SOUTHERN-UNIONIST-L Archives

Archiver > SOUTHERN-UNIONIST > 2007-01 > 1169096162


From: Dean Barber <>
Subject: Re: [SOUTHERN-UNIONIST] Non-white Regiments in SC Question
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2007 22:58:39 -0600
In-Reply-To: <BAY107-DAV18BDEA523A83A6EBA47E85BEAA0@phx.gbl>


Yes, Don, you said it better than me. Thanks. -- Dean


> From: Quarry Press <>
> Reply-To: <>
> Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2007 20:20:43 -0600
> To: <>
> Subject: Re: [SOUTHERN-UNIONIST] Non-white Regiments in SC Question
>
> Dee, I think the point here is that South Carolina was the only Confederate
> state that did not have a Union regiment. Below, Dean was referring to white
> (Union) regiments as opposed to Union regiments that were comprised of former
> slaves, such as the First Alabama African-Descent Regiment, a Union outfit.
> Does this answer your question.
>
> Best wishes, Don Umphrey
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: dee<mailto:>
> To: <mailto:>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2007 7:41 PM
> Subject: [SOUTHERN-UNIONIST] Non-white Regiments in SC Question
>
>
> Does anyone know why it was only SC? Was that the only state that allowed
> it?
>
> Thanks,
> dee
>
>
> Dean Barber <<mailto:>> wrote: I
> believe all CS states had predominantly white regiments with the exception of
> South Carolina.
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Any questions? Get answers on any topic at Yahoo! Answers. Try it now.
>
> -------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
> <mailto:
> eb.com> with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the
> body of the message
>
> -------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
> with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
> quotes in the subject and the body of the message



This thread: