Thus far the reader’s eye has been able to review in their successive order some of the many difficulties and perplexities which beset the pathway of President Lincoln as he felt his way in the dark, as it were, toward Emancipation.  It must seem pretty evident now, however, that his chief concern was for the preservation of the Union, even though all other things ­Emancipation with them ­had to be temporarily sacrificed.

Something definite, however, had been already gained.  Congress had asserted its right under the War powers of the Constitution, to release from all claim to Service or Labor those Slaves whose Service or Labor had been used in hostility to the Union.  And while some of the Union Generals obstructed the execution of the Act enforcing that right, by repelling and even as we have seen, expelling, from the Union lines all Fugitive Slaves ­whether such as had or had not been used in hostility to us ­yet still the cause of Freedom to all, was slowly and silently perhaps, yet surely and irresistibly, marching on until the time when, becoming a chief factor in the determination of the question of “whether we should have a Country at all,” it should triumph coincidently with the preservation of the Republic.

But now a new phase of the Slave question arose ­a question not involving what to do with Fugitive Slaves of any sort, whether engaged or not engaged in performing services hostile to the Union cause, but what to do with Slaves whom their panic-stricken owners had, for the time being, abandoned in the presence of our Armies.

This question was well discussed in the original draft of the report of the Secretary of War, December 1, 1861 in which Secretary Cameron said: 

“It has become a grave question for determination what shall be done with the Slaves abandoned by their owners on the advance of our troops into Southern territory, as in the Beaufort district of South Carolina.  The whole White population therein is six thousand, while the number of Negroes exceeds thirty-two thousand.  The panic which drove their masters in wild confusion from their homes, leaves them in undisputed possession of the soil.  Shall they, armed by their masters, be placed in the field to fight against us, or shall their labor be continually employed in reproducing the means for supporting the Armies of Rebellion?

“The War into which this Government has been forced by rebellious Traitors is carried on for the purpose of repossessing the property violently and treacherously seized upon by the Enemies of the Government, and to re-establish the authority and Laws of the United States in the places where it is opposed or overthrown by armed Insurrection and Rebellion.  Its purpose is to recover and defend what is justly its own.

“War, even between Independent Nations, is made to subdue the Enemy, and all that belongs to that Enemy, by occupying the hostile country, and exercising dominion over all the men and things within its territory.  This being true in respect to Independent Nations at war with each other, it follows that Rebels who are laboring by force of arms to overthrow a Government, justly bring upon themselves all the consequences of War, and provoke the destruction merited by the worst of crimes.  That Government would be false to National trust, and would justly excite the ridicule of the civilized World, that would abstain from the use of any efficient means to preserve its own existence, or to overcome a rebellious and traitorous Enemy, by sparing or protecting the property of those who are waging War against it.

“The principal wealth and power of the Rebel States is a peculiar species of Property, consisting of the service or labor of African Slaves, or the descendants of Africans.  This Property has been variously estimated at the value of from seven hundred million to one thousand million dollars.

“Why should this Property be exempt from the hazards and consequences of a rebellious War?

“It was the boast of the leader of the Rebellion, while he yet had a seat in the Senate of the United States, that the Southern States would be comparatively safe and free from the burdens of War, if it should be brought on by the contemplated Rebellion, and that boast was accompanied by the savage threat that ’Northern towns and cities would become the victims of rapine and Military spoil,’ and that ’Northern men should smell Southern gunpowder and feel Southern steel.’

“No one doubts the disposition of the Rebels to carry that threat into execution.  The wealth of Northern towns and cities, the produce of Northern farms, Northern workshops and manufactories would certainly be seized, destroyed, or appropriated as Military spoil.  No property in the North would be spared from the hands of the Rebels, and their rapine would be defended under the laws of War.  While the Loyal States thus have all their property and possessions at stake, are the insurgent Rebels to carry on warfare against the Government in peace and security to their own property?

“Reason and justice and self-preservation forbid that such should be; the policy of this Government, but demand, on the contrary, that, being forced by Traitors and Rebels to the extremity of war, all the rights and powers of war should be exercised to bring it to a speedy end.

“Those who war against the Government justly forfeit all rights of property, privilege, or security, derived from the Constitution and Laws, against which they are in armed Rebellion; and as the labor and service of their Slaves constitute the chief Property of the Rebels, such Property should share the common fate of War to which they have devoted the property of Loyal citizens.

