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.
Larry, fighting as a soldier like some slaves did and being enlisted as a soldier is two different things. I acknowledge that some slaves fought and even wrote an article. Join the Company of Military Historians or find someone you know who belongs and you'll get to read it.
It boils down to definition. By your modern definition, yes, that gun wielding slave would be a soldier. By Confederate defintion, no, he's a slave with a gun. How one defines things resolves the issues - that's what lawyers do.
Easy now, friend. I believe what I wrote was "black man with a gun". YOU introduced the word slave. I rather doubt a slave would have been in that position for lots of very practical reasons.
__________________ Ancestors in US Army: 13th TN Cav; 10th TN Cav; 3rd NC Inf
Ancestors in CSA Army: 48th VA; 63rd VA, 5th NC Cav; 37th NC
Wife and Grandson's CSA: 15th AL, 51st GA, 41st TN; 36th TN; GA Mil 1197 Dist
Easy now, friend. I believe what I wrote was "black man with a gun". YOU introduced the word slave. I rather doubt a slave would have been in that position for lots of very practical reasons.
OK Larry, black man with a gun then. No difference whether the black man was a freeman or a slave. Enlistment in the Confederate Army as a soldier was not easily achieved for either. For the freeman, it would require cooperation of the officer and that many of the neighbors who enlisted kept their mouths shut. There's been cases where light skin mulattos enlisted but were discharged when informed upon.
Now, as to slaves wielding firearms, check out Professor Ervin Jordan's book, "Black Confederates and Afro-Yankees in Civil War Virginia." I think it happened, but that doesn't grant the slave status as a soldier in the Confederate army. The exception of course being very late in the war when some were indeed enlisted.
Simple questions referencing the 1st LA Native Guard:
Were they paid by the CS, a State or at all? Please be specific as to when.
Were they armed or equipped by the state? If you contend they were please list the number & type of arms issued along w/ when.
Please list the battles they took part in w/ their casualties.
Please list their Brigade commander and any comments he might have made about their service.
Please list their muster in & muster out dates w/ the CS military.
If they were captured by the US military please list their parole dates & provide evidence they were paroled or sent to a US POW camp.
If there were so many you shouldn't need to include the 1st LA Native guard, who fought in no engagements and were never mustered into service.
The Louisiana Native Guards served under Confederate command.
They even flew Confederate flags.
As for being in a battle...I'm not certain.
There were 50 regiments of the USCT that were never in a battle...not even a skirmish.
Are you ready to exclude them?
Quote:
Originally Posted by js
You have been repeatedly asked to provide evidence of these phantom masses of Black CS soldiers under arms... no reply. Only cut & pastes of 3-4 at a time... a long way from even my estimated number of 1,300.
1300+...right off the bat-
Martial Law was proclaimed over the Parishes of Orleans, St. Bernard, Jefferson, and Plaquemines (LA) on 15 March 1862. This effectively placed all State Troops in those parishes under the command of General Lovell (CSA)-
"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."
The Louisiana Native Guards served under Confederate command.
They even flew Confederate flags.
1300+...right off the bat-
Martial Law was proclaimed over the Parishes of Orleans, St. Bernard, Jefferson, and Plaquemines (LA) on 15 March 1862. This effectively placed all State Troops in those parishes under the command of General Lovell (CSA)-
Once again, the Louisiana Native Guards had been disbanded on February 15 by state law passed in January of 1862. The organization did not exist, officially, according to Louisiana law, on March 15, 1862. You have ben told this many, many times. Please justify and explain your claim here.
Also, and once again, the Native Guard had a strength, including present and absent, of just barely above 900 in November 1861, counting all officers and men. That was on the occasion of the massive "grand review" in New Orleans, and over 100 were among the absent for that party-like parade. How then do you get to a figure of 1,035 in your claim here?
1) If it is an estimate, how do you justify it, and why do you not indicate it as you did for these other scattered companies?
2) Since you are apparently estimating that these other units are full strength at 100 men, why would you do so when you know most such units were not?
