Col. William H. Parsons was already known as a hard-riding cavalryman by the time his troopers rode into northeast Louisiana in late June, 1863.  On June 29, he discovered two companies of the Union 1st Arkansas Infantry, African Descent, fortified behind an Indian mound located in Carroll Parish between Goodrich’s Landing and Lake Providence. A small firefight broke out, but Brig. Gen. James Tappan’s infantry brigade soon arrived, and the Union commander knew it was hopeless to face such overwhelming odds, likely more than 10 to 1. The Union commander voluntarily surrendered, on the condition that the four white officers present be treated as prisoners of war. He surrendered the black enlisted men – numbering slightly more than 100 – unconditionally. This meant the Confederate troops were under no obligation to treat the black men as prisoners of war, and was a cowardly move by the Union commander (who is never identified). However, he may have had no choice. To fight on was absurdity, and it may be that Parsons or Tappan dictated these conditions as part of their terms.

The prisoners were sent westward, force-marched to Delhi where the railroad would take them farther west. Maj. Gen. John G. Walker admitted in his report concerning the Mound: “I consider it an unfortunate circumstance that any armed negroes were captured,” for he had already been warned by Lt. Gen. Kirby Smith that black soldiers were not to be taken prisoner.

Parsons cavalrymen galloped northward to Lake Providence, setting the whole countryside aflame. Their trail was marked by burning homes and cotton gins. Part of their goal was to disrupt Union efforts to operate plantations in the area. They also intended to gather up as many blacks as they could, and evacuate them from the Union-controlled territory, moving them far to the west to places like Monroe, Shreveport, or even Texas. It is estimated that more than 1000 freedpeople were taken in this raid, and many were to be returned to bondage.

Source: Milliken’s Bend: A Civil War Battle in History and Memory, pp.122-124.