“While it is plain that the Slave Property of the South is justly subjected to all the consequences of this Rebellious War, and that the Government would be untrue to its trust in not employing all the rights and powers of War to bring it to a speedy close, the details of the plan for doing so, like all other Military measures, must, in a great degree, be left to be determined by particular exigencies.  The disposition of other property belonging to the Rebels that becomes subject to our arms is governed by the circumstances of the case.

“The Government has no power to hold Slaves, none to restrain a Slave of his Liberty, or to exact his service.  It has a right, however, to use the voluntary service of Slaves liberated by War from their Rebel masters, like any other property of the Rebels, in whatever mode may be most efficient for the defense of the Government, the prosecution of the War, and the suppression of Rebellion.  It is clearly a right of the Government to arm Slaves when it may become necessary, as it is to take gunpowder from the Enemy; whether it is expedient to do so, is purely a Military question.  The right is unquestionable by the laws of War.  The expediency must be determined by circumstances, keeping in view the great object of overcoming the Rebels, reestablishing the Laws, and restoring Peace to the Nation.

“It is vain and idle for the Government to carry on this War, or hope to maintain its existence against rebellious force, without employing all the rights and powers of War.  As has been said, the right to deprive the Rebels of their Property in Slaves and Slave Labor is as clear and absolute as the right to take forage from the field, or cotton from the warehouse, or powder and arms from the magazine.  To leave the Enemy in the possession of such property as forage and cotton and military stores, and the means of constantly reproducing them, would be madness.  It is, therefore, equal madness to leave them in peaceful and secure possession of Slave Property, more valuable and efficient to them for war than forage, cotton, military stores.  Such policy would be National suicide.

“What to do with that species of Property is a question that time and circumstances will solve, and need not be anticipated further than to repeat that they cannot be held by the Government as Slaves.  It would be useless to keep them as prisoners of War; and self-preservation, the highest duty of a Government, or of individuals, demands that they should be disposed of or employed in the most effective manner that will tend most speedily to suppress the Insurrection and restore the authority of the Government.  If it shall be found that the men who have been held by the Rebels as Slaves, are capable of bearing arms and performing efficient Military service, it is the right, and may become the duty, of this Government to arm and equip them, and employ their services against the Rebels, under proper Military regulations, discipline, and command.

“But in whatever manner they may be used by the Government, it is plain that, once liberated by the rebellious act of their masters they should never again be restored to bondage.  By the master’s Treason and Rebellion he forfeits all right to the labor and service of his Slave; and the Slave of the rebellious master, by his service to the Government, becomes justly entitled to Freedom and protection.

“The disposition to be made of the Slaves of Rebels, after the close of the War, can be safely left to the wisdom and patriotism of Congress.  The Representatives of the People will unquestionably secure to the Loyal Slaveholders every right to which they are entitled under the Constitution of the Country.”

This original draft of the report was modified, at the instance of President Lincoln, to the following ­and thus appeared in Secretary Cameron’s report of that date, as printed: 

“It is already a grave question what shall be done with those Slaves who were abandoned by their owners on the advance of our troops into Southern territory, as at Beaufort district, in South Carolina.  The number left within our control at that point is very considerable, and similar cases will probably occur.  What should be done with them?  Can we afford to send them forward to their masters, to be by them armed against us, or used in producing supplies to sustain the Rebellion?

“Their labor may be useful to us; withheld from the Enemy it lessens his Military resources, and withholding them has no tendency to induce the horrors of Insurrection, even in the Rebel communities.  They constitute a Military resource, and, being such, that they should not be turned over to the Enemy is too plain to discuss.  Why deprive him of supplies by a blockade, and voluntarily give him men to produce them?

“The disposition to be made of the Slaves of Rebels, after the close of the War, can be safely left to the wisdom and patriotism of Congress.  The Representatives of the People will unquestionably secure to the Loyal Slaveholders every right to which they are entitled under the Constitution of the Country.

Simon Cameron.  “Secretary of War.”

The language of this modification is given to show that the President, at the close of the year 1861, had already reached a further step forward toward Emancipation ­and the sound reasoning upon which he made that advance.  He was satisfying his own mind and conscience as he proceeded, and thus, while justifying himself to himself, was also simultaneously carrying conviction to the minds and consciences of the People, whose servant and agent he was.

That these abandoned Slaves would “constitute a Military resource” and “should not be turned over to the Enemy” and that “their labor may be useful to us” were propositions which could not be gainsaid.  But to quiet uncalled-for apprehensions, and to encourage Southern loyalty, he added, in substance, that at the close of this War ­waged solely for the preservation of the Union ­Congress would decide the doubtful status of the Slaves of Rebels, while the rights of Union Slave-holders would be secured.

