to an extent, that bias held true on both sides. Many white officers looked down on those who agreed to command black troops and ceertainly would not themselves do so. The very fact that Colored Troop units were commanded by white officers, with the possible rare exception of black Second Lieutenants, showed official policy assumed them not capable of demonstrating leadership. And the pay differential was recognition of the contemporary belief that blacks were not as competent as whites. Granted there were political resons for keeping blacks in separate units, but many believed at the time that white troops would not serve with blacks.
Even during the Korean War, after Harry Truman had issued his executive order against segregation, the 24th Infantry was largely black. When it was, apparently falsely, accused of cowardice in the face of the enemy, the regiment was disbanded.
Chief Upton cited regulations which mentioned negroes and mulattoes; what of quadroons and octoroons, with all due respect? Were those with lesser amounts of black heritage thought of differently? In Louisiana after WWII, and possibly in other states, as little as 1/32 black blood was enough to be considered black, Confusing, isn't it?
What those who buried the dead at Fort Wagner thought is of no consequence; they buried them the same as the dead of other battlefields. They had to be gotten into the ground quickly, to avoid disease. This was especialy true in hot, humid climates, and in July at Gettysburg, and in September at Antietam. Things were different then, and we can not always know how and to what extent. Stan