food necessary to keep them in health, and I respectfully recommend that hereafter the ration be composed as follows, viz: Hard bread, 14 ounces, or 16 ounces soft bread; corn-meal, 16 ounces; beef, 14 ounces; pork or bacon, 10 ounces; beans, 6 quarts per 100 men, or rice, 8 pounds per 100 men; sugar, 12 pounds per 100 men; coffee, 5 pounds ground or 7 pounds raw per 100 men, or tea, 1 pound per 100 men; soap, 4 pounds per 100 men; salt, 2 quarts per 100 men; vinegar, 3 quarts per men; molasses, 1 quart per 100 men; potatoes, 15 pounds per 100 men. I also recommend that ration of sugar and coffee, as above fixed, be issued only every other day.

I have the honor to be, very respectfully, your obedient servant,
W. HOFFMAN, Colonel Third Infantry and Commissary-General of Prisoners"
O.R., Series II, Vol VII, Part 1 pp. 150-151


General Halleck, who had received a copy of Hoffman's request to Stanton, also made suggestion to "dispense with tea, coffee, and sugar and reduce the ration to that issued by the rebel Government to their own troops."
Halleck's request was agreed to by both the federal officer in charge of subsistence and the Secretary of War, Stanton:

"MAY 19, 1864.
Respectfully referred as above directed. Why not dispense with tea, coffee, and sugar and reduce the ration to that issued by the rebel Government to their own troops?
H. W. HALLECK,
Major-General and Chief of Staff. "
Ibid., pg. 151


The acting Surgeon-General concurred with Halleck on the reduced rations for healthy prisoners but objected to it applying to sick or wounded prisoners. Halleck approved the modification of the ration order to include "tea, coffee, and sugar" for those prisoners:

"I concur with the views expressed by Major-General Halleck.
J. P. TAYLOR,
Commissary-General of Subsistence.
_________________________

I respectfully approve of the reduction of the ration as suggested by Major-General Halleck.
W. HOFFMAN,
Colonel Third Infantry and Commissary-General of Prisoners.
_________________________________

SURGEON-GENERAL'S OFFICE, May 19, 1864.

The reduction proposed by Major-General Halleck could be carried out with the exception of the ration for the sick and wounded, who would require that proposed by Colonel Hoffman or more than its equivalent in medicine and hospital items.
Very respectfully,
J. K. BARNES,
Acting Surgeon-General.
_________________________

MAY 27, 1864.
Proposed ration, except that sick and wounded are to have tea, coffee, and sugar, approved.
H. W. HALLECK,
Major-General and Chief of Staff.
________________________________

The ration approved by the Chief of Staff and Surgeon-General approved.
EDWIN M. STANTON,
Secretary of War. "
Ibid., pg. 151


While there was too much death and suffering in Northern prisons which is a black mark on the Federal government, some of it can be attributed to the rapid influx during 1864 of thousands and thousands of Confederate prisoners, many in poor health or suffering from severe wounds and the inability in some cases of a system incapable handling it. Blame can also be placed at the foot of incompetent or sadistic Union camp commanders and camp personnel who should of been tried and hanged just as Henry Wirz was, but it is incorrect to place blame on an order that never existed.

 

[byron ed]

Political considerations trumped humane interests in the Lincoln regime no matter whose POWs suffered the consequences.

The Lincoln"regime" eh? We were thinking Lincoln was duly elected to a 4-year term in office.

 

[major bill]

"Washington, D. C., May 19, 1864.
Honorable E. M. STANTON, Secretary of War, Washington, D.C.:
SIR: I have the honor to suggest that the ration as now issued to prisoners of war may be considerably reduced without depriving them of the food necessary to keep them in health, and I respectfully recommend that hereafter the ration be composed as follows, viz: Hard bread, 14 ounces, or 16 ounces soft bread; corn-meal, 16 ounces; beef, 14 ounces; pork or bacon, 10 ounces; beans, 6 quarts per 100 men, or rice, 8 pounds per 100 men; sugar, 12 pounds per 100 men; coffee, 5 pounds ground or 7 pounds raw per 100 men, or tea, 1 pound per 100 men; soap, 4 pounds per 100 men; salt, 2 quarts per 100 men; vinegar, 3 quarts per men; molasses, 1 quart per 100 men; potatoes, 15 pounds per 100 men. I also recommend that ration of sugar and coffee, as above fixed, be issued only every other day.