The Contraband-Slave question, however, continued to agitate the public mind for many months ­owing to the various ways in which it was treated by the various Military commanders, to whose discretion its treatment, in their several commands, was left ­a discretion which almost invariably leaned toward the political bias of the commander.  Thus, in a proclamation, dated St. Louis, February 23, 1862, Halleck, commanding the Department of Missouri, said: 

“Soldiers! let no excess on your part tarnish the glory of our arms!

“The order heretofore issued in this department, in regard to pillaging and marauding, the destruction of private property, and the stealing or concealment of Slaves, must be strictly enforced.  It does not belong to the Military to decide upon the relation of Master and Slave.  Such questions must be settled by the civil Courts.  No Fugitive Slaves will therefore be admitted within our lines or camps, except when especially ordered by the General Commanding. "

And Buell, commanding the Department of the Ohio, in response to a communication on the subject from the Chairman of the Military Committee of the Kentucky Legislature, wrote, March 6, 1862: 

“It has come to my knowledge that Slaves sometimes make their way improperly into our lines, and in some instances they may be enticed there, but I think the number has been magnified by report.  Several applications have been made to me by persons whose servants have been found in our camps, and in every instance that I know of the master has recovered his servant and taken him away.”

Thus, while some of our Commanders, like Dix and Halleck, repelled or even expelled the Fugitive Slave from their lines; and others, like Buell and Hooker, facilitated the search for, and restoration to his master, of the black Fugitive found within our lines; on the other hand, Fremont, as we have seen, and Doubleday and Hunter, as we shall yet see, took totally different ground on this question.

President Lincoln, however, harassed as he was by the extremists on both sides of the Slavery question, still maintained that calm statesman-like middle-course from which the best results were likely to flow.  But he now thought the time had come to broach the question of a compensated, gradual Emancipation.

Accordingly, on March 6, 1862, he sent to Congress the following message: 

“Fellow citizens of the Senate and House of Representatives: 

“I recommend the adoption of a joint Resolution by your honorable bodies, which shall be substantially as follows: 

“Resolved, That the United States ought to co-operate with any State which may adopt gradual abolishment of Slavery, giving to such State pecuniary aid, to be used by such State in its discretion, to compensate for the inconveniences, public and private, produced by such change of system.

“If the proposition contained in the Resolution does not meet the approval of Congress and the Country, there is the end; but if it does command such approval, I deem it of importance that the States and people immediately interested should be at once distinctly notified of the fact, so that they may begin to consider whether to accept or reject it, The Federal Government would find its highest interest in such a measure, as one of the most efficient means of self preservation.

“The leaders of the existing Insurrection entertain the hope that this Government will ultimately be forced to acknowledge the Independence of some part of the disaffected region, and that all the Slave States North of such part will then say, ’the Union for which we have struggled being already gone, we now choose to go with the Southern Section.’

“To deprive them of this hope, substantially ends the Rebellion; and the initiation of Emancipation completely deprives them of it, as to all the States initiating it.  The point is not that all the States tolerating Slavery would very soon, if at all, initiate Emancipation; but that, while the offer is equally made to all, the more Northern shall, by such initiation, make it certain to the more Southern that in no event will the former ever join the latter in their proposed Confederacy.  I say, ‘initiation,’ because in my judgment, gradual, and not sudden Emancipation, is better for all.

“In the mere financial or pecuniary view, any member of Congress, with the census tables and Treasury reports before him, can readily see for himself how very soon the current expenditures of this War would purchase, at fair valuation, all the Slaves in any named State.

“Such a proposition on the part of the General Government sets up no claim of a right by Federal authority to interfere with Slavery within State limits, referring, as it does, the absolute control of the subject in each case to the State and its people immediately interested.  It is proposed as a matter of perfectly free choice with them.

“In the Annual Message last December, I thought fit to say, ’the Union must be preserved; and hence all indispensable means must be employed.’  I said this, not hastily, but deliberately.  War has been made, and continues to be an indispensable means to this end.  A practical reacknowledgment of the National authority would render the War unnecessary, and it would at once cease.  If, however, resistance continues, the War must also continue; and it is impossible to foresee all the incidents which may attend, and all the ruin which may follow it.  Such as may seem indispensable, or may obviously promise great efficiency toward ending the struggle, must and will come.

