How Did Whole Regiments Surrender, & Then Get Paroled?

Jerseyman

Private
Joined
Jun 1, 2020
I've been researching a 4x great uncle who served with the 32nd Ohio, which surrendered as a whole regiment along with many others at the Battle of Harper's Ferry in September 1862.

I know they were sent to Camp Douglass in Illinois for a time before they were paroled, and re-organized in January 1863. I'm curious to understand the logistics of this process of parole.

Did the Union essentially have to wait until Confederate regiments surrendered, and once they were square they could consider themselves even and re-organize the regiments? or was it more complicated then that. Any information is appreciated, most of what I could is about the parole process for soldiers who surrendered individually
 
Men who had been exchanged could go back into service and combat, no problem; generals George Stoneman and Rooney Lee for example. It only became an issue when paroled soldiers turned up in battle without having been exchanged.
 
The exchange process worked on numbers: a private for a private, a sergeant for a sergeant, a major for a major, etc. A larger number of junior personnel could be exchanged for a more senior person. It didn't operate on a unit for unit exchange.

The Confederate's decision to declare regiments surrendered at Vicksburg, Port Hudson, and Arkansas Post exchanged had serious ramifications over the remainder of the war. Under the surrender cartels, the surrendered officers and men were paroled and permitted to return to their homes until they were exchanged for an equivalent number of Federal Army prisoners. There has been reasonable conjecture that that Federal Army expected that while the men were on parole numbers of them would stay home and simply disappear. Problems arose when the Confederates refused to deliver and exchange black soldiers from the U.S. Colored Troops (USCT) and their white officers. It was alleged that some of them were hanged, and some of the black enlisted men were sold into or returned to slavery, all of which was a violation of the law of land warfare and was intolerable to the Federal Army. As Lieutenant General Grant would later write to General Lee in 1864, "…the Government is bound to secure to all persons received into her armies the rights due to soldiers." In the fall of 1863 the Confederates declared the surrendered officers and men from Vicksburg, Port Hudson, and Arkansas Post exchanged with no equivalent release of Federal Army prisoners. Federal General-in-Chief Henry W. Halleck countered by directing that no further Confederate prisoners be exchanged until USCT troops were properly treated by the Confederates under the laws of war. He also significantly tightened the restrictions under which Confederate prisoners of war were being held. When some of the troops from regiments declared exchanged were subsequently captured by the Federal Army at Chattanooga and during the Atlanta Campaign, they could have been shot out-of-hand by the Federal Army for violating their parole oath and returning to combat without proper exchange, an act which effectively placed them outside the laws of war. With exchanges significantly curtailed, prisoner of war populations increased on both sides, with resulting allegations that prisoners were being mistreated, allegations which were particularly true with regard to the Confederacy's handling of its Federal prisoners.

Among the Confederate units involved were the 1st, 23rd, 40th and 42nd Alabama Infantry, the 34th, 36th, 39th, 41st, 43rd, 52nd, and 56th Georgia Infantry, the 4th 37th, 40th, 43rd, and 46th Mississippi infantry, the 18th, 26th, 32nd, 46th, 49th, and 53rd Tennessee Infantry, and the 6th, 10th and 15th Texas Cavalry Consolidated. But, the Confederate high command were honorable men who scrupulously followed the laws of war.

Regards,
Don Dixon
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the responses. I suppose it makes sense that they exchanged officers for officers, and had to wait until enough enlisted men had surrendered to keep them even.

Also it's definitely an odd coincidence how quite of a few of us have ancestors who were captured at Harper's Ferry!
 

Learn About Us
About CivilWarTalk
Contact the Webmaster
Meet the Staff
Link to CivilWarTalk
Join Our Community
Register
Browse Forums
View Today's Discussions
Search the Forum
Get Help
FAQ
Student Guide
Forum Rules & Etiquette
Copyright / DMCA

     Contact Us CivilwarTalk on Facebook CivilWarTalk on YouTube CivilWarTalk on Twitter RSS Feed

Bringing the American Civil War and More to Life.
© 1999 - , CIVILWARTALK, LLC - Site Version 10.0

SlaveryTalk.com - SecessionTalk.com - CivilWarTalk.com - ReconstructionTalk.com
Back
Top