Benjamnin F. Butler, Butler's Book: Autobiography and Personal Reminiscences of Major-General Benjamin Butler

I do not see how I can add anything to my reply to this letter. The evident desire to hold on to the arms impelled me to make my order more effectual, and therefore I must prevent the concealment of them by a high penalty; and also I sent this reply:--

headquarters Department of the Gulf, New Orleans, August 14, 1862.

Sir:--Your official note to Lieutenant Weitzel has been forwarded to me.

I see no just cause of complaint against the order requiring the arms of private citizens to be given up. It is the usual course pursued in cities similarly situated to this, even without any exterior force in the neighborhood.

You will observe that it will not do to trust to mere professions of neutrality. I trust most of your countrymen are in good faith neutral; but it is unfortunately true that some of them are not. This causes the good, of necessity, to suffer for the acts of the bad.

I take leave to call your attention to the fact, that the United States forces gave every immunity to Monsieur Bonnegrass, who claimed to be the French consul at Baton Rouge; allowed him to keep his arms, and relied upon his neutrality; but his son was taken prisoner on the battlefield in arms against us.

You will also do me the favor to remember that very few of the French subjects here have taken the oath of neutrality, which was offered to, but not required of them, by my Order No. 41, although all the officers of the French Legion had, with your knowledge and assent, taken the oath to support the constitution of the Confederate States. Thus you see I have no guarantee for the good faith of bad men.

I do not understand how it is that arms are altered in their effectiveness by being “personal property,” nor do I see how arms which will serve for personal defence ( “qui ne peuvent servir que pour leur defense personnelle” ) cannot be as effectually used for offensive warfare.

Of the disquiet of which you say. there are signs manifesting themselves among the black population, from a desire to break their bonds ( “certaines dispositions à rompre les liens qui les attachent à leurs maitres” ), I have been a not inattentive observer, without wonder, because it would seem natural, when their masters had set them the example of rebellion against constituted authorities, that the negroes, being an imitative race, should do likewise.

But surely the representative of the emperor, who does not tolerate slavery in France, does not desire his countrymen to be armed for the purpose of preventing “the negroes from breaking their bonds.”