November 2023

Pictured left to right: Back row – Michael McKeon, Brandon Copeland, Brittany Henderson, Second row- Janice Hawbaker, Victoria Beard, Jacqueline Gonsalez-Velasquez, Deborah Dresser Neiderer, Third row – the Honorable Mary Beth Shank, Cierra Renshaw, Rosita Methner, Gloria Keener, Front row – Jeb Keller, Carrie Bowmaster, Martha Ewan, Tony Cosentino, Kari Ramsey, and Kristen Hamilton

On October 25, 2023 FCBA members who had provided pro bono service, legal services members and their staff, and FCBA officers attended the pro bono award luncheon, held at the Barrel House in Chambersburg. They were joined by PA Bar Association's pro bono coordinator David Keller Trevaskis and the Honorable Mary Beth Shank.

Tony Cosentino was nominated by Franklin County Legal Services, MidPenn Legal Services, and the Law Offices of Women in Need for this award, stating:

David Trevaskis and Kristen Hamilton, pictured here with Tony, spoke on behalf of PBA. Jeb Keller spoke on behalf of FCBA and was the MC for awards ceremony. The Honorable Mary Beth Shank spoke on behalf of the Board of Judges. Janice Hawbaker, pro bono committee chair, provided a 2022-2023 roll-up of pro bono cases/matters handles by FCBA volunteers. Brittany Henderson, FCLS, Carrie Bowmaster, MidPenn, and Deborah Dresser Neiderer, WIN, spoke about Tony's and our members' contributions to providing legal services to Franklin County.

Congratulations Tony! And Thank you to our all pro bono volunteers!

On October 30, 2023 Laura Kerstetter was sworn in as District Attorney to fill a vacancy in the office of district attorney until the first Monday in January following the next municipal election.

The Board of Judges took the bench for this swearing-in. The Honorable Angela R. Krom administered the oath of office to Laura Kerstetter. Laura was joined by her husband.   

The FCBA Women's Club will be decorating the Courthouse Planters for the holidays. The Chambersburg Christmas Parade is November 18th. Please join us Friday, November 17th at 1 p.m. to add fresh ever greens and decorations to the planters.

Barb and Marty will have everything there, we just need people to help. Please bring your garden gloves. Planter decorating typically takes 30-45 minutes depending on the number of volunteers we have.

Please let us know if you can help. Contact Amelia at 717-267-2032 or director@franklinbar.org

2022 planter decorating

Join us for a BRAND NEW and exciting fundraising event! WIN is hosting a volleyball tournament at the Chambersburg Memorial YMCA on January 13th. The tournament will be co-ed sixes, and team registration is $180. To register, email your team members' names to stephaniel@winservices.org.

Sponsors Wanted

We are currently seeking sponsors from people and businesses who would like to support WIN. If you are interested, please email community@winservices.org

Check out the event on our website or on Facebook.

Senators Casey and Fetterman announced the opening of applications for those interested in being considered for appointment to the positions of Federal District Court Judge for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania (EDPA) and Federal District Court Judge for the Middle District of Pennsylvania (MDPA): 

Read Press Release HERE

The Deadline for submitting a completed application is Monday, November 27, 2023.

At the upcoming November 15th Board of Directors meeting, the Board plans on considering a new investment policy, a copy of which is attached. The Investment Committee has met several times over the past few months, and after much consideration, discussion, research and hard work, provided the Board with the attached policy. I would like to thank the Investment Committee members for volunteering their time and energy to help the Bar evaluate the soundest path forward for our investments and the long-term financial health of our organization. 

On behalf of the Board and the Investment Committee, I am inviting our members to provide feed back to us on the proposed investment policy. Please send me your comments by Thursday, November 9th, so that the Board will have enough time to review them in advance of the upcoming meeting. 

Thank you all for your consideration of this important proposal. 

