Civil War History - General DiscussionFor Discussions on Civil War Era Personalities, Politics, Issues, Campaigns, Battles, and more. Serious Civil War Discussions Only Please! All other posts will be deleted.
Even paid servants and teamsters are not soldiers -- unless they were enlisted in the Army.
Tim
That is the primary subject at hand- free blacks enlisted in the Confederate army.
__________________ POWER & MONEY
"Your New-York bankers and merchants are shrewd people, but I never gave them credit for so much sagacity as when they took the Government Loan. It was not merely patriotism, it was a high stroke of policy. It has saved the Government, and what they will regard as equally important, saved them from a great financial disaster."
There seems to be a bit of controversy over the muster or is it pension rolls.
Are blacks sometimes listed on the pension rolls in the South as "soldier" and why if they served in noncombat roles?
I don't think there were any "pension roles" during the war. They came about many years later, and they are related to money being handed out. That's why they were requiring affidavits that backed up the pension claim. Generally, anytime money is involved a certain amount of skepticism about what is claimed is fairly healthy.
In large, pension rolls are probably pretty accurate. But if you want to look at individuals, I am sure you will find lots of inaccuracies.
So if it is now, oh, 1890, and a Black man who was a camp servant for someone in your unit is old and can't work and your memory of him is that he was a good boy, worked hard, shared your camp, etc. Do you say "Nah, he wasn't a soldier, just the Lieutenant's slave" and shut him out of getting any money? Or do you say "Ol' Tom? Sure, he was a good boy, a good soldier. Stayed with us through the war, just as good a soldier as any other" and get him a little money for his old age?
Tim
__________________ "Let us, then, consider all attempts to weaken this Union, by maintaining that each state is separately and individually independent, as a species of political heresy, which can never benefit us, but may bring on us the most serious distresses."
Charles Cotesworth Pinckney of South Carolina, 1740-1824, Revolutionary War soldier, one of the authors of the US Constitution in 1787, speaking at the South Carolina Ratifying Convention in 1788.
That is the primary subject at hand- free blacks enlisted in the Confederate army.
Which was, of course, illegal in the Confederacy until 1865 -- except as cooks and musicians. You already know that, of course.
Tim
__________________ "Let us, then, consider all attempts to weaken this Union, by maintaining that each state is separately and individually independent, as a species of political heresy, which can never benefit us, but may bring on us the most serious distresses."
Charles Cotesworth Pinckney of South Carolina, 1740-1824, Revolutionary War soldier, one of the authors of the US Constitution in 1787, speaking at the South Carolina Ratifying Convention in 1788.
Which was, of course, illegal in the Confederacy until 1865 -- except as cooks and musicians. You already know that, of course.
Tim
An army regulation is not a law (what trumps if law conflicts with army regulation?).
The 1865 law concerns slaves...not free blacks.
__________________ POWER & MONEY
"Your New-York bankers and merchants are shrewd people, but I never gave them credit for so much sagacity as when they took the Government Loan. It was not merely patriotism, it was a high stroke of policy. It has saved the Government, and what they will regard as equally important, saved them from a great financial disaster."
An army regulation is not a law (what trumps if law conflicts with army regulation?).
The 1865 law concerns slaves...not free blacks.
And, as you have been shown before and already know, the 1862 law concerned all Blacks in the Confederacy. Stop trying to mislead people by omitting things you know damage the credibility of what you say.
Tim
__________________ "Let us, then, consider all attempts to weaken this Union, by maintaining that each state is separately and individually independent, as a species of political heresy, which can never benefit us, but may bring on us the most serious distresses."
Charles Cotesworth Pinckney of South Carolina, 1740-1824, Revolutionary War soldier, one of the authors of the US Constitution in 1787, speaking at the South Carolina Ratifying Convention in 1788.
And, as you have been shown before and already know, the 1862 law concerned all Blacks in the Confederacy. Stop trying to mislead people by omitting things you know damage the credibility of what you say.
Tim
What 1862 law?
__________________ POWER & MONEY
"Your New-York bankers and merchants are shrewd people, but I never gave them credit for so much sagacity as when they took the Government Loan. It was not merely patriotism, it was a high stroke of policy. It has saved the Government, and what they will regard as equally important, saved them from a great financial disaster."
Come now. I know you and I have discussed this in the past, and this has all been shown to you specifically. Don't get cute and pretend you know nothing of it.
We have consistently seen that the Confederate Congress passed laws specifying "white male" when it was dealing with the military in a general fashion. When they wanted to make an exception -- as they did in about April of 1862 for cooks -- they were specific about allowing colored people, slave or free, to be enlisted for that purpose and only for that purpose.
You also know that we can document many occasions when Confederate citizens asked for permission to organize units of blacks with white officers or of "creoles" and were officially denied permission by the war department. Even as late as November of 1864 we can find the Confederate Secretary of War saying that Congress will NOT allow this.
You know as well that in 1865 (with their supposed nation falling apart around their ears) there was still a bitter fight to prevent Blacks from serving as soldiers in the Confederate Congress.
You may find Black people serving as soldiers here and there. If they are musicians or cooks, it was specifically authorized by the Confederate Congress. If they were something else, it was illegal under Confederate law until March of 1865.
Tim
__________________ "Let us, then, consider all attempts to weaken this Union, by maintaining that each state is separately and individually independent, as a species of political heresy, which can never benefit us, but may bring on us the most serious distresses."
Charles Cotesworth Pinckney of South Carolina, 1740-1824, Revolutionary War soldier, one of the authors of the US Constitution in 1787, speaking at the South Carolina Ratifying Convention in 1788.
An army regulation is not a law (what trumps if law conflicts with army regulation?).
The 1865 law concerns slaves...not free blacks.
BTW, the Confederate Congress in early 1861 passed a law stating the Army would use the existing US Army regulations, giving the regulations the force of law.
Tim
__________________ "Let us, then, consider all attempts to weaken this Union, by maintaining that each state is separately and individually independent, as a species of political heresy, which can never benefit us, but may bring on us the most serious distresses."
Charles Cotesworth Pinckney of South Carolina, 1740-1824, Revolutionary War soldier, one of the authors of the US Constitution in 1787, speaking at the South Carolina Ratifying Convention in 1788.
We have consistently seen that the Confederate Congress passed laws specifying "white male" when it was dealing with the military in a general fashion. When they wanted to make an exception -- as they did in about April of 1862 for cooks -- they were specific about allowing colored people, slave or free, to be enlisted for that purpose and only for that purpose.
Those are conscription laws. They require whites to serve but there is nothing in them that specifically excludes blacks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by trice
You know as well that in 1865 (with their supposed nation falling apart around their ears) there was still a bitter fight to prevent Blacks from serving as soldiers in the Confederate Congress.
This debate was about using slaves as soldiers. It has nothing to do with free blacks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by trice
You may find Black people serving as soldiers here and there. If they are musicians or cooks, it was specifically authorized by the Confederate Congress. If they were something else, it was illegal under Confederate law until March of 1865.
Tim
See previous answer.
__________________ POWER & MONEY
"Your New-York bankers and merchants are shrewd people, but I never gave them credit for so much sagacity as when they took the Government Loan. It was not merely patriotism, it was a high stroke of policy. It has saved the Government, and what they will regard as equally important, saved them from a great financial disaster."
CivilWarTalk.com -
A free and friendly Civil War community. 
Linear Mode
