Patriotism Limited, 1862-1865: The Civil War Draft and the Bounty System (review)

262CIVIL WAR HISTORY exclusively on the same sources he previously used—reports and reminiscences of white officers. It remains to be seen whether this treatment of the Ninth and Tenth Cavalry, which emphasizes their racial characteristics, does greater credit to these two good regiments than Leckie's previous tactic, wlu'ch was to handle them exactly as he did the other cavalry assigned the same mission. William T. Hagan State University College Fredonia, New York Patriotism Limited, 1862-1865: The Civil War Draft and the Bounty System. By Eugene Converse Murdock. (Kent: Kent State University Press, 1967. Pp. ix, 270. $7.95.) During the Civil War the United States adopted a military policy which has long been the subject of serious criticism. The primary targets of that criticism have been the conscription program, which authorized a drafted man to avoid service by paying a commutation fee or by furnishing a substitute , and the bounty system by which men were given a sum of money as a reward for entering the armed forces. The conscription law of 1863 created enormous problems, both on the battlefield and behind the lines, and helped produce the most destructive riots the nation had ever experienced . The bounty system, too, was responsible for many evils, including the practice of bounty-jumping and the appearance of the bounty broker, who, judged on the basis of personal traits and occupation, rates as one of the most sordid and despicable prototypes in the history of the Republic. Now all of this is so familiar to a Civil War historian that the appearance of a new volume on the draft and bounty system excites his interest; for he expects something fresh and different, perhaps a penetrating reevaluation that utilizes unmined sources, or employs new techniques, or takes a new approach from a centennial perspective, or perhaps all of these. Patriotism Limited is not such a study. It is essentially a case-history analysis of the draft and bounty system in the state of New York, and it rests chiefly on material in New York newspapers. Regarding this focus on New York, the author explains that "bounty affairs" (apparently draft affairs too) in that state represented the pattern for the entire Union (p. viii). This assumption may be valid, but the author supplies no evidence to support it. Considering all this, as well as the author's failure to treat exhaustively the social, economic, and political impact of the draft and bounty system in New York, it becomes clear that the book should bear a very different title than the one it has. Using property values and the rates of commutation in all provost marshal districts in the state of New York, except those in New York City, the author shows that "draftees in poor districts paid the commutation fee BOOK REVIEWS263 just as frequently as draftees in rich districts" (p. 230, note 18; Appendix B, pp. 211-215). Thus, declares the author, commutation was not unduly harsh on low-income groups, and there is little or no merit to the charge that the Civil War was "a rich man's war, but a poor man's fight." However accurate this judgment may in fact be, the author's method in reaching it is too faulty to produce conclusive results. Despite these shortcomings the study has much that is worthwhile. It depicts with restraint and good judgment a seamy side of the war that needed to be told; it rescues from an undeserved limbo General James B. Fry, Director of the Civil War drafts and an able leader about whom more should be written; it advances convincing evidence that Governor Horatio Seymour not only handled ineptly the draft riots in New York City (July, 1863), but persistently and defiantly opposed the Federal government in its efforts to enforce the conscription laws; and it points out the relationship between commutation, bounties, and substitution, showing how changes in laws governing one affected the behavior and response of men eligible for military service. Much-deserved criticism is directed at the bounty system—especially at local bounties, which, since they were paid in advance and were neither fixed nor uniform, caused many desertions, numerous cases...