General William Tecumseh Sherman’s Stark, Grim Judgment: South Carolina Received a “Just Punishment” at His Hands

Sherman’s army left Savannah and began marching into South Carolina on Feb. 1, 1865. Thus, the General, his officers, and tens of thousands of Union troops, found themselves in a position to exact revenge on South Carolina, birthplace of the Confederacy and scene of the first shots fired at Fort Sumter. Of his men’s reactions on their upcoming march into the state, Sherman predicted, “When I go through South Carolina, it will be one of the most horrible things in the history of the world. The devil himself couldn’t restrain my men in that state.” His own feelings on the subject were presaged by a letter he famously wrote on January 31, 1864: “Satan and the rebellious saints of Heaven were allowed continuance of existence in Hell, merely to [feel] their just punishment. To such as would rebel against a Government so mild and just as ours was in Peace, a punishment equal would not be unjust.” Clearly, the theme of “just punishment” being the just reward for evil or unjustified actions resonated strongly with him.  In this quote, he draws a direct comparison between the rebellious saints of hell and the Confederates.  The words “just punishment” expressed his biblical view of the morality of the Civil War and were ones he would not forget.

After entering South Carolina on that February day in 1865, Sherman’s army found Confederate resistance was ineffectual. The main force, and its legions of “bummers” [destructive and looting stragglers], destroyed railroads, and burned most of a dozen towns and uncounted barns, farmsteads and plantations on the month-long march through the state.

“Mr. Roper of South Carolina, not content with the just punishment questions our acts & charges us with awful barbarity and cruelty.

The capital city of South Carolina  – Columbia – surrendered to Sherman on February 17, 1865. Sherman’s soldiers had orders to destroy the public buildings, railroad property, manufacturing and machine shops, but to spare libraries and private dwellings. After they entered the city, they ransacked both the existing State House and the new unfinished one. Some officers tried to keep their instructions by maintaining order, but this proved not to be possible. There was extensive looting, some by Union soldiers, some by bummers, some by local looters. And then there were the fires: by the 18th, half the city was burnt and in ruins. Essays and articles have been written about who was responsible for the destruction, but it seems safe to say that Confederates fleeing the town, looters, and Union soldiers (bummers and otherwise) all had some hand in setting the fires, and high winds drove them. The blazes swept out of control. And although some Union soldiers indeed tried to douse the fires, there was no coordinated effort from Sherman or other Union generals to fight the conflagration. Sherman later wrote: “Though I never ordered it and never wished it, I have never shed any tears over the event, because I believe that it hastened what we all fought for, the end of the war.” The finger pointing still continues.

The town of Winnsboro, the seat of Fairfield County, lies some 30 miles north of Columbia on the road leading into North Carolina. Sherman’s army next went there, with instructions to destroy bridges, railroads, and similar targets along the way. It (and its bummers) reached Winnsboro itself on February 21. The pillaging and looting quickly began, and soon the fires were burning. An eyewitness later wrote in a Harper’s magazine article, the Yankees destroyed enough food to have fed the town for a year. Union Gen. John Geary saw the heavy smoke from the flames as he approached the town, and moved at double-quick to reach Winnsboro before it was completely destroyed. The efforts made at his order, with his men as firemen, were successful at least in part, though much damage had already been done. They also sought to preserve order and discourage further looting, again with mixed results. Winnsboro was left a burned, ransacked place when Sherman’s men left, though real efforts had been made to limit the damage.

One of only two letters we have ever seen on the market defending his conduct on his marches through Georgia and South Carolina

In the following letter: Gen. Henry Slocum commanded the Left Wing of Sherman’s army (O.O. Howard led the Right Wing) and was thus one of two generals that were second in command after Sherman himself. Slocum was therefore present when these events took place. Geary, who had tried to prevent Winnsboro’s destruction, led a division in Slocum’s wing. John Sherman was William’s brother and an influential U.S. Senator from Ohio. The Roper mentioned was clearly one of the noted South Carolina family that lent their name to a Civil War era hospital.

Autograph letter signed, on his Head Quarters Military Division of the Mississippi letterhead, St. Louis, Mo., April 2, 1866, to Slocum, reaffirming his biblical view of morality of the war.  He also reaffirms his position that South Carolina’s punishment was just, repeating the line he used earlier in 1864, denying accusations of cruelty, and asking Slocum to set the matter straight. Importantly, he repeats his biblical “Mr. Roper of South Carolina, not content with the just punishment questions our acts & charges us with awful barbarity and cruelty. Please write a note to my brother John Sherman telling him exactly of the fire at Winnsboro, & such other things as occur to you bearing on these matters, now that they are fresh in memory. Hoping that you are prospering in life, I am always W.T. Sherman.” It is interesting that Sherman asks Slocum to contact his brother, perhaps because Slocum had the most information on Geary’s moves to save Winnsboro, and by extension for his brother to respond to Roper’s attack, perhaps to make the defense seem less self-serving.

Sherman’s letter from 1864 and his remark about his men entering South Carolina are very well known. However, the existence of this letter, with its two-fold defense (that the punishment of South Carolina – and by extension, of Georgia – was just, and his flat denial that his actions were barbarous or cruel, has been unknown until now. Sherman obviously disliked writing about his conduct in Georgia and South Carolina, as we can only recall two letters in which he dealt with this crucial subject reaching the market in all our years in this field. In one letter from the 1870s, he said anyone who thought he would apologize to Georgia was mistaken, and now this stark answer to any and every question about his true feelings.