The Union and Its Effort to Wage a Just War Dale Hance Dilbeck III
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
War in Earnest: The Union and its Effort to Wage a Just War Dale Hance Dilbeck III Oklahoma City, Oklahoma M.A., University of Virginia, 2012 B.A., Oklahoma Baptist University, 2010 A Dissertation presented to the Graduate Faculty of the University of Virginia in Candidacy for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of History University of Virginia May 2014 i © Copyright by Dale Hance Dilbeck III All Rights Reserved May 2014 ii To Mackenzie and Pearl iii Contents Acknowledgements iv Introduction: Responsible to One Another and to God 1 Chapter One: Guerrillas in Missouri 30 Chapter Two: Occupied Cities 83 Chapter Three: Francis Lieber and His Moral Vision of Just Warfare 130 Chapter Four: Retaliation—The Sternest Feature of War 185 Chapter Five: Civilians 248 Conclusion: The American Way of Just Warfare 305 Bibliography 323 iv Acknowledgements Completing this dissertation has been an exhilarating and profoundly rewarding experience because of the support I have received from institutions, archives, colleagues, advisers, and family. My research began in the days after Christmas 2012 at the Missouri History Museum in St. Louis. I thank my in-laws for gladly tolerating an extended holiday stay at their home as I finished this research. I profited immensely from the Missouri History Museum archives and the friendly assistance of its staff, particularly Dennis Northcott. I received similarly helpful treatment during multiple trips to the Manuscript Reading Room at the Library of Congress. A month at the Huntington Library generously supported by a W.M. Keck Foundation Fellowship enabled me to immerse myself in Francis Lieber’s papers, among other collections in the library’s vast Civil War holdings. My time there also proved to be an ideal location to complete a first draft of the third chapter of this dissertation. A Ridgway Research Grant funded two weeks of essential research at the U.S. Army Military History Institute. For this support I am thankful especially to Dr. Richard J. Sommers. His legendary assistance to researchers consulting the archives at Carlisle did not disappoint. Genial and gracious colleagues in the Ph.D. program made my entire graduate school experience particularly enjoyable. I owe special thanks to the members of the Early American Seminar for their thoughtful readings of portions of this dissertation. I have had the ridiculous good fortunate of learning how to be a historian from some of the finest in the country. Peter Onuf offered keen advice and persistent encouragement to me throughout my time at U.Va., even after our amicable “divorce” and my drift into the Civil War era. Elizabeth Varon’s captivating undergraduate lectures on nineteenth-century southern history v helped set in motion that drift. Since then, she always welcomed me into her office to hear out (and help refine) my latest ideas. She also gladly read the many chapter drafts I sent her way. Gary Gallagher cheerfully accepted me as one of his students – despite his already sizeable cohort of advisees – when I decided late in my first semester at U.Va. to shift the focus of my research to the Civil War. Since then, Gary has been gracious beyond measure with his support. He is a perceptive and generous critic as well as a model teacher and scholar. His influence is ever-present in the pages of this dissertation in the best possible way. Peter, Elizabeth, and Gary are all masterful historians doggedly committed to the success and well being of their graduate students. I am thankful to count myself as one of the many they have trained. My parents have endlessly affirmed me in my calling as a teacher and historian. I consider it a rich blessing to have begun this vocation by first learning from them how to read in a parsonage in Marshall County, Oklahoma. They taught me also to delight in the law of the Lord and meditate on it day and night. I am grateful for that instruction. Nearly four years ago Mackenzie and I moved from our home in Oklahoma to Charlottesville, a foreign place to us where we knew no one. More often than not, especially early on, we felt Jeff Tweedy was right: “our love, our love, our love is all we have.” Mackenzie is a faithful partner in success and failure, happiness and disappointment. Her unshakeable confidence in me was a harbor amid the tempest of anxiety and self-doubt. This dissertation is a testament to the strength and renewal I find in her unfailing love. Pearl Caroline arrived in the eager weeks between my defense and commencement. Her timing was impeccable. We had longed for her, and she brought us joy unspeakable. This dissertation is dedicated to Mackenzie and to Pearl, in the fond hope that my daughter will inherit her mother’s humor and heart. 