Tony Cosentino 

FCBA President 

acosentino@dcblaw.com

Orientation to Legal Research Webinar: Federal Legislative History

November 2nd at 1:00 PM EDT.

Register Here

This entry in the series provides an overview of U.S. federal legislative history resources, including information about the methods of identifying and locating them. In tackling this area of research, the focus will largely be on finding these documents online. We will be highlighting freely-available governmental websites like Congress.gov, GovInfo, and Law.gov, and quickly touch on subscription databases that can be accessed at one’s local public law or academic library.

Orientation to Law Library Collections Webinar

November 14th at 1:00 PM EDT.

Register Here

This webinar is designed for patrons who are familiar with legal research, and would instead prefer an introduction to the collections and services specific to the Law Library of Congress. Some of the resources attendees will learn about include the Law Library’s research guides, digital collections, and the Guide to Law Online, among others.

This webinar will feature a special appearance by law librarians from the Wisconsin State Law Library as part of the State Law Libraries Outreach Project.

Foreign and Comparative Law Webinar

November 30th at 2:00 PM EDT.

Register here

In this entry in the series, foreign legal experts will discuss recently released Law Library of Congress research reports.

On November 10, 1865, a large crowd of spectators gathers at the Old Capitol Prison in Washington D.C. The two hundred spectators able to get the exclusive tickets are joined by the one hundred and twenty soldiers that guard the event. Despite the cold the spectators arrive early and the anticipation in the air is palpable. The soldiers surround the large gallows constructed for the occasion. A little before 10:30 am, the condemned makes his way to the gallows. The crowd is full of anger and chants “remember Andersonville,” as he ascends the thirteen steps to the waiting noose. The details of the condemned’s crimes have left him universally reviled in the North and few enough even in the South offer any sympathy.  He is calm and many will later remark on his stoic demeaner throughout the proceedings. He tells the officer commanding, “I know what orders are, Major. I am being hanged for obeying them.” Those will be his final words. His name is Captain Henry Wirz, and he is about to die. He is one of only three Confederate soldiers executed for war crimes during the Civil War. 

Wirz’s death will not be an easy one. Whether by mistake or by malice, his neck will not break when he drops through the trap door. His fate is to slowly strangle to death, at the end of a rope. Considering the suffering he caused, his painful end garnishes no sympathy from the crowd. When he finally dies the general feeling is one of satisfaction having seen justice done. Wirz was the commandant of the prison at Fort Sumpter, Georgia, better known as Andersonville. Of the 45,000 union prisoners of war that passed through Andersonville, 12,912 are known to have died there. That represents a staggering death rate of nearly 29%. Most of those soldiers would die of scurvy, starvation, dysentery, or typhoid. But as we will see there were many ways to die in Andersonville including by Wirz’s own hands. The horrors of Andersonville are as stark today as they were to the crowd that confronted Wirz on the gallows.  

Henry Wirz was in ways an odd choice for a Confederate prison commandant. Wirz was born on November 25, 1823, in Zurich Switzerland, to a moderately successful family. His father was a member of the city council but was not wealthy. Wirz would marry and have two children. Wirz apprenticed to a merchant and worked in that trade until he was convicted of embezzlement and fraud in 1847. He was originally imprisoned but later had his four-year sentence converted to a twelve-year banishment from Switzerland. Wirz’s wife would not follow him into exile and divorced him. He spent some time traveling around Europe before coming to America. He originally spent time in the North but began working in Kentucky as a homeopathic doctor.  Wirz would later move to Louisiana where he became a plantation overseer and remarried. He would take many of the methods for controlling and recapturing escaped slaves to his work in Southern Prisoner of war camps.  

