Was Desertion Really Ut for Civil War Soldiers in the North and South?
The United States Civil War's sanctity of military service was strictly maintained, and desertion was indeed considered a severe offense, often resulting in harsh punishments. Let us delve into the extent of the punishment for deserters from both the Union and Confederate armies, the context in which it occurred, and the reasons behind such measures.
Desertion as a Capital Offense
Desertion during armed conflict, whether in the Union or Confederate armies, carried a severe penalty. It differed significantly from AWOL ( Absence Without Leave ) in which the absence is unauthorized yet the returning intent is still intact. However, if a soldier missed troop or ship movements during an absence, this could be treated as desertion and potentially as a capital offense.
Despite the severity of the offense, the recorded instances of punishment were not frequent. Confiscation of deserters was a common practice, but it was often tempered by a desire to reintegrate those who returned.
General Punishment Practices
Both Union and Confederate soldiers faced severe consequences upon apprehension. Those found guilty of desertion were often made examples, with their execution publicly witnessed by large formations of soldiers. This acted as a deterrent but rarely resulted in the death penalty.
Bell Irvin Wiley, a revered historian, provided insights into the legal proceedings: "In the Union's Army of the Potomac between July 1 and November 30, 1863, '592 men were tried for desertion. 291 were found guilty, 80 received capital sentences, and 21 were eventually shot. In the same period, 2,000 deserters were returned to their units.
On the Confederate side, mostly in Lee's Army of Northern Virginia, by the last six months of the war, 245 men were convicted of desertion, and 70 were sentenced to be executed. However, 31 of these sentences were set aside in a February 1865 general amnesty, revealing a broader trend of leniency as the war progressed.
Leniency and Rehabilitation
A notable similarity between Jefferson Davis and Abraham Lincoln was their inclination to spare deserters facing execution. This leniency was evident despite the demands of strict discipline from military commanders. Both leaders were willing to set aside death sentences, causing dissatisfaction among those who believed in strict military laws.
In the early stages of the war, penalties for desertion were relatively light, with fines, confinement, or extra duty being the most common forms of punishment. As the war extended, the severity of punishments increased, reflecting the escalating tension and lack of manpower on both sides.
Rehabilitation and Amnesty
Both sides made efforts to rehabilitate deserters, recognizing that a significant number streamed home briefly before returning. In the Confederacy, the fall of soldiers and the rise of "French leave" (involuntary leave when soldiers went home and sometimes returned months later) led to the issuance of amnesties. These measures reflected the broader strain on the Confederate army due to dwindling manpower and morale issues.
In the Union, regimental and brigade commanders often played a crucial role in the process of public executions. This was not only a punitive measure but also a form of public education, aiming to deter potential deserters by clearly demonstrating the consequences of leaving the ranks.
Conclusion
While desertion in the Civil War was harshly punished, the execution (ute) was far less frequent than often believed. The reasons for this leniency ranged from practical military considerations to the humane spirit of both Union and Confederate leaders. Understanding these facets of Civil War history requires a balanced view of military discipline and the moral complexities of war.
References
Bell Irvin Wiley, "The Life of Billy Yank: The Common Soldier of the Union," Louisiana University Press, 1998.
Bell Irvin Wiley, "The Life of Johnny Reb: The Common Soldier of the Confederacy," Louisiana State University Press, 1991.