1 Introduction: Responsible to One Another and to God On New Year’s Eve 1863, an anxious George W. Lennard sought blessed assurance of his eternal fate. Lennard began the American Civil War as a private in an Indiana regiment and was eventually commissioned lieutenant colonel of the Fifty-Seventh Indiana Volunteer Infantry. He survived some of the most gruesome fighting of the Western Theater, from Shiloh to Stones River to Missionary Ridge. As another year of war dawned, Lennard confessed in a letter home that he dreaded nothing more than the thought of what awaited him after death. He longed for “a clear and well defined hope that all would be well with me in the world to come.” “You will say,” he wrote his wife, “why dont you be a Christian? I say, how can a soldier be a Christian?” He continued: “Read all Christs teaching, and then tell me whether one engaged in maiming and butchering men – men made in the express image of God himself – can be saved under the Gospel. Clear my mind on this subject and you will do me a world of good.” Lennard was still searching for answers when he was killed in May 1864 as he marched toward Atlanta.1 George Lennard doubted he could reconcile the gospel of the Prince of Peace with his duties as a soldier, and in that he was unusual among fellow Federals. But he was not alone in earnestly considering the moral dilemmas of warfare. Can a soldier be a Christian? Can a self- proclaimed Christian society send more than two million men off to “maim and butcher” other men? Is killing and destruction acceptable in war if done in service of a sacred cause? Is it possible for a soldier to fight for a just cause and himself remain just, or must he inevitably surrender his own righteousness before the brutal demands of war? Can a supposedly civilized people constrain the death and devastation unleashed by their armies? Is it possible to wage war justly? 1 George Lennard, “‘Give Yourself No Trouble About Me’: The Shiloh Letters of George W. Lennard,” eds. Paul Hubbard and Christine Lews, Indiana Magazine of History 76, no. 1 (March 1980): 26. 2 The loyal Union citizenry did not cast aside these moral questions in its war against the Confederacy, even as the war reached levels of carnage unforeseen and once unimaginable. From the headquarters of military commanders, to the camps of regular soldiers in the lull between battles, to the pulpits where clergymen untangled the war’s mysteries, to the contention- filled halls of Congress, to homes across the loyal states whose wives and sons and daughters and fathers and mothers watched loved ones march off to battle – throughout the war the loyal citizenry contemplated a first order moral quandary: What does it mean to wage a just war? Their answers decisively shaped the nature of their war against the Confederacy, infusing it with stern measures to crush Confederate resistance that were also laced with humane restraints. One year before George Lennard sat down to write his forlorn letter home, another man worked to resolve the moral quandaries that plagued Lennard’s mind. Francis Lieber did so not by turning to the New Testament but to international law. Lieber was a scholar, not a soldier, a Berlin-born professor at Columbia College in New York City who taught history and political economy. He was also an acknowledged expert in the laws of war. In the winter of 1862, Lieber finally convinced the Lincoln administration to authorize him to produce a clear, practical set of rules of conduct for Federal soldiers distilled from the complex laws of war tradition. Lieber called his work “Instructions for the Government of Armies of the United States in the Field.” Issued to Union armies in May 1863 as General Orders No. 100, it soon became known informally as the Lieber code. The code’s 157 articles ranged widely from topics such as guerrillas to prisoners of war to private property to flags of truce. Taken together, they sought to instruct men like George Lennard how to wage a just war. While Lieber’s code authorized far-reaching destruction it also imposed inviolable constraints on Federal armies. Both were vital components of a just war, Lieber believed. Clearly 3 defining the limits of just warfare remained far more than an intellectual exercise for Lieber. His three sons fought in the Civil War. One lost an arm fighting for the Union at Fort Donelson, Tennessee. Another died fighting for the Confederacy on the Virginia peninsula. Mere months after his son’s death Lieber began work on his code, motivated by an unshakeable conviction about morality in warfare: “Men who take up arms against one another in public war do not cease on this account to be moral beings, responsible to one another and to God.” Lieber sought to instruct the loyal citizenry how it might reconcile its obligations as a warring but still morally responsible people.2 Did Lieber succeed? The deaths of as many as 750,000 soldiers ought to give pause to anyone inclined to quickly answer yes.3 The war’s death toll can make it easy to scorn Civil War Americans as zealously certain of the righteousness and divine sanction of their cause; so too is it easy to assume that their self-righteous zeal stoked near-limitless violence and destruction.