It is reasonable to believe that to be the case Alan. I understand the need to try to protect ones 'investment'. The thing about this war that seems to be the reason for many discussions is there were many factors that didn't fit into the 'regular' mold. It was much easier to understand the use of Blacks in the wars against England and in the Indian Wars. The Civil War is a whole nother ball of wax. This war went beyond the 'rulebook' and the use of or allowing the Blacks to fight is one of those things that may fall under the 'bent rule' catagory. some may have been Free. That would be reason to let them join up if they wished. Even if not in large numbers, should we be so ready to dismiss the possiblity or should we try to find evidence or even accept the fact that there may have been those who for whatever reason did take up arms at some time during the war?