Daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, Va. [W. Va.]) 1859-1865, 1864-09-09
The Exchange aussttOn.-Gsn, bat.
Ter to Robert DuidA

rebel commissioner of exchange of prison !
ers, on the question whether cOlOred troops |
of the United States ought to be recogniz-
ed as prisoners of war, we copy a few
The whole letter lie very ably
written, and we should much like to pub.
lish it in full, but have not the room and
space to day:
/ DO the Confederate authorities claim the I
right to reduce to a state of slavery free
mea, prisoners OF war captured by them2
This claim our fathers fought against mn
der Bainbridge and Decatur, when set up
by the BarbaTy Powers on the northern
shere of Africa, about the year 1900, and
in 1854 their children will hardly yield it
upon their own soil. .- ,
This point will not pursue further, be-
cause l understand you to repudiate the
idea that yeu will reduce free men to
slaves because of capture in war, and that
you base the claim of the Confederate au-
thoriIies to re. enslave our negro soldiers,
when captured by you, upon the 'JuS pos
limini," or the principle of the law of ma
tons which inhabilits ties the former owner
with his property taken by an enemy,
when such property is repossessed by the
force of his own country. 900 ! '''-
. Or in other words, you claim that by.
the laws of nations and of war, when
property of the subjects of one beiliger-
ent power, captured by the forces of the
other belligerent, is recsptured by the ar
mics of the former owner, then such pro.
perry is to be restored to its prior posses
sor, as if it had never been captured, and,
therefore, under this principle your au-
thorities propose to restore to their mas
oil pub haratofnHa halnnnah
to them which you may capture from US,
But this post liminary right under which
you claim to act, as understood and defined
by all writers on national law, is applica-
BILE simply to iHlmoUed6le property, and that
too, only after the complete re-subj ugation
of that portion of the country in which the
property is situated, upon which this right
fasteus ITSELF By the laws and customs of
war, this right has never been applied to
moUed6Le property. -T.r-.
True, it is, believe, that the Romans at
tempted to apply it to the case of slaves,
but for two thousand years no other nation
has attempted to set up this right as ground
for treating slaves differently from other
property.
But the Romans even refused to re.en-
slave men captured from opposing bellig-
ereuts in civil war, such as ours unhap-
PLY is. ra.
Consistently then with any principle of
the laws of nations, treating slaves as
property merely, it would seem to be i'm
possible for the Government of the United
States to permit the negroes in their ranks
to be re- enslaVed when captured, or treated
otherwise than as prisoners of war. --,--
have forborne, sir, in this discussion,
to argue the question upon any other or
different grounds of right than those
adopted by your authorities in claiming
the negro as property, because under
stand that your fabric of opposition to the
Government of the United States has the
right of property in man as it's corner stone.
or course it would not be profitable in set
Ting question of exchange of prisoners
of war to attempt to argue the question of
abandonment OF the very corner stone oil
their attempted political ediice. There
fore have admitted all the considerations
which should apply to the negro soldier as
man, and dealt with him upon the Con-
| federate theory of property only.
unite with you most cordially, sir, in
desiring speedy settlement of all these
questions, in view of the great suffering en-.
cured by our prisoners in the hands of
your authorities, of which you 80 feelingly
speak. Let me ask, in view of that suffer
ing, why you have delayed eight months to
answer proposition which by now &C
cepting, you admit to be right, just and
humane, allowing that suffering to con-
tinue so loug2 One cannot help thinking,
even at the risk of being deemed uncharita.
BILE, that the benevolent sympathies of the
Confederate authorities have been lately
stirred by the depleted condition of their
! armies, and desire to get into the field,
| to affect the present campaign, the hale,
hearty, and well-ted prisoners held by the
United States in exchange for the half
| starved, sick, emaciated, and uuserViceable
soldiers of the United States now lam
| gushing in your prisons. The events of
this war, if we did not know it before, have
taught us that it is not the Northern peo-
Pile alone who know how to drive sharp
| bargains.
The wrongs, indignities, and priVations
suffered by our soldiers would move me to
consent to anything to procure their ex
change, except to barter away the honor
and faith of the Government of the United
States, which has been so solemnly pledg-
ed to the colored soldiers in its ranks.
Consistently with the national faith and
justice we cannot relinquish this position.
With your authorities it is question of
property merely. 1t seems to address itself
to you in this form. Will you suffer your
soldier, captured in fighting your battles,
to be in confinement for months rather
than release him by giving for him that
which you call piece of property, and
we which we are willing to accept as a
| MANI
You certainly appear to place less value
upon your soldier than you do upon your
negro. 1 assure you, much as we of the
North are accused of loving property, our
citizens would have no difficulty in yield
inc nm any niece of DFoDertV thew have in
languishing in your prisons. Certainly
there could be no doubt that they would
do SO were that piece of property less in
value than FIVE thousand dollars 10 Confed-
crate money. which ia haliazed To he the