3) If you are estimating the Native Guards as a full-strength regiment at 1,035 officers and men, when you have long known that they were well under full strength in fact, why are you doing that?
4) Since the Native Guard were disbanded by state law as of February 15 and did not exist on the March 15, 1862 date you are referring to, why would you include them at all?
5) Were these other companies you mention also disbanded by Louisiana law on February 15? If so, why are you counting them?
6) While you might count these men as Confederate Army, they would not be considered such by the Confederate government until and unless officially accepted by the Confederate War Department. They never were accepted by the Confederate War Department as members of the Confederate Army. They were simply members of the Louisiana state militia at certain times. You agree that this is correct, right?
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.
Once again, the Louisiana Native Guards had been disbanded on February 15 by state law passed in January of 1862. The organization did not exist, officially, according to Louisiana law, on March 15, 1862. You have ben told this many, many times. Please justify and explain your claim here.
They were re-instated on 24 March 1862. Martial Law was still in effect.
Quote:
Originally Posted by trice
Also, and once again, the Native Guard had a strength, including present and absent, of just barely above 900 in November 1861, counting all officers and men. That was on the occasion of the massive "grand review" in New Orleans, and over 100 were among the absent for that party-like parade. How then do you get to a figure of 1,035 in your claim here?
They had 1,022 rank and file on 10 January 1862.
Quote:
Originally Posted by trice
1) If it is an estimate, how do you justify it, and why do you not indicate it as you did for these other scattered companies?
It's not an estimate.
Quote:
Originally Posted by trice
2) Since you are apparently estimating that these other units are full strength at 100 men, why would you do so when you know most such units were not?
OK...say they were 85 each...that would make the total 1,305.
Quote:
Originally Posted by trice
3) If you are estimating the Native Guards as a full-strength regiment at 1,035 officers and men, when you have long known that they were well under full strength in fact, why are you doing that?
"Under full strength"...?
They were probably the largest regiment in the LA State forces.
Quote:
Originally Posted by trice
4) Since the Native Guard were disbanded by state law as of February 15 and did not exist on the March 15, 1862 date you are referring to, why would you include them at all?
See answer top of page.
__________________ 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."
Easy now, friend. I believe what I wrote was "black man with a gun". YOU introduced the word slave. I rather doubt a slave would have been in that position for lots of very practical reasons.
Actually, the odds of a slave being in that situation were generally much better than for a free black man, IMHO. Slaves might be with the Army for a number of reasons, including "brought along by their master" and "conscripted from their master" and "hired from their master". Body servants were often accompanying their masters with the Army, even when the master was a private, and so could easily end up in these situations. Free black men could not be conscripted even as laborers by the Confederacy for most of the war, so the most likely situation you would find them in was as a contractor to the Army, such as a teamster (where they might make $2/day instead of the $11/month or so of a soldier). The teamsters Chamblis uses in an emergency on the retreat from Gettysburg might include some of these.
Regards,
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.
Tim, I'm still working on a faint hope that there were free men who made that conscious decision to fight without help from the system. No, I don't know of any at the moment.
__________________ Ancestors in US Army: 13th TN Cav; 10th TN Cav; 3rd NC Inf
Ancestors in CSA Army: 48th VA; 63rd VA, 5th NC Cav; 37th NC
Wife and Grandson's CSA: 15th AL, 51st GA, 41st TN; 36th TN; GA Mil 1197 Dist
The Louisiana Native Guards served under Confederate command.
They even flew Confederate flags.
As for being in a battle...I'm not certain.
Oh, come now. You know that the Native Guards unit formed in the city of New Orleans in 1861, never left the city, and were disbanded on February 15, 1862 by Louisiana law. They did participate in two "grand review" parades in November and January, but were otherwise stay-at-home militia not in active service of any kind, drilling on their own and staying in civilian life.
Then, on March 24, 1862, the Governor's office writes a letter asking them to maintain their organization (already officially disbanded for five-and-a-half weeks) and have their colonel report to the the state Militia commander:
=====
ORDERS NO. 426.
HDQRS. LOUISIANA MILITIA, ADJT. GEN.'S OFFICE,
New Orleans, March 24, 1862.
I. The Governor and commander-in-chief, relying implicitly upon the loyalty of the free native colored population of the city and State for the protection of their homes, their property, and for Southern rights from the pollution of a ruthless invader, and believing that the military organization which existed prior to the 15th of February, 1862, and elicited praise and respect from the patriotic motives which prompted it, should exist for and during the war, calls upon them to maintain their organization, and to hold themselves prepared for such orders as may be transmitted to them.
II. The colonel commanding will report the organization without delay to Maj. Gen. John L. Lewis, commanding State militia.
By order of Thomas O. Moore, Governor and commander-in-chief:
M. GRIVOT,
Adjutant and Inspector General.
=====
The reason for this is that Farragut has arrived at the mouth of the Mississippi River, the state has been called on to send troops to Tennessee where A. S. Johnston is concentrating for what will be the Battle of Shiloh, and so there is a desperate shortage of troops and weapons.
The Native Guard regiment does show up, at least in part, and is assigned a sector in the city of New Orleans. I doubt anyone knows today how many men showed up; the only comment I recall said about 300 men did. The Federals steamed past the forts on the Mississippi, the Confederates withdrew from the city to Camp Moore, and the Mayor surrendered the city to the Federals, who had occupied it by May 1. The "Confederate" version of the Native Guard regiment disbands for good.
Now you know all this. You have known it for a long time. It has been pointed out to you many, many times, and you have never once been able to come up with any evidence that the Native Guard ever participated in any battle on the side of the Confederacy. Yet here you are saying "As for being in a battle...I'm not certain."
Balderdash. I submit that you know they never did, and that this is simply more of your usual policy of never admitting facts you do not like. If you have any evidence to suport a belief the Louisiana Native Guard regiment of the Confederate side participated in a battle, present it now. If you do not, simply suck it up and admit that they never did.
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.
They were re-instated on 24 March 1862. Martial Law was still in effect.
Please note: this does not make them part of the Confederate Army. It would merely make them State Militia that had to take orders from Confederate officers -- like the Mississippi State Militia at Brice's Crossroads taking orders from Nathan Bedford Forrest.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Battalion
They had 1,022 rank and file on 10 January 1862.
Really? We know how many men were present and absent at the November 23, 1861 "grand review" in New Orleans, and it is more than 10% below that figure. You are telling us they increased substantially over the next six weeks or so. Obviously you must have some source for this number, since you quote it so authoritatively. Probably, given the date you cite, it is the "grand review" held in New Orleans on January 8, 1862 that the Native Guard participated in. What is your source, and how many men were present and absent on it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Battalion
It's not an estimate.
Then you have a specific source and can cite it for us and show us the details, as requested above. What are they?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Battalion
OK...say they were 85 each...that would make the total 1,305.
ROFL. Or say they are 15 men each ... Be serious.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Battalion
"Under full strength"...?
They were probably the largest regiment in the LA State forces.
You have figures for all of them to back this up as of that date? Great! Let's see them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Battalion
See answer top of page.
So? I have told you they were reinstated many times and when it happened. That brings them back into the Louisiana State Militia. Martial Law does not make them part of the Confederate Army.
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.
The great majority of the leadership of the south (And IMO the great majority of the white supporters of the confederacy), preferred to lose the war rather than free their slaves. That being so, it was unthinkable to the great majority of southerners, that the south needed its slaves to win the confederacy's independence, much less the implicit acceptance that they would have to honor their slaves as the saviors of the Confederacy and would owe a great debt of gratitude to their erstwhile slaves.
W.E.B DeBoise commented to the effect, that whatever the motivations or feelings of northern whites, once a colored man wore the blue uniform of the Union Army, with U.S. stamped on the buttons of that uniform and put a rifle in his hands and when his blood was shed and the war crippled returned, no one would be able to deny that they were not free citizens of a free country (loosely paraphrased) the north was able to live with that decision. The south, not only could not, but it would not, live with such a decision.
CivilWarTalk.com -
A free and friendly Civil War community. 
Linear Mode
