I presume you are aware of this response from James Seddon, Confederate Secretary of War, when asked about the use of "Creoles" in the Mobile, AL area.

[NOVEMBER] 24, 1863.

Our position with the North and before the world will not allow the employment as armed soldiers of negroes. If these creoles can be naturally and properly discriminated from negroes, the authority may be considered as conferred; otherwise not, unless you can enlist them as "navvies" (to use the English term) or for subordinate working purposes.

J. A. S.,
Secretary.

Have you determined this bill was voted on or approved. I believe it was not. If you'd like for me to look up the legislative result, please tell me.

Jim M

P.S. David, even though we stand on opposite sides regarding this issue, I want to thank and congratulate you for your posting of "documents" and sources for your view. Unfortunately, as I've viewed this discussion and the articles written about it, I find a lot of feeling and emotion used to justify the Black Confederate view, with anecdotal and out of context information being used to justify the position. Let me repeat, I believe and accept the idea that a very small number of full and mixed-blood African-Americans participated in Confederate frontline service. I do not believe any estimates of 10,000 to 100,000 frontline soldiers can be supported by evidence. It seems strange that when this argument breaks down regarding large numbers of armed blacks in Confederate service, most of its proponents retreat to a position that "Well, cooks and valets are soldiers, too." Then a day later they are back promoting some mysterious black Confederate army, that due to a mass conspiracy on the part of Confederate and Union authorities, this army was lost to history. I must say, debating this issue with anyone other than you, has been a frustrating experience, due to the type of tactic used above. Thank you again for you ethics in this historical discussion.