The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1902-10-26

to carry It out (sorne OF which are con-
fessed. as we have just seen, by Colonel
Ludlow. that on January II, 1865. Judge
{ Oud wrote Colonel Ludlow. complaining
In ths strongest terms, and stating that
II he Colonel Ludlow had any Confede-
rate officer in his possession. or on pa
role, he would be exchanged for his
equivalent But that beyond that he
would not. and could not. parole COM
miss oned officers then in his possession.
but would continue to parole non-com-s
missioned officers and privates. He
said:
Confederate Government. not only by the
refusal Of the authorities of the United
States to sespond to the repeated applica-5
TORS Of this government in relation to
the execution Of Munford, but by their
persistence In retaining Confederate OFF,
GERS who were entitled to parole and ex-
change.
You have now Of captures that are by
no means recent. many officers of the
Conrederate service. who are retained In
your military prisons east and west Ap-
r,:ications have been made for the re-
5l.nse OF same without success. and 9TH
long as to justify the conclusion that you
refuse both to parole and exchange. =
Cd. p. 1861
Judge Ould then called Colonel Lud-
lows attention to several instances OF
these abuses and mistakes and asked
that they be corrected. In his letter OF
January %. 1863. he says:
any Injustice has been done to you
ky cur agreement about reducing Off.
GERS to privates. or In any other subject
natter, will promptly redress 1t"
There must be many officers in your
and our possession. who by our agree
merit, made at the last interview. We're
de, AIRED exchanged. Such certainly ought
10 be mutually delivered up. The excess
is on our side. but will stand it because
i lave agreed to it I must. however.
Insist upon the immediate delivery Of
s.lch of our officers as are included In
the agreement ''-P. o1s.,
On December 3d. 1862. the following Or
der was issued by General H. ". Hal
leck, signing himself as "General-tn-
Chit f"::
No officers, prisoners of war. will be
released on parole till further orders. -
I'D. p. 2ts.)
This. he said. was done in consequence
of the course then being pursued by the
Confederate authorities. But, notwith-
st;,.sding this order and this action OF the
Confederate authorities here complained
OF, exchanges seem to have gone on.
the comm :ssioner on either side constant.
ly complaining that his adversary had
broken the cartel
F'LAGRANT BREACH OF CARTEL.
And on April II. 1858. we find Judge
Ould again writing Colonel Ludlow. say
ing:
= m ryyoy 1frh al at
refusal to deliver officers for those Of
Your own. who have been captured.
paroled, and released by US since the
date OF the proclamation and MESA ge
of Pres dent Davis. The refusal is not
only a fragrant breach OF the cartel. but
can be supported on no rule Of reciproc-
ity or equity You have charged
US with breaking the cartel: with what
sort of justice can that allegation be
supported, when you delivered only
few days ago over ninety officers. most
of whom had been forced to 1anguish
and suffer in prison for months before
we were compelled, by that and other
reasons. to issue the retal!atory order OF
which you complain. Those ninety-odd
are not half Of those whom you unjust
ly. held in prison. On the other hand.
defy you to name the case Of one who
has declared exchanged. Is 1t your idea
that we are to be bound by every strict
ness of the cartel, while you are at
liberty to violate it for months. and
that, too. not only. In a few cases.. but
in hundreds. 'es IF captivity, pr.va-
ton. and misery are to be the fate Of
officers on both sides hereafter let God
Judge between us. I have struggled In
this matter as If It had been a matter
Of life and death to me- I am heartsicks
at the termination, but I have no self
reproa ches'' ID p. 46e.
In Ludlow's reply to this letter he
simply says Judge Ould was mistaken
in his charges and complaints. but he
did not succeed in pointing out one single
instance in which Judge Ould was in
error.
Notwithstanding all these charges and
counter-charges, exchanges still went on.
and SO We find Colonel Ludlow reporting
to Secretary Stanton on May 5. 1863. as
follows:
81 have just returned from City Point
and have brought with me all my OIL
cs@s who have been held by the Con-
f.derates. and whom I send to City Point
toni light have made the following
declaration of exchanges:
81 All officers and enlisted men, and
all persons. whatever may have been
their classification or character. who
have been delivered at City Point up to
the 9Th OF May. 1863
80: All officers who have been cap
tured and released on parole up to April
II, 1853 wherever they may have been
captured" 80. ID, p. $50. See also y.
564
OUR MANY GRIEVANCES.
It seems that the Confederate Congress
20 toip Nr o1-;o In ia
suggested retaliatory measures IS to the
treatment of officers to the full extent
he had recommended. and so exchanges
went on without the result as just above
REL orted, up to May 6, 1865. and with
hut few. if any, complaints against the
Confedera ties of i'll treatment to prison
ers to that time. But how does the case
stand. in this respect, at this time with
tire Federals? We have only space here
for two quotations to show this. Both
OF these are from their own witnesses,
and 1t would seem that these would on.