With the outbreak of the Civil War Wirz joined up with the 4^th Louisiana Infantry, as a private. He would rise through the ranks prior to being shot in the shoulder, which rendered his right arm useless. In 1861 Wirz was made a guard at a Richmond prison, where he gained a reputation for being efficient and uncaring towards his charges, which got him noticed by General Widner who was in charge of Confederate Prisoner of war camps. In November 1861, he was promoted to be the assistant to the commandant of a similar prison in Tuscaloosa, Alabama. Wirz would eventually become the commandant of the camp until the prisoners were all exchanged. His reputation at Tuscaloosa was one of confusing inconsistency. He was described as a tyrant who was capable of great kindness but also great cruelty, with little warning of which the prisoner could expect.  He would go on to command the Richmond prisoner of war camps at Belle Isle & Libby Prison and rose to the rank of Captain. Werz would serve in a number of capacities prior to his March 27, 1864, appointment to command Andersonville. 

The prison opened in February 1864, with the intention of holding ten thousand prisoners. These prisoners were to be confined to a 16.5-acre lot enclosed by a 15-foot stockade, with guard towers. The available space would have been inadequate even if the creek that ran through the center did not create swampy areas. The livable space was further limited by the use of dead-lines some 20 feet away from the walls, which were a personal addition by Wirz. Any prisoner passing a deadline would be shot without warning. To make this worse these “lines” were not always clearly marked, and newly arriving prisoners often didn’t have them explained to them. Matters would go from awful to apocalyptic when prisoner exchanges broke down in the Summer of 1864. The prison population quickly swelled to over 31,000 by July 1864.  By August, the number rose to over 35,000. Even had Wirz been a compassionate and diligent commandant the situation would have been dire. The fact that he was neither led to unspeakable horror.  

Sargent Major Robert H. Kellogg of the 16^th Connecticut gave a description of the Camp when he arrived on May 2, 1864.

As we entered the place, a spectacle met our eyes that almost froze our blood with horror, and made our hearts fail within us. Before us were forms that had once been active and erect;—stalwart men, now nothing but mere walking skeletons, covered with filth and vermin. Many of our men, in the heat and intensity of their feeling, exclaimed with earnestness. "Can this be hell?" "God protect us!" and all thought that he alone could bring them out alive from so terrible a place. In the center of the whole was a swamp, occupying about three or four acres of the narrowed limits, and a part of this marshy place had been used by the prisoners as a sink, and excrement covered the ground, the scent arising from which was suffocating. The ground allotted to our ninety was near the edge of this plague-spot, and how we were to live through the warm summer weather in the midst of such fearful surroundings, was more than we cared to think of just then. 

In May 1864, when Kellogg arrived there were only about 12,000 prisoners in Andersonville. Imagine what the prison was like with 23,000 more prisoners squeezed into it in the next three months. By August 100-200 prisoners were dying every day.  

Overcrowding was far from the prisoners’ only problem. Despite shelters being planned for, none were ever built. The prisoners were left exposed to the elements with only what they could cobble together. Since wood and cloth were not provided in anything approaching adequate quantities few even could manage a meager improvised shelter. The guards closely controlled the flow of wood, tools, and utensils into the camp. There was inadequate fuel or utensils for cooking let alone for heating. The average high in the Summer was close to ninety degrees and the average cold was barely above freezing in winter. The prisoners took precautions to try to protect their only water supply, the creek that passed through the camp. They set up latrines downstream and had all the water taken from the upstream portion of the camp. This was rendered useless by the guard’s decision to set up their camp immediately up stream and use the creek as a sewer. So, all the water the prisoners got was contaminated and there was nothing they could do about it. The science of sanitation was well enough advanced that this could not be anything but intentional.

