While I hoped otherwise, unfortunately I was proven wrong. I knew that you would use partial quotes from what I listed and devise suppositions from the incomplete portions. That is simply something that does not tell the whole story. My posts were dated specifically to combat the notion that you threw out there out when you adamantly stated, "To repeat, the Conscript law "killed" existing organizations; not the ability of the state to form militia on another basis of enrollment". That is totally not true, yet you persist on falling back upon it like a personal afront to you when it is not that but a correction of a blanket statement. (Trying to lecture me on how to best discuss a historical topic is patronizing and not worth a response on this gentlemanly forum.) The point of the examples were to show you that after the dates, militia units that were in existance before those dates you listed were still in existance before, through and after the dates you listed. It categorically refutes you assumtion that all existing militia units were "killed". Trying to alter your original statement (above) to this one "My post mentioned that the Act of April 16, 1862, did not abolish the militia as an institution." counteract each other. In order for ALL of the militia units to be "killed" it would mean ALL of them and NOT that it "did not abolish the militia as an institution". That last sentence of yours just does not make any sense.

Like I referred to at the beginning of this post, the partial use of the Calcasieu Militia quote applies to what you say UNTIL you add the rest of the quote - "Captain Johnson remained in command of the Calcasieu Militia and when a northern revolutionary gunboat raided his hometown of Lake Charles in October, 1862, he again mustered the remaining militiamen to fight the raiders. However when the militia was about to fire on the ship the northerners had stolen, they discovered the raiders had taken 10 hostages from the town and tied them up around the helmsman, thus using them as human shields. Johnson's men held their fire in spite of being fired upon the the raiders' boat howitzer. The raiders completed their rampage of theft and terror and went back out to the Gulf of Mexico." Once you add that onto your partial usage, you get a statement that goes against what you wrote. The miitia from Calcasieu was pilfered and depleted at Camp Moore and still remained a viable militia unit in times of conflict in their parish. Even though they were company-sized, unevenly armed, and not in uniform, they were official militia.

My last example you again partially used. Both parts are meant to be used together, not apart. In YOUR mind it may mean the Confederate Adjutant General, but research of original Louisiana documents refute that assumption. Reading five pages of a book published in 1924 (Albert B Moore, Conscription and Conflict in the Confederacy, pp 238-242) that only covers part of our state is not a healthy substitute for original Louisiana documents.