I should therefore prefer to rely upon our white population to preserve the ratio between our forces and those of the enemy, which experience has shown to be safe. But in view of the preparations of our enemies, it is our duty to provide for continued war and not for a battle or a campaign, and I fear that we cannot accomplish this without overtaxing the capacity of our white population.
If Lee's army was so integrated then why would he be saying he preferred a white army this late in the war? Wouldn't that mean that he would be ignoring the contribution of those 100,000 black soldiers you claim was part of the army since day 1?
And while we're at it, if roughly 10% of the confederate army was already black then why would this legislation be passed in March 1865?
SECTION 1. The Congress of the Confederate States of America do enact, That the President of the Confederate States be and he is hereby authorized to receive into the military service, any number of negro troops not to exceed two hundred thousand.
SEC. 2. That the President be and he is authorized, to assign officers already appointed, or make appointments of officers, to raise and command said troops; and the same, when raised, shall be organized as provided under existing laws.
SEC. 3. That no negro slave shall be received into the service without the written consent of his owner and under such regulations as may be prescribed by the Secretary of War to carry into effect this act.
SEC. 4. That it is hereby declared, that Congress does not hereby assume to change the social and political status of the slave population of the States, but leaves the same under the jurisdiction and control of the States to which it belongs.
So why the special legislation authorizing 200,000 black troops, free and slave, if hundreds of thousands of blacks were already serving? And by the way, you'll notice that slaves weren't offered any sort of incentive for joining. Not freedom or anything else. Why, do you think? And those troops that were raised, why do you suppose they speak of a parade of 5 companies, two white and three black if units were integrated like you say? Does integration mean white and black companies within a regiment?
I know that I'm not going to get any sort of intelligible answer out of you, but I have to ask.
it comes to this: the "leadership" of the PACSA did NOT favor blacks in gray, BUT the state, privately-raised & local units did not care a damn what they thought. Richmond & even Marse Robert were FAR AWAY and out-of-mind to the average local commander.
in the midst of a war for liberty, you do NOT turn down ANY good fighter, no matter what his/her skin tone.
furthermore, i'd like one of you yankee apologists to give me a straight answer on this question: are the THOUSANDS of service records of black CSA veterans at the US Archives AND the pension records at state offices in the southland real or false?
if you say real, doesn't that make you look silly?
if false, who put false records in the archives & state archives?
you can't have it both ways.
FRee dixie,sw