There was concern, and justifiable concern, too. Throughout the rebellion, the Davis government showed a lack of interest in following generally accepted practices regarding prisoners. On July 31, 1862, Davis declared that if John Pope or certain of his subordinates were captured that they would not be treated as prisoners of war but common felons. Now you will note that Davis issued this sentence, there was no trial or legal proceedings. Davis had no use for courts, as history has shown. Not being content with that order, on August 21st the Davis government declared that if General David Hunter and certain of his officers were to be captured then they would be held for execution. Again, a summary order on the part of the confederate government and not the result of any judicial proceedings or any trial. Captured, then executed, that was to be their fate. That same year, Davis celebrated Christmas by issuing a similar order for General Butler and his officers. It should be noted that the capital offense that these officers were 'guilty' of was recruiting former slaves as Union soldiers.
At the same time, Davis issued his order that white officers commanding black regiments were also to be hanged. No trial, the punishment was already decided on. The black soldiers under their command were to be returned to slavery. So given these public orders on the part of Davis and his government that they felt that they were not bound to treat prisoners of war as prisoners of war, why should the U.S. have taken any offers of exchange on the part of such a bunch as serious?
Sir -- In view of the the exchange and release of prisoners, I propose that all such on each side shall be attended by a proper number of their own surgeons, who under rules to be established, shall be permitted to take charge of their health and comfort. I also propose that these surgeons shall act as commissaries, with power to receive and distribute such contributions of money, food, clothing and medicines as may be forwarded for the relief of prisoners. I further propose that these surgeons be selected by their own Governments, and that they shall have full liberty at any and all times, through the agents of exchange, to make reports not only of their own acts but also of any matters relating to the Welfare of prisoners.
The prisoners in places like Andersonville died of malnutrition and exposure and lack of sanitary water. What were the Union commissioners supposed to do, bring houses and food with them as well? The mistreatment of Union prisoners by the South was deliberate. As deliberate in every way as Union mistreatment of confederate prisoners was. Both sides could have provided decent shelter but did not. Both sides could have provided sufficient food but did not. Both sides could have provided sanitary conditions but did not. The difference between us on this point, Rusty ol' man, is that I admit it while you persist on blaming everything on Lincoln. I state for the record that the Union treatment of prisoners was despicable and those responsible for it should have been tried. You blame everything on Lincoln. Lincoln is your boogie man, the cause of all the South's problems. Such is the great Southern Whine, vintage 2008.
You must be referring to Pope's harsh treatment of Southern civilians: [Link, see bottom of page]. Some have called Pope's actions the initiation of total war against the South later practiced by Sherman, Hunter and others [Link 2].
The Lieber Code for conduct by US Armies signed by Lincoln allowed for retaliation against barbarities. Why shouldn't Davis have the right to prevent barbarities against Southern civilians by threatening retaliation against Pope and his officers. From the Lieber Code:
27. The law of war can no more wholly dispense with retaliation than can the law of nations, of which it is a branch. Yet civilized nations acknowledge retaliation as the sternest feature of war. A reckless enemy often leaves to his opponent no other means of securing himself against the repetition of barbarous outrage.
28. Retaliation will therefore never be resorted to as a measure of mere revenge, but only as a means of protective retribution, and moreover cautiously and unavoidably--that is to say, retaliation shall only be resorted to after careful inquiry into the real occurrence and the character of the misdeeds that may demand retribution.
By retaliating against innocent civilians for the actions of guerillas, Pope brought about Davis' action against him.
I have to postpone our conversation now for a few days. I apologize. I'll get back to this later.
The North stopped prisoner exchange. The North -- that part of the old union that was headed by Lincoln. This resulted in the need for both sides to house large numbers of prisoners. Prisons became overcrowded; disease easily spread; conditions became bad for prisoners on both sides. Some guards were cruel; some were kind -- on both sides.
From northerner Walt Whitman in the New York Times, Dec 1864:
In my opinion, the Secretary has taken and obstinately held a position of cold-blooded policy, (that is, he thinks it policy) in this matter, more cruel than anything done by the secessionists. ... In my opinion, the anguish and death of these ten to fifteen thousand American young men, with all the added and incalculable sorrow, long drawn out, amid families at home, rests mainly on the heads of members of our own Government...
And then there was "Beast" Butler, Federal Commissioner or Agent of Exchange, admitting his part in the affair.
In case the Confederate authorities should yield to the argument...and formally notify me that their slaves captured in our uniform would be exchanged as other soldiers were, and that they were ready to return to us all our prisoners at Andersonville and elsewhere in exchange for theirs, I had determined, with the consent of the lieutenant-general [Grant], as a last resort, in order to prevent exchange, to demand that the outlawry against me should be formally reversed and apologized for before I would further negotiate the exchange of prisoners.
It may be remarked here that the rebels were willing enough to exchange prisoners at this time, man for man, were we to permit it to be done.
As I remember, Confederate Agent of Exchange,Judge Robert Ould offered to release 10,000 to 15,000 Union prisoners, thousands of them well and able and not sick, primarily from Andersonville in the summer of 1864 with no requirement for the release of any Confederate prisoners by the North. The North eventually agreed, and the release finally took place in Savannah in late November 1864. Ould's offer, like his offer to buy medicines for Union prisoners was made before the large number of deaths at Andersonville.
So yes, I primarily blame Lincoln for the fate of prisoners on both sides.