To Henry W. Halleck1Jump to section
Washington, D.C. October 3d. 1862. 8. A.M
General Stuart of the Rebel Army, has sent in a few of our prisoners under a flag of truce, paroled with terms to prevent their fighting the Indians, and evidently seeking to commit us to their right to parole our prisoners in that way. My inclination is to send the prisoners back with a distinct notice that we will recognize no parole given to our prisoners by the rebels, as extending beyond a prohibition against fighting them. Yet I wish your opinion upon it, based upon the general law and our cartel. I wish to avoid violations of law and bad faith. Answer as quick as possible, as the thing, if done at all, should be done at once. A. LINCOLN
Annotation
[1] Copy, DLC-McClellan Papers. Concerning the Union troops paroled by Confederate General James E. B. Stuart, Halleck at first replied that he thought there was ``nothing against'' Lincoln's proposal (OR, II, IV, 593), but later on the same day he replied, ``When I telegraphed you this morning I had only heard the cartel read by the Secretary of War. I have since examined the original document and withdraw my opinion. I am disposed to think the parole is made by the cartel to include all military duty.'' (Ibid., 593-94). On October 4, he concluded, ``After full consultation with the Secretary of War and Colonel Holt it is concluded that the parole under the cartel does not prohibit doing service against the Indians.'' (Ibid., 598). But Attorney General Bates on October 18 gave his opinion that ``The terms of the contract are . . . explicit . . . beyond a doubt. . . . It is the plainly declared purpose of the Cartel to prevent the use of prisoners paroled . . . in the discharge of any of the duties of a soldier. . . .'' (DLC-RTL). See also the note to Lincoln's letter to Stanton, September 20, supra.