Talk:James J. Andrews

WP:MILHIST Assessment

The introduction does not mention at all, or even hint at, which side Andrews was on. It becomes clearer from reading the rest of the article, but even then it's assumed that you already know, and is never explained outright. "Andrews was an espionage agent for the Union Army..." should be in there somewhere, preferably at the very beginning. LordAmeth 23:30, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Good suggestion! I have done so. Scott Mingus 23:50, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Andrews maintained as part of his trial defense that he was not a spy/agent but acting under military directions and therefore should have been treated as a prisoner of war, he maintained he was not a spy. Indeed it was one of the last things he repeated on the scaffold. There are examples of Confederates who worked behind enemy lines dressed as civilians but were treated as enemy combatants by Union courts, not spies. As such to say he was a spy would be taking sides in the affair - which is OK, some people had the opinion he was a spy (including the so-called "kangaroo court" that convicted him) but we should show respect for Andrews in the article and not say outright he was a spy, only that the court found him as such and thus the reason he was hanged. Green Cardamom (talk) 18:48, 6 August 2011 (UTC)