Thank you Stan for the link. Just quickly perusing through the Lieber Code I find points that could both condemn yet defend Sherman. There are, arguably, different ways to interpret some of the Lieber Code's assertions. For instance (to take just a quick example), we find:

"15. Military necessity admits of all direct destruction of life or limb of armed enemies, and of other persons whose destruction is incidentally unavoidable in the armed contests of the war; it allows of the capturing of every armed enemy, and every enemy of importance to the hostile government, or of peculiar danger to the captor; it allows of all destruction of property, and obstruction of the ways and channels of traffic, travel, or communication, and of all withholding of sustenance or means of life from the enemy; of the appropriation of whatever an enemy's country affords necessary for the subsistence and safety of the Army, and of such deception as does not involve the breaking of good faith either positively pledged, regarding agreements entered into during the war, or supposed by the modern law of war to exist. Men who take up arms against one another in public war do not cease on this account to be moral beings, responsible to one another and to God."

This covers a lot of ground.

We also find:

"16. Military necessity does not admit of cruelty--that is, the infliction of suffering for the sake of suffering or for revenge, nor of maiming or wounding except in fight, nor of torture to extort confessions. It does not admit of the use of poison in any way, nor of the wanton devastation of a district. It admits of deception, but disclaims acts of perfidy; and, in general, military necessity does not include any act of hostility which makes the return to peace unnecessarily difficult."

I do believe that some of Sherman's men engaged in acts of revenge in South Carolina---not through killing so much as destruction of state and personal property.

What stands out more to me with this passage, though, is the last phrase: "does not include any act of hostility which makes the return to peace unnecessarily difficult." While I think we can understand the spirit behind that last part, in a war between people who hate each other which already involves killing, maiming and destruction, this could be a very hard thing to measure. It is even more difficult when considering other aspects the Lieber Code recognizes, such as:

"17. War is not carried on by arms alone. It is lawful to starve the hostile belligerent, armed or unarmed, so that it leads to the speedier subjection of the enemy."

AND

"21. The citizen or native of a hostile country is thus an enemy, as one of the constituents of the hostile state or nation, and as such is subjected to the hardships of the war."

AND

"The more vigorously wars are pursued the better it is for humanity. Sharp wars are brief."

Overall, this code may be like the Constitution and the Bible . . . obvious in some ways, but almost infinitely interpreted in others.

It definitely is interesting!