If this was actually fed to the prisoners, this is enough food, The problem, as I see it, is what did the prisoners really get? Both the Confederacy and Union had orders and directives that, on paper, gave the prisoner enough to eat. The prisoners however, did not always get what the orders indicated. Government quartermasters and contract food providers probably provided about half of the required calories. The above is probably around 3,000 or more calories per day. This is fine for soldiers marching and fighting, but 2,500 calories would be more in line for inactive prisoners.

The problem with this is, is Halleck talking about what Confederate soldiers were according to Confederate orders suppose to get, or what they were actually getting?

"MAY 19, 1864.
Respectfully referred as above directed. Why not dispense with tea, coffee, and sugar and reduce the ration to that issued by the rebel Government to their own troops?
H. W. HALLECK,
Major-General and Chief of Staff. "
Ibid., pg. 151

 

[archieclement]

Off the top of my head I can't think of any POW facilities after mid-1862, Federal or Confederate, that could be singled out as examples of providing humane treatment.

So you agree there little defense for Camp Douglas, I certainly wouldn't argue that.

However my point not all camps were picked from existing places all ready known to be unsanitary and unhealthy, would still stand.....hard to see the logic in picking a place all ready known to be unsuited

Would note other camps after 1862, Union or Confederate is somewhat irrelevant as this thread was just about Camp Douglas, perhaps some comparison to other Union camps might have some degree of merit, but comparisons to confederate or Nazi camps seem to be a bit down the off topic rail to distraction from the OP.......

If however as you claim all United States camps post mid 62 were inhumane, that would seem to suggest policy, which would suggest leadership........at least when a Missourian was president it was suggested the buck starts and stops at that desk. The buck being responsibility. ............

 

[major bill]

In the book While in the Hands of the Enemy by Charles W. Sanders Jr. he say at in 1863 at Camp Douglas every three days each prisoners received "three quarters of pound of bacon or 1 pound of beef, good baked wheat bread, hominy, coffee, candles, soap,salt, pepper, potatoes, and molasses". Without fruits or vegetables this not not a healthy diet and probably comes in at about 1,600 to 2,000 plus calories per day.

Although the calorie intake is hard to know without knowing how much bread, potatoes, and molasses were issued, this is probably below the calorie needs of a prisoner and unless supplemented by the prisoners would cause weight loss.

 

[Copperhead-mi]

So you agree there little defense for Camp Douglas, I certainly wouldn't argue that.

However my point not all camps were picked from existing places all ready known to be unsanitary and unhealthy, would still stand.....hard to see the logic in picking a place all ready known to be unsuited

Would note other camps after 1862, Union or Confederate is somewhat irrelevant as this thread was just about Camp Douglas, perhaps some comparison to other Union camps might have some degree of merit, but comparisons to confederate or Nazi camps seem to be a bit down the off topic rail to distraction from the OP

I certainly agree that there is very little to defend of the conditions at Camp Douglas ...after mid-1862. The Camp did contain some flat and level acreage not prone to flooding such as Garrison Square, Hospital Square and Whiteoak Square which are where the earliest prisoners were confined but with the sudden and constant flood of prisoners from Forts Henry and Donelson, Pittsburg Landing and Island No. 10, and nowhere else to send them, they had to expand to the lowest ground that had always flooded. Colonel Hoffman, Commissary-General of Prisoners appealed to Quartermaster-General Montgomery Meigs for immediate construction of proper sewage and drainage systems within the Camp but was turned down as an undertaking that would be too extravagant.