“The proposition now made, though an offer only, I hope it may be esteemed no offense to ask whether the pecuniary consideration tendered would not be of more value to the States and private persons concerned, than are the Institution, and Property in it, in the present aspect of affairs?

“While it is true that the adoption of the proposed resolution would be merely initiatory, and not within itself a practical measure, it is recommended in the hope that it would soon lead to important practical results.  In full view of my great responsibility to my God and to my Country, I earnestly beg the attention of Congress and the People to the subject.

“March 6, 1862.”

In compliance with the above suggestion from the President, a Joint Resolution, in the precise words suggested, was introduced into the House, March 10, by Roscoe Conkling, and on the following day was adopted in the House by 97 yeas to 36 nays.

Of the 36 members of the House who voted against this Resolution, were 34 Democrats, and among them were Messrs. Crisfield of Maryland, and Messrs. Crittenden, Mallory, and Menzies of Kentucky.  These gentleman afterward made public a report, drawn by themselves, of an interesting interview they had held with President Lincoln on this important subject, in the words following: 

“Memorandum of an interview between the president and some border slave-state representatives march 10, 1862.

“’Dear sir: ­I called, at the request of the President, to ask you to come to the White House to-morrow morning, at nine o’clock, and bring such of your colleagues as are in town.’”

“’Washington, March 10, 1862.

“Yesterday on my return from church I found Mr. Postmaster General Blair in my room, writing the above note, which he immediately suspended, and verbally communicated the President’s invitation; and stated that the President’s purpose was to have some conversation with the delegations of Kentucky, Missouri, Maryland, Virginia, and Delaware, in explanation of his Message of the 6th inst.

“This morning these delegations, or such of them as were in town, assembled at the White House at the appointed time, and after some little delay were admitted to an audience.

“After the usual salutations and we were seated, the President said, in substance, that he had invited us to meet him to have some conversation with us in explanation of his Message of the 6th; that since he had sent it in, several of the gentlemen then present had visited him, but had avoided any allusion to the Message, and he therefore inferred that the import of the Message had been misunderstood, and was regarded as inimical to the interests we represented; and he had resolved he would talk with us, and disabuse our minds of that erroneous opinion.

“The President then disclaimed any intent to injure the interests or wound the sensibilities of the Slave States.  On the contrary, his purpose was to protect the one and respect the other; that we were engaged in a terrible, wasting, and tedious War; immense Armies were in the field, and must continue in the field as long as the War lasts; that these Armies must, of necessity, be brought into contact with Slaves in the States we represented and in other States as they advanced; that Slaves would come to the camps, and continual irritation was kept up; that he was constantly annoyed by conflicting and antagonistic complaints; on the one side, a certain class complained if the Slave was not protected by the Army; persons were frequently found who, participating in these views, acted in a way unfriendly to the Slaveholder; on the other hand, Slaveholders complained that their rights were interfered with, their Slaves induced to abscond, and protected within the lines, these complaints were numerous, loud, and deep; were a serious annoyance to him and embarrassing to the progress of the War; that it kept alive a spirit hostile to the Government in the States we represented; strengthened the hopes of the Confederates that at some day the Border States would unite with them, and thus tend to prolong the War; and he was of opinion, if this Resolution should be adopted by Congress and accepted by our States, these causes of irritation and these hopes would be removed, and more would be accomplished towards shortening the War than could be hoped from the greatest victory achieved by Union Armies; that he made this proposition in good faith, and desired it to be accepted, if at all, voluntarily, and in the same patriotic spirit in which it was made; that Emancipation was a subject exclusively under the control of the States, and must be adopted or rejected by each for itself; that he did not claim nor had this Government any right to coerce them for that purpose; that such was no part of his purpose in making this proposition, and he wished it to be clearly understood; that he did not expect us there to be prepared to give him an answer, but he hoped we would take the subject into serious consideration; confer with one another, and then take such course as we felt our duty and the interests of our constituents required of us.

“Mr. Noell, of Missouri, said that in his State, Slavery was not considered a permanent Institution; that natural causes were there in operation which would, at no distant day, extinguish it, and he did not think that this proposition was necessary for that; and, besides that, he and his friends felt solicitous as to the Message on account of the different constructions which the Resolution and Message had received.  The New York Tribune was for it, and understood it to mean that we must accept gradual Emancipation according to the plan suggested, or get something worse.