Perhaps worst of all was the food. The rules of war at the time required that captured soldiers be given rations equivalent to what their captors army in the field received. It is true that food was a difficult commodity to come by in the quickly deteriorating South in 1864. It is also true that Wirz made official requests for more food to be provided for the prisoners. However, It is also true that none of the guards died of starvation or scurvy while their prisoners died in droves. The North sent food to Andersonville to assist the South in feeding their prisoners. Werz and James Duncan the quartermaster conspired to steal the food for their and the guards use (Duncan would be convicted of manslaughter for his actions and sentence to 15 years hard labor). Werz would also use food as a weapon of control. He would withhold rations from entire groups of people if anyone challenged him or made trouble. What little food was provided was usually raw corn flour. Lacking Vitamin C and other vital nutrients, the prisoner’s diet had predictable results. The lack of Vitamin C in particular was well understood at the time as the cause of scurvy but nothing was done. Scurvy is an extremely painful and distressing way to die that is entirely preventable by adequate nutrition. 

The conditions combined together to destroy the health of the prisoners and leave them vulnerable to the diseases that ravaged the camp. It should be remembered that up until shortly before their capture these had been young men in the prime of life. While some were walking wounded most entered the camp uninjured and healthy soldiers. The photos of the walking skeleton’s that survived can easily be confused with survivors of Nazi concentration camps. Those photos circulated widely in the press and shocked and enraged all who saw them. To this litany of hardships were added cruel punishments for any who broke the rules or tried to flee.  

There was a brief reprieve in the Autumn of 1864 when many prisoners were transferred to other camps closer to the sea as part of a hoped-for prisoner exchange. But when General Sherman began his March to the Sea the deal fell through, and the remaining prisoners were returned to Andersonville. On March 15, 1865, prisoners’ exchanges were fully restored and all, but the sickest men were sent by rail to Mississippi where they boarded Union boats that took them to freedom. The last prisoners in Andersonville, too ill to travel, would die in April 1865. On May 7, 1865, Wirz was arrested at Andersonville and transferred to Washington D.C. for prosecution.  

There is a persistent myth, often spread by Lost Cause apologists, that Wirz was the only person tried for war crimes committed during the Civil War. In fact, more than 1,000 Confederates were tried after the war for war crimes. Most of those crimes were for the mistreatment of prisoners of war. It is true that only two others would be executed after the war, Champ Ferguson (a Kentucky irregular who was convicted for murdering over fifty Union prisoners) and Henry Magruder (another Kentucky irregular who was convicted of murdering eight Union prisoners after they had surrendered and been disarmed). Many others were convicted and received imprisonment and/or hard labor.  

Lest this appear solely to be victors’ justice many were also acquitted. The commandant of Salisbury Prison, Major John Gee was acquitted of similar charges as Wirz. Many confederates where also spared prosecution because of political pressure brought to bear by President Johnson and General Grant. Grant personally interceded on behalf of a number of Confederates recommended for prosecution. This included two local connections. Bradley T. Johnson was recommended for prosecution in part for his role in the 1864 burning of Chambersburg. General George Pickett, of Pickett’s Charge fame, should have been hanged for executing twenty-two Union prisoners of war from North Carolina, who had deserted from Confederate units to fight for the North. Grant saved him for reasons that aren’t entirely clear, but they were classmates at West Point. 

A military tribunal was formed to try Wirz on August 23, 1865. Major General Lew Wallace headed the nine-member special commission that would try Wirz. The indictment accused Wirz of two counts. Count one accused him of conspiracy “to injure the health and destroy the lives of soldiers in the military service of the United States, then held and being prisoners of war within the lines of the so-called Confederate States and in the military prisons thereof, to the end that the armies of the United States might be weakened and impaired, in violation of the laws and customs of war.” Essentially, he was charged with trying to kill or make unfit for service 45,000 Union soldiers. Count two contained thirteen specifications of individual union soldiers Wirz killed personally or died directly through his orders in violations of the rules of war. He was charged with killing three separate Union soldiers with a revolver, one by stomping and beating him to death, two by putting them in stocks that caused their death, one by beating a prisoner to death with a revolver, one count of chaining prisoners together that led to death, ordering guards to shoot four prisoners who died, and finally, one incident of causing blood hounds to attack and kill a captured escapee. Wirtz was accused of far more killings but given that many of the witnesses to the incidents were dead it wasn’t always easy to narrow down specific incidents. Reading the indictment would also show another weakness of the prosecution, none of the murder victim’s names were listed although their dates of death were. Many of the witnesses did not personally know the men the accused Wirz of killing and could not name them.  

