Circa1865
Author Jonathan W. White’s book “Emancipation, the Union Army and the
Reelection of Abraham Lincoln” (LSU Press, 2014) contends that
Secretary of War Edwin Stanton utilized intimidation tactics to ensure
Lincoln’s election and use the soldier vote to help accomplish it. His
assistant secretary, Charles A. Dana, admitted to using the full power
of the War Department to ensure Lincoln’s electoral triumph. Stanton
also employed creative solutions for filling the blue ranks with
soldiers.
By May 1864, the initial three-year enlistments had expired and
strong measures utilized for re-enlisting the veterans. The hated draft
was causing riots in northern cities, and Grant complained often of the
useless soldiers he was sent — paid substitutes and draftees who often
deserted at the first opportunity.
Desperate to retain the veterans, Stanton demanded additional
government bounty money to entice them to stay, one-month furloughs home
to show off their “Veteran Volunteer” sleeve chevrons, and commanders
rewarded with promotions for re-enlistments obtained. Commanders
unsuccessful in their re-enlistment efforts were denied promotion or
cashiered.
The bounty money made soldiers wealthy men for the time, but
naturally caused them to avoid battle in order to spend it. White
estimates that only 15 percent of veteran soldiers re-enlisted, leaving
85 percent who walked away, as it had become an abolition war rather
than the “save the Union” banner they had enlisted under. Additionally,
they saw emancipation bringing many black freedmen north in search of
employment, thus depressing wages and taking jobs from white
northerners.
Penalty for Not Re-Enlisting
In May [1864] the three-years’ service of the regiment had expired;
and three hundred and seventy-five men who had not reenlisted as
veterans were mustered out and made their way home as best they could.
On arriving in New York, they drew up and adopted a series of
resolutions. They began by rehearsing an order of Col. [Henry L.] Abbot,
dated May 21, urging them to “stand by their colors, and not march to
the rear to the sound of the enemy’s cannon.”
The reason for their non-re-enlistment seems to be stated in the charge against Col. Abbot:
“That he has spared no pains to place over us a military aristocracy,
subjecting us to every variety of petty annoyance, to show his own
power, and take away our manhood; subjecting men to inhuman and illegal
punishments for appealing to him for justice; disgracing others for
attempting to obtain commissions in colored regiments; . . . about May 4
ordering his heavy artillery men who had not re-enlisted, into the
ditch for the remainder of their term of service, thus placing us on a
level with prisoners under sentence for court-martial; and finally
capping the climax by leaving us to the tender mercy of
provost-marshals, turning us loose on the world, without pay, without
officers, without transportation, without rations and without our
colors.”
(The Military & Civil History of Connecticut, During the War of
1861-1865. W. Croffut & J. Morris. Ledyard Bill. 1869, pg. 558-559)