“The President replied, he must not be expected to quarrel with the New York Tribune before the right time; he hoped never to have to do it; he would not anticipate events.  In respect to Emancipation in Missouri, he said that what had been observed by Mr. Noell was probably true, but the operation of these natural causes had not prevented the irritating conduct to which he had referred, or destroyed the hopes of the Confederates that Missouri would at some time range herself alongside of them, which, in his judgment, the passage of this Resolution by Congress, and its acceptance by Missouri, would accomplish.

“Mr. Crisfield, of Maryland, asked what would be the effect of the refusal of the State to accept this proposal, and desired to know if the President looked to any policy beyond the acceptance or rejection of this scheme.

“The President replied that he had no designs beyond the action of the States on this particular subject.  He should lament their refusal to accept it, but he had no designs beyond their refusal of it.

“Mr. Menzies, of Kentucky, inquired if the President thought there was any power, except in the States themselves, to carry out his scheme of Emancipation?

“The President replied, he thought there could not be.  He then went off into a course of remark not qualifying the foregoing declaration, nor material to be repeated to a just understanding of his meaning.

“Mr. Crisfield said he did not think the people of Maryland looked upon Slavery as a permanent Institution; and he did not know that they would be very reluctant to give it up if provision was made to meet the loss, and they could be rid of the race; but they did not like to be coerced into Emancipation, either by the direct action of the Government or by indirection, as through the Emancipation of Slaves in this District, or the Confiscation of Southern Property as now threatened; and he thought before they would consent to consider this proposition they would require to be informed on these points.

“The President replied that ’unless he was expelled by the act of God or the Confederate Armies, he should occupy that house for three years, and as long as he remained there, Maryland had nothing to fear, either for her Institutions or her interests, on the points referred to.’

“Mr. Crisfield immediately added:  ’Mr. President, what you now say could be heard by the people of Maryland, they would consider your proposition with a much better feeling than I fear without it they will be inclined to do.’

“The President:  ’That (meaning a publication of what he said), will not do; it would force me into a quarrel before the proper time;’ and again intimating, as he had before done, that a quarrel with the ’Greeley faction’ was impending, he said, ’he did not wish to encounter it before the proper time, nor at all if it could be avoided.’

“Governor Wickliffe, of Kentucky, then asked him respecting the Constitutionality of his scheme.

“The President replied:  ’As you may suppose, I have considered that; and the proposition now submitted does not encounter any Constitutional difficulty.  It proposes simply to co-operate with any State by giving such State pecuniary aid;’ and he thought that the Resolution, as proposed by him, would be considered rather as the expression of a sentiment than as involving any Constitutional question.

“Mr. Hall, of Missouri, thought that if this proposition was adopted at all, it should be by the votes of the Free States, and come as a proposition from them to the Slave States, affording them an inducement to put aside this subject of discord; that it ought not to be expected that members representing Slaveholding Constituencies should declare at once, and in advance of any proposition to them, for the Emancipation of Slaves.

“The President said he saw and felt the force of the objection; it was a fearful responsibility, and every gentleman must do as he thought best; that he did not know how this scheme was received by the Members from the Free States; some of them had spoken to him and received it kindly; but for the most part they were as reserved and chary as we had been, and he could not tell how they would vote.

“And, in reply to some expression of Mr. Hall as to his own opinion regarding Slavery, he said he did not pretend to disguise his Anti-Slavery feeling; that he thought it was wrong and should continue to think so; but that was not the question we had to deal with now.  Slavery existed, and that, too, as well by the act of the North, as of the South; and in any scheme to get rid of it, the North, as well as the South, was morally bound to do its full and equal share.  He thought the Institution, wrong, and ought never to have existed; but yet he recognized the rights of Property which had grown out of it, and would respect those rights as fully as similar rights in any other property; that Property can exist, and does legally exist.  He thought such a law, wrong, but the rights of Property resulting must be respected; he would get rid of the odious law, not by violating the right, but by encouraging the proposition, and offering inducements to give it up.”

“Here the interview, so far as this subject is concerned, terminated by Mr. Crittenden’s assuring the President that whatever might be our final action, we all thought him solely moved by a high patriotism and sincere devotion to the happiness and glory of his Country; and with that conviction we should consider respectfully the important suggestions he had made.

“After some conversation on the current war news we retired, and I immediately proceeded to my room and wrote out this paper.                                “J.  W. Crisfield.”

“We were present at the interview described in the foregoing paper of Mr. Crisfield, and we certify that the substance of what passed on the occasion is in this paper, faithfