MovieChat Forums > Andersonville (1996) Discussion > Camp Douglass was just as horriable as A...

Camp Douglass was just as horriable as Andersonville


Camp Douglass was just as horriable as Andersonvilleand in many ways it was even worse. However you hear nothing about the tragic stories that happen at this Union Camp. Bothe men and boys died in the Civil War to unite this country and our country is being divied. Patrick Henry once stated, "Give me Lyberty or give me death." and Abraham Lincoln once stated that a house dived cannot stand and our country is falling apart it is time we come together once more and become the country our forefathers fought for and become one Nation under God.

reply

Just wondering: does the fact that Camp Douglass was just as horrible as Andersonville justify what happened at Andersonville?

reply

[deleted]

The Confederates at Andersonville were unable to provide adequate care to the Union prisoners. But at Camp Douglass, prisoners were purposefully deprived of essential care.

There's a difference.

reply

You are exactly right. Elmira was actually considered the #2 worst prison if you look at the death rate compared to the number they held. Andersonville was the worst, then Elmira, then Douglas

reply

they had bumper crops at least one year but the food brought by the locals for the prisoners was not given to them.
they had 6 square feet per person. thats a 1 x 6 or 2 x 3 area. and their only water source beside what rain they could catch was in the latrine.

reply

Confederates were UNABLE to provide adequate care? That's a crock.

Andersonville prison was surrounded by pine forests but none of the prisoners were allowed even a stick or a pole with which to construct a shelter or use as fuel to cook the corn meal that was their only food. The first prisoners were "lucky" enough to grab what was laying around on the ground to use for shelter and fuel for cooking but that was the end of it.

Water came from a stream that was already polluted by the Rebel camp 1/2 mile upstream and became unbearably polluted once inside the stockade. The rebels would not even provide them with a well for water.

Henri Wirz deserved the noose, but there were others that deserved it too.

reply

[deleted]

Death rates of union solders at confederate prisons and of captured union soldiers by the south were much higher than those held and capatured by the north. You cant get around that fact. The south also executed way more POWs in the moments after surrender.

reply

Perhaps the Confederates were unable to provide adequate care at Andersonville because the prison area was stripped of trees providing no shade in Georgia heat and the place was stuffed to the gills with sick prisoners and was fed with one tiny creek full of human excrement. The man running the prison, Captain Henry Wirz had no sympathy for the prisoners dropping like flies from disease and starvation. I'm not suggesting the Union prisons were any better but your comment would suggest the Rebs weren't at fault for deplorable conditions at Andersonville. Andersonville was set up to fail by the top command. Please be accurate with your history Jonathand.

reply

They should consider themselves lucky they weren't charged with treason and executed.



This will be the high point of my day; it's all downhill from here.

reply

It's important to remember that prisoners were denied food, sanitary water, and shelter purposely by the Confederates at Andersonville... namely because the commandant. Conditions at places like Elmira and Camp Douglass were in retribution of conditions at Andersonville, and was done at the orders of SecWar Edwin Stanton. Was that right? In our eyes, probably not... but the cruelest of wars is a Civil War.

As an after thought, perhaps the ending of prisoner exchanges that resulted in these conditions on wouldn't have happened if the Confederacy hadn't implemented a policy of enslaving captured black soldiers and executing their white officers for inciting a slave insurrection? Rather incredulous when you consider the fact that many of these captured black soldiers had never been slaves.

reply

Richardamckeel is dead wrong. At Camp Douglas, far fewer prisoners died than at Andersonville. Frequently, people seem to search for a parallel to Andersonville to perhaps portray the Confederacy as no worse than the Union, but, unfortunately, no such parallel exists.

"...Camp Douglas's 15 percent mortality rate was far below that of Andersonville Prison, where the death rate exceeded 30 percent."

This is from Bile's Illinois: A History of the Land and its People, published 2005, page 110. Unfortunately, books and fiction such as Gone With the Wind specifically attack Camp Douglas as being brutal/as brutal as Andersonville... these are falsehoods. Current academic research tells the real truths.

reply

You must understand that during the War of northern Agression the South was always struggling with food and supplies, so by 1864 the South's soldiers and citizens came first and the invaders second, up north they had the food and supplies but they just choose to be a**holes, i am pretty sure someone has mentioned this before.

reply

[deleted]

>>You must understand that during the War of northern Agression the ....<< This is the Scarlet O'Hara version of history. Makes for a good story, but is completely divorced from reality. It overlooks the fact that the southern states, far from just wanting to be left alone to govern themselves, immediatley upon seceeding, began a systematic course of stealing U.S. property. Forts, shipyards, arsenals, post-offices; anything that was owned by the American people in or near the seceeding state was confiscated. The nascent Confederacy never offered to pay the U.S. government for any of the property they seized making secession little more than an act of piracy. What did the "North" (what the insurrectionists euphemistically called the United States) do in response? Nothing. A few mild complaints, but under the lame duck administration of President Buchannon, nothing would be done to stop the theivery. That's not surprising considering that the executive and judicial branches of the U.S. government had been under almost exclusive control of southerners for decades. Even after Lincoln took office there was no immediate mobilization of troops to retake property that legally belonged to the U.S. Finally, a small garrison of U.S. troops in Ft. Sumter, who had taken no aggressive action whatsoever against the citizens of Charleston, SC, were maliciously fired upon. All of the "aggression" in the creation of this war clearly came from the so-called "South" (a euphemism for the insurrectonist slavocracy).

reply

Well now, all those damn yankees complaining about Andersonville don't have a leg to stand on. If the South had been successful at gaining their freedom none of those yankees would have been in Andersonville. Lincoln's devils were intent on stopping the Confederacy from fighting for their freedom from a government that only wanted them for the taxes they were paying. As far as I'm concerned this country started disintegrating when General Lee surrendered at Appomattox. And the way things are going now, it won't be long before there won't even be a U.S. anymore. The dollar is worthless. The idiotic feds in Washington refuse to stop illegal mexicans from invading this country. And disastrous free trade agreements have turned China into a world power while weakening this country. Too bad the South didn't have the resources or the manpower to win their freedom. The Confederate govt. couldn't have done any worse than the feds from 1865 to the present.

reply

Well now, all those damn yankees complaining about Andersonville don't have a leg to stand on. If the South had been successful at gaining their freedom none of those yankees would have been in Andersonville. Lincoln's devils were intent on stopping the Confederacy from fighting for their freedom from a government that only wanted them for the taxes they were paying. As far as I'm concerned this country started disintegrating when General Lee surrendered at Appomattox. And the way things are going now, it won't be long before there won't even be a U.S. anymore. The dollar is worthless. The idiotic feds in Washington refuse to stop illegal mexicans from invading this country. And disastrous free trade agreements have turned China into a world power while weakening this country. Too bad the South didn't have the resources or the manpower to win their freedom. The Confederate govt. couldn't have done any worse than the feds from 1865 to the present.




Yawwnnnn...more from the DiLorenzo camp. Been there, heard it, it's a crock.



The Troika of Irrelevancy: bringing off-topic enlightenment to the masses since 2006

reply

I had never heard of Thomas DiLorenzo; now that I have, I wish I haven't.

~~Bayowolf
There's a difference between being frank... and being dick.

reply

[deleted]

...Not to mention that absent a Union victory, the world would be speaking German or Russian by now.

~~Bayowolf
There's a difference between being frank... and being dick.

reply

If the south was so short of food in 1864, how is it that Sherman's army ate so well. And Sheridan's army did just as well in the Shenandoah Valley. The south was sitting on ample amounts of food and other goods, so much so that they cried like banshees when we marched through and took it away from them.

I will grant you that the loyal, devoted backbone of the Confederacy also refrained from supporting their own armies, keeping the food for themselves, but that does not excuse them from their brutal treatment of northern prisoners. It also does not excuse their peremptory executions of hundreds of Negro Union prisoners.

The conduct of the average Confederate "citizen" during the war was abysmal, whether you look at it from the perspective of Union or of a Confederate soldier. They were self-righteous and arrogant then and some might argue that many continue to be self-righteous and arrogant today.

One can look at any remotely objective history of America's Civil War and see a south that assumed it would win easily. Outnumbered by at least three-to-one and probably more than four-to-one (we count only the white population of the south) and having almost no industrial capacity, they still assumed that their "greater character" that they earned by having a sharply stratified socio-economic system that allowed some to own others would see them to an easy victory. Then later, when the North's numbers and industrial capacity produced the predictable outcome, they cried how impoverished they were.

Well, if you were so correct then and would be so easy, go ahead and secede again.

reply

[deleted]

the War of northern Agression

What. A. Crock!

~~Bayowolf
There's a difference between being frank... and being dick.

reply

I am not dead wrong more people died at camp douglas then at Andersonville was a great prison. But Camp Douglas saw more tragedies then Andersonville. You only hear about Andersonville because for the winner goes the spoilers.

reply

That may be true to a certain extent. However, Wirz also purposely withheld food from the prisoners (as depicted in the scene about the bridle) and also purposely tried to prevent the prisoners from having access to clean water, even going so far as to using slaves to try to dam up a small stream created after several weeks of rain (see the account by former prisoner Charles Ferren Hopkins here: http://www.americanheritage.com/articles/magazine/ah/1982/6/1982_6_78.shtml)

As for the Union, yes, they are culpable in the treatment of Confederate prisoners, yet at least some of that was due to reports of what was happening to Union prisoners at places like Andersonville and Libby Prison, and it still in no way absolves the Confederates of their responsibility, nor does it make the portrayals in the film any less accurate.

reply

invaders should always be punished

reply

Andersonville was never designed to accommodate as many prisoners as it would eventually be forced to handle and the Confederacy lacked essential supplies in large part due to the naval blockade and Sherman's march to the sea. One of the main reasons the south lost the war was their lack of resources. With all the resources of the north it seems inexcusable that conditions were as bad as they were. And it certainly seems wrong that the south should bear so much responsibility for something that was certainly not unique to them.

reply

Andersonville - at about 29% - had the second highest death percentage of any camp, North or South. Salisbury, NC was over 30%. The highest Northern camp was at about 24%, which I think was Elmira.

Andersonville, however, held far more prisoners than any of the other, so it had the largest death total by far.

Neither side can be pointed to as a shining exemplar when it came to treatment of prisoners. The CSA, as the war wore on, had more of an excuse for poor conditions due to the CSA'a own condition at the time. But Andersonville's horrors are not fully explained by that - Wirz, while a scapegoat and not a war criminal, was not exactly an angel either.

The Troika of Irrelevancy: bringing off-topic enlightenment to the masses since 2006

reply

Sorry, could you repeat that? You can't articulate very well with the three hick teeth you've got left.

reply

"The releas’d prisoners of war are now coming up from the southern prisons. I have seen a number of them. The sight is worse than any sight of battle-fields, or any collection of wounded, even the bloodiest. There was (as a sample) one large boat load, of several hundreds, brought about the 25th, to Annapolis; and out of the whole number only three individuals were able to walk from the boat. The rest were carried ashore and laid down in one place or another. Can those be men—those little livid brown, ash-streak’d, monkey-looking dwarfs?—are they really not mummied, dwindled corpses? They lay there, most of them, quite still, but with a horrible look in their eyes and skinny lips (often with not enough flesh on the lips to cover their teeth.) Probably no more appalling sight was ever seen on this earth. (There are deeds, crimes, that may be forgiven; but this is not among them. It steeps its perpetrators in blackest, escapeless, endless damnation. Over 50,000 have been compell’d to die the death of starvation—reader, did you ever try to realize what starvation actually is?—in those prisons—and in a land of plenty.) An indescribable meanness, tyranny, aggravating course of insults, almost incredible—was evidently the rule of treatment through all the southern military prisons. The dead there are not to be pitied as much as some of the living that come from there—if they can be call’d living—many of them are mentally imbecile, and will never recuperate."

-Walt Whitman.

"Officially, 12,919 (thirty percent) of the Union prisoners at Andersonville died whereas 4,454 (seventeen per cent) of Confederate prisoners at Camp Douglas died. Wagner, Margaret E., Gallagher, Gary W. And Finkelman, Paul, eds., The Library of Congress Civil War Desk Reference. Simon and Shuster Paperbacks, Inc., New York, NY, pp. 605–6, 609. 2009 edition. ISBN 978-1-4391-4884-6. Levy also noted that prisoners could maintain many of their social customs and behaviors at Camp Douglas, which was impossible at Andersonville, and the garrison enforced discipline at Camp Douglas which deterred crime but the garrison at Andersonville rarely did so. Levy, 1999, pp. 343–344. Andersonville was an open "garbage pit" with no shelters or facilities while Camp Douglas had some buildings and facilities, even if inadequate, and some organization and order. Levy, 1999, p. 344. If about 6,000 deaths actually occurred at Camp Douglas as some sources suggest, the mortality rate for Confederates prisoners at the camp would have been about twenty-three percent. The highest mortality rate at any Union prison was twenty-four percent at Camp Elmira, New York. Wagner, et al., eds., 2009, p. 607. Without understating the conditions or death rate at Camp Douglas, Elmira or Fort Delaware might be more apt comparisons to Andersonville."

-Levy, George, To Die in Chicago: Confederate Prisoners at Camp Douglas 1862–1865.

reply

The prison that first comes to mind for me as being just as terrible is the prison in Elmira, New York. Where Confederate prisoners were kept during New York winters, some who had no shoes. And none were used to a Northern winter.

reply

[deleted]

You must remember that during the War to Free the Slaves from their Ignorant, Racist, Criminal Opressors, every Confederate soldier was a traitor, guilty of treason against the United States of America and should have been subject to hanging. These criminals were lucky that the gallows wasn't their fate. The survival of the 76% who walked away from Elmira is simply a sign of the magnanimy of the heroes from the north.

reply

Whistler, I'm afraid I have to disagree. The states who ceded from the Union felt that they were losing their way of life, and thought the Union was being unjust. According to the Constitution, they had every right to leave.

---

I hate AIM speak. If you use AIM speak, I will hunt you down and stab you.

reply

According to the Constitution, they had every right to leave


That's still debated today, and if you ask a dozen Constitutional lawyers you'll probably get six answering each way.

Nowhere in the Constitution is/was secession explicitly allowed or prohibited, and thus you have to delve into all sorts of interpretation to make either case.

The Troika of Irrelevancy: bringing off-topic enlightenment to the masses since 2006

reply

[deleted]

Some of you should remember that the Civil War ended roughly 143 years ago. Which means...nobody who has access to internet message boards fought in the war...or has an immediate family member who did.

My point is...the war is long gone...and only lives in history. Those of you calling each other "damn Yankees" and "stupid hillbillies"....and the like...are pathetic.

I think it's great to look back on the war to learn from history. It happens to be one of my favorite parts of history to study.

Whether you're from New York, Virginia, California or Alabama...you;re a U.S. Citizen. Try a little civility towards your fellow countrymen.

reply

[deleted]

A lot of people are bashing the leader of Andersonville (I've forgotten his name) and are using examples from the movie to justify this. The movie while very historically accurate, was not accurate about this. He actually tried to gain help from both the North and South, but neither would give him any. And before he was hung, the North offered him a bargain to sign a piece of paper saying that Jefferson Davis, the president of the Confederacy, told him to do it. He however declined because he said I was given the orders by another officer, not him, I shall not go to my grave a liar. And not all the South was bad Robert E. Lee was offered command of the Union army as well, but turned it down because his home was the South. And Goerge Bush is not from the South. He's from Texas which in my opinion is a bit different. Not totally, but a bit different. I and all of my "southern" friends hate him more than you can imaine and studies show that today the top 15 most racist cities are all ocated in the North and Midwest, not the south.

reply

The states who ceded from the Union felt that they were losing their way of life
GOOD!!!
If maintaining their "way of life" meant keeping other humans in bondage then they deserved to lose their way of life a lot earlier...and they deserved to be horsewhipped within an inch of their lives.

~~Bayowolf
There's a difference between being frank... and being dick.

reply

Care of prisoners was never a high priority for either side the Civil War, but the south pioneered the system of neglect and mistreatment the north would eventually copy. Having won many of the early battles there were far more Union prisoners to incarcerate and the Confederates did so as cheaply as possible. The Union enlisted prisoners taken at First Manassas (Bull Run) were kept in old tobacco warehouses in Richmond VA with inadequate latrine systems and food supplies barely fit for livestock. Many prisoners were forced to sleep on hard wooden floors covered with human excrement and diseases flourished. After being exchanged these prisoners returned home with plenty of horror stories to tell and a deadly cycle of tit-for-tat began to prevail in the prison systems of both sides. The simple fact remains that war is an atrocity that breeds more atrocities no matter how moral one side thinks they are. Playing the "which side had worse prisons" game is utterly childish.

reply

Just a minor correction: Lincoln was quoting Jesus when he said that a house divided against itself cannot stand; to put it into context, Christ was originally addressing accusations that only someone who was allied with Hell could drive out demons.

*My lists: http://www.imdb.com/user/ur7367234/lists

reply

Worse? 12,000 died at Andersonville, 4,000 at camp Douglas.

This will be the high point of my day; it's all downhill from here.

reply

Wirz was hung just to prove a point. Grant and Lincoln were the ones that stopped prisoner exchanges. The historical record shows that twice , appeals made by both Confederate officials, and prisoner's themselves, were refused. The sad fact is...Lincoln was jus as responsible for Andersonville as anyone else.

It was a sad strategy, but it did work.

reply

Lincoln was jus as responsible for Andersonville as anyone else.


Don't mean to sound curt here, but that's bull****.

http://www.nps.gov/ande/historyculture/grant-and-the-prisoner-exchange .htm

Confederates bucked their paroles FAR more often than Union soldiers did in the instances in which it applied to confederates. If they'd not, and those soldiers had abided by the rules of the exchange program, Lincoln and all his commanders would have continued it.

The confederate government refused to treat black soldiers equally to white soldiers, and refused to exchange them. If they'd not done that, Lincoln and all his commanders would have continued the exchange. The swelling of POW camps, North and South, and the incalculable toll of human death, suffering and indignity that followed was FAR more the fault of the Confederacy's war policies, than those of the Federal Government.

Both sides refused to compromise, but the Confederates were in the wrong, and Lincoln knew it. History has judged as such. Lincoln was right then, and his decisions are still right. Unlike too many Union generals, Grant and Sherman could grasp the immense toll that would have to be paid to put down the rebellion and crush Lee's armies. Continuing to exchange prisoners would likely have lengthened the war. Lengthening the war would have meant more battles, more prisoners, and more death. The non-exchange policy may have shortened the war by keeping thousands of Confederate soldiers from Lee's ever dwindling Army off the field. The consequences to the men at Andersonville and other prisons was disgusting. But that blood, and that suffering is on confederate hands.

The Civil War turned from a pissing match to an abject nightmare in 1862. Both sides demonstrated their resolve. The best way to end the suffering given that neither side would concede, and both had the will to fight, was to fight hard, regardless of the cost, and end the war as soon as possible. McClellan wasn't willing to face up to that fact, and threw away thousands upon thousands of lives trying to win the war clean. Grant and Sherman were willing to face the unbridled carnage and bloodshed that would be required to achieve the decisive victory that was needed. The non-exchange policy was a part of that. Right or wrong, they got it done, and the American people were able to forge ahead as one nation again, with the scourge of slavery decisively put to rest.



reply

[deleted]

[deleted]