My suspicion is that he pulled it out of the same section of his anatomy that he got most of the rest of his story from.
Still, to make the history come out the way everyone claims, that number should still be zero.
The way everyone claims? Or the way you claim? Regardless, I'm aware of one Union officer who was also a slave owner, Colonel James Wallace of the 1st Maryland Infantry (Eastern Shore). There may well have been more but I would think that the number of slave owning Union soldiers would have been few in number. Certainly nowhere near the ridiculous number that Baldwin states.
You know very well I claim that the Union fought to stop independence and didn't give a rat's @$$ about the continuation of slavery, but most people think they were fighting to stop the practice.
You can be intellectually honest if you really want to.
Certainly nowhere near the ridiculous number that Baldwin states.
Well, in order to claim it is ridiculous, it would be a good idea for someone to ask him where he got that number. I find it odd that people (Baldwin) think they can throw out "facts" and think that people won't check on them.
But for what it's worth, I think his numbers are ridiculous too.