Wirz was originally represented by five attorneys but three quit shortly before the trial. The defense made several pretrial motions. First, Wirz’s original surrender terms included a clause that soldiers could return home and “not to be disturbed by the United States authorities so long as they observe their obligation and the laws in force where they may reside.” The Defense argued that this clause prevented the Federal Government for trying Wirz for crimes committed during the war. The Prosecution led by Colonel N. P. Chipman was able to successfully argue that war crimes were not contemplated by the surrender terms. The second motion argued that the Military had no jurisdiction over Wirz, and he deserved a civilian trial. He was a naturalized U.S. Citizen who had never served in the U.S. Military, and the war was over, so a military tribunal lacked subject matter jurisdiction. The Prosecution successfully argued that while the war had ended the state of rebellion had not, and there was still a very real threat that war could resume, granting the tribunal jurisdiction. Lastly, they argued the indictments were unconstitutionally vague because the murder victims were listed as unknown. The tribunal ruled against the Defense a third time. Even if successful this third motion would not have led to the dismissal of count one.  

Wirz’s legal team was also unsuccessful in several hearings about the types of evidence that would be allowed to be introduced. They attempted to introduce tu quoque, you also, evidence of the treatment of Confederate prisoners in Union prisons. Essentially Confederate prisoners died at a higher rate to their Union counter parts (12% to 9% respectively). Keep in mind that 9% includes Andersonville. The Union had far more Confederate prisoners and generally held them for longer because the South had less prisoners to trade. This combined with conditions in some camps that while not anything like Andersonville were below what should have been expected. The tribunal ruled against the admission of this evidence. Whether the North mistreated or allowed its’ prisoners to die through negligence could not excuse Wirz doing the same under the rules of war. This type of evidence has been rejected at every major war crimes trial since it only gives evidence that members of the victors may also be prosecuted for war crimes but does not excuse the actions of the conquered. 

 Similarly, the defense was not permitted to offer evidence about the breakdown of various prisoner exchange programs. Both sides in the war accused the other of frequent violations of the rules of these exchanges. The North ended prisoner exchanges after the Fort Pillow Massacre, where Confederate soldiers slaughtered surrendering black soldiers and their white officers. The South had also issued proclamations that it would return to slavery black soldiers it captured and execute their white officers. The North refused to exchange prisoners unless all Union prisoners were treated equally.  By the time the South was willing to relent, General Grant had made the strategic decision that releasing captured soldiers disproportionately benefited the South, with its severely limited manpower reserves. Until the final weeks of the war this policy would prevent any large-scale exchanges. The tribunal ruled that this evidence was irrelevant. While these issues may have increased the numbers of prisoners it did not suspend the Southern obligation to provide adequate provision for captured prisoners. If it was unable to care for those soldiers the South was obligated to release them. Indeed, the South did unilaterally release prisoners including some from Andersonville, but acted far too late and on far too small a scale. The death tolls had this not occurred can only be wondered at. 

Wirz’s trial was held in the Capital Building and would go on for sixty-seven days. Over 150 witnesses (sources differ somewhat on the exact number) were called by either the prosecution or the defense. The trial began with no less a personage than the Secretary of War Edwin Stanton reading the charges against Wirz. Wirz was an ill man by the time he came to trial suffering complications from a wound he had suffered. He spent the entire trial lying upon a couch next to his counsel because he was unable to sit up for extended periods of time. The first stage of the trial saw the prosecution lay out the horrendous conditions of the prison. They called both former prisoners and their guards, many of whom testified against Wirz. Most damaging of all was the testimony and report of Dr. Joseph Jones. Jones had been sent to the camp by the Confederate’s to see what might be learned about the inmates suffering. He stayed there for three weeks and wrote a detailed report about the conditions of the camp. He was not there to improve the suffering of the prisoners but only to report back on what he saw. His report was graphic and uncensored regarding the conditions in the camp. He was quite upset to see his report used against Wirz and tried to assist him in testimony to little effect. 

 The testimony of Colonel George C. Gibbs, the overall commander of Camp Sumpter, placed the blame, perhaps in a self-serving way squarely on Wirz for the conditions in the prison. Testimony that Wirz had intentionally withheld, or misappropriated food meant for prisoners was especially damaging. Wirz was also not helped by testimony that he was “doing more than General Lee to kill union soldiers.” Which in numerical terms there may be something too, more people died at Andersonville then at the two bloodiest battles of the civil war, Gettysburg and Antietam, combined. If we consider only Union soldiers, Andersonville is equal to twelve percent of all Union soldiers killed in battle. This phase of the trial ended with the only question remaining whether the conditions at Andersonville resulted in war crimes perpetrated by Wirz. 

The second phase of the trial focused on Count 2, and the specific allegations of violence and cruelty by Wirz. Any defense of Wirz usually begins with the fact that only about 15 of the witnesses would be able to tie Wirz to specific crimes. The remaining witnesses either didn’t see Wirz committing specific crimes and in a few occasions testified on Wirz’s behalf. Wirz inconsistent nature helped him in this regard. He would mix in remarkably generous acts with his cruelty. His defense was able to present Union prisoners who remembered only that side of Wirz. For example, Wirz paroled five union prisoners in order to carry a petition to the North to resume prisoner exchanges. Wirz also at times did request better food and supplies for the prison, which were generally denied. The limited number of witnesses that saw Wirz’s crime firsthand may seem strange but it’s a consistent problem at war crimes trials that the majority of those who witness such crimes do not survive to see the accused tried.   

The most serious charges against Wirz were that he had personally murdered several prisoners. The testimony of former prisoners would implicate Wirz in stomping a man to death and shooting others with his revolver. The most powerful evidence was offered by Private George W. Gray of the 7^th Illinois Calvary. He and another prisoner named William Stewart had volunteered to carry a dead prisoner outside the stockade, in the hopes that they could bribe the guard into allowing them to escape. After delivering the body to the dead house, Wirz road up and asked by what authority they were beyond the walls. When Stewart responded that they had proper authority Wirz drew his revolver and shot Stewart dead. He then ordered the guard to search him for valuables. He found thirty dollars and Wirz ordered him to take the money. Gray was then returned to the prison. Gray was one of two witnesses that knew the identity of the man he saw Wirz kill. Gray’s testimony was clear and came off as credible to spectators. He stood up to cross examination and even when Wirz rose from his couch to challenge his testimony. When Gray refused to retract his statements, Wirz was seen to collapse back onto the couch in what appeared to be a defeated manner. 

Dozens of witnesses would testify to prisoners being killed for crossing the dead-lines. It is estimated that some three hundred prisoners were killed for crossing the dead-lines, although the exact number who died this way is unknown. But several also saw Wirz specifically order sentries to shoot prisoners for seemingly trivial violations of this often-ill-defined line. Private Jacob Brown of the 101^st Pennsylvania, saw Wirz order a man who had crossed the deadline to get a drink of water shot and killed, when the sentry hesitated to fire. Another prisoner testified that a crippled prisoner nick named, Chickamauga, limping on a crutch crossed the deadline and begged the sentries to shoot him. The sentries refused until Wirz ordered them to fire. Wirz was accused of a number of similar executions. 

