By one of the nation's foremost legal historians, a groundbreaking history of the pioneering American role in establishing the modern laws of war. This book is a compelling story of ideals under pressure and a landmark contribution to our understanding of the American experience.

• The "rules of warfare" and "government of the army" as they existed in the American Civil War • All 101 Articles of War as amended through June 1863 including the famous Lieber Code (General Orders No. 100), directed by President Lincoln, which expanded the laws of land warfare and General Orders No. 49 on the granting of paroles • Copious extracts from the Revised U.S. Army Regulations through June 1863 This compendium of laws and rules is a testimony to America's reverence for the rule of law as well as its high regard for "civilized" behavior on the battlefield. The Articles of War were normative rules covering military duty and punishments allowed for violations. The Lieber Code was a new and profound law for the conduct of armies in the field, to include humane treatment of prisoners and protection of property and civilians. It had a profound affect on the evolution of the laws of land warfare in use today. Army Regulations, on the other hand, dealt with the administration and management of the army-from personnel assignments to supply and recruiting operations-all three sets of rules were used by both the Union and Confederate armies. An essential reference for students, historians, writers, reenactors, and those interested in how our Civil War armies operated.

In his first inaugural address, Abraham Lincoln declared that as president he would "have no lawful right" to interfere with the institution of slavery. Yet less than two years later, he issued a proclamation intended to free all slaves throughout the Confederate states. When critics challenged the constitutional soundness of the act, Lincoln pointed to the international laws and usages of war as the legal basis for his Proclamation, asserting that the Constitution invested the president "with the law of war in time of war." As the Civil War intensified, the Lincoln administration slowly and reluctantly accorded full belligerent rights to the Confederacy under the law of war. This included designating a prisoner of war status for captives, honoring flags of truce, and negotiating formal agreements for the exchange of prisoners -- practices that laid the intellectual foundations for emancipation. Once the United States allowed Confederates all the privileges of belligerents under international law, it followed that they should also suffer the disadvantages, including trial by military courts, seizure of property, and eventually the emancipation of slaves. Even after the Lincoln administration decided to apply the law of war, it was unclear whether state and federal courts would agree. After careful analysis, author Burrus M. Carnahan concludes that if the courts had decided that the proclamation was not justified, the result would have been the personal legal liability of thousands of Union officers to aggrieved slave owners. This argument offers further support to the notion that Lincoln's delay in issuing the Emancipation Proclamation was an exercise of political prudence, not a personal reluctance to free the slaves. In Act of Justice, Carnahan contends that Lincoln was no reluctant emancipator; he wrote a truly radical document that treated Confederate slaves as an oppressed people rather than merely as enemy property. In this respect, Lincoln's proclamation anticipated the psychological warfare tactics of the twentieth and twenty-first centuries. Carnahan's exploration of the president's war powers illuminates the origins of early debates about war powers and the Constitution and their link to international law.

"Published a year before Lieber's code, this pamphlet contains several ideas that were incorporated into that work. Halleck's commission resonates with our current debates concerning the definition of 'enemy combatants' and prisoners of war. In the letter to Lieber that is reproduced as a preface Halleck states: 'The rebel authorities claim the right to send men, in the garb of peaceful citizens, to waylay and attack our troops, to burn bridges and houses, and to destroy property and persons within our lines. They demand such persons be treated as ordinary belligerents, and that when captured they have extended to them the same rights as other prisoners of war; they also threaten that if such persons be punished as marauders and spies, they will retaliate by executing our prisoners of war in their possession. I particularly request your view on these questions.'"--Lawbook Exchange.