Linda I think this Statement taken from this report sums it up.

*******
"...of Federal prisoners in Confederate hands during the war, only 22,576 died, while of the Confederate prisoners in Federal hands 26,436 died."

And Surgeon-General Barnes reports in an official report - . . . - that in round numbers the Confederate prisoners in Federal hands amounted to 220,000, while the Federal prisoners in Confederate hands amounted to 270,000. Out of the 270,000 in Confederate hands 22,000 died, while of the 220,000 Confederates in Federal hands over 26,000 died.

The ration is this:
More than twelve per cent. of the Confederates in Federal hands died, and less than nine per cent. of the Federals in Confederate hands died."
******

One has to wonder why with all the resources available to the north such as food, medicine, a rail transportation system to move needed supplies, and no disruption caused by an invading enemy army, why these facts of history shouldn't have been just the opposite. That there should have been more Union Prisoners of War died due to privation than Confederates.

Simply there was NO EXCUSE for such privation in Northern Prisoners of War Camps. The only reason that a normal person can place on this type of treatment is malice.

It doesn't matter what type of treatment your enemy gives their pow's, you as the captor of your pow's have the responcibility to treat your pow's in the properly manner and with humanity. You don't have to give them every right under the sun, but you don't starve them to death when you do have the food, refuse them medicine, intentionally expose them to diseases such as smallpox, etc. etc.

And then you have modern day "Professors" who write one book justifing that prisoners on both sides were treated badly.

Well, that may be true. But in the southern prison camp the bad conditions are a subjective argument. On the other hand in the Northern prison camps there is no reasonable argument as to why the prisoners suffered the treatment that they did.

Retaliation, or retribution are not a justifiable argument for either side. Take that away from the Northern Prison Camp argument and what do you have left that justifies such treatment as the Southern POW's recieved?