Even more prisoners were able to testify to the plantation style torture that Wirz had brought to Andersonville from his days as an overseer. Wertz was a fan of collective punishment. He would often chain as many as eighteen prisoners together with thirty-two-pound cannon balls attached to their legs. This made it nearly impossible for the weakened men to move. This would go on for weeks at a time. There was testimony that prisoners so chained would often die of exposure because they could not move to what little shelter the camp had in extreme weather. Several witnesses testified to seeing dead men with the chains and cannon ball still attached to them. An estimated 100 prisoners died while chain ganged. Testimony also showed that Wirz often used stocks as punishment. Restraining prisoners in painful and often dangerous positions for extended periods of time. Men would die of exposure and those too weak to hold themselves up could die of suffocation. Thirty men were estimated to have died while in the stocks. 

Lastly, and most feared by the men, were the savage pack of bloodhounds that Wirz kept for tracking and attacking escaped prisoners. Southern plantations had long kept such dogs because of their utility in tracking escaped slaves and the fear they engendered. The number of men killed by these dogs is unknown, but some estimates put the number over four hundred and thirty. Witnesses accused Wirz of reprimanding guards who had prevented their dogs from attacking captured escapees. He was also accused of repeatedly forcing prisoners, who had been treed by the dogs, to climb down before allowing the dogs to maul them. Multiple prisoners testified to seeing this happen or the aftereffects of these attacks. Most of those attacked would die.   

Wirz’s defense tried to undermine the testimony of those that accused him of specific cruelties and to paint their testimony as fabrications. The defense scored points, by presenting some union prisoners and a catholic priest that had tried to help the prisoners, who saw Wertz as a tormented man doing the best he could. Their testimony stood in stark contrast to the murderous rage and callousness of other prisoners’ testimony. They portrayed Wirz as a victim of circumstance that did the best he could in an impossible situation. Wirz attempted the ever popular and ever unsuccessful war crime defense that he was just following orders. It appears from the records that his team was professional and was able to secure not guilty verdicts on multiple counts.  However, the weight of the evidence was against them. The tribunal returned a verdict that found Wirz guilty on count one and guilty on ten of the thirteen specifications of count two.  Wirz would be found not guilty on specification four of shooting a prisoner, specification ten for ordering a prisoner shot, and specification thirteen for beating a prisoner to death with his revolver. 

As we have seen Wirz was sentenced to death by hanging. The Judge Advocate General Joseph Holt reviewed the trial and recommended the death sentence be confirmed by President Johnson. There are some sources that suggest Wirz was offered clemency if he would implicate former Confederate president Jefferson Davis in atrocities and that Wirz refused. This is only supported by sources sympathetic to Wirz and the South and not published until thirty-five years later, so there are doubts of its authenticity. Wirz wrote to Johnson asking for clemency. Johnson never replied to Wirz’s letter, sealing his fate.  

Wirz’s fate has become a lightning rod for controversy in the years following his death. With the growth of the Lost Cause Myth, many sought to paint Wirz as either a scapegoated victim or a martyr sacrificed by a vengeful Federal Government. The United Daughters of the Confederacy went so far as to construct a monument to him in Andersonville and hold a memorial every year in his honor. I have tried to be as fair to Wirz as I can, but this is a sickening distortion of the facts. Like most of the Lost Cause Myth it badly rewrites history to suit its ends. Some writers have attacked the fairness of Wirz’s trial and the fact that so many others never joined him on the gallows. I agree that many other Confederates could have, and perhaps should have, been hanged alongside Wirz, but this does nothing to exonerate him. Wirz’s trial, while not perfect, was far from a kangaroo court that some writers claim. The evidence against Wirz, especially on count one, is overwhelming. It shows he wanted to destroy the ability of his prisoners to ever threaten the Confederacy again. Even if there wasn’t substantial evidence of his guilt to count two it is impossible to ignore the 12,912 deaths laid at his feet. No other prisoner of war camp was anything like Andersonville, despite struggling with many of the same problems. Reading about this subject can be fascinating but I warn you to be cautious of your sources, because far too many seemingly reliable sources are more concerned with pushing a narrative than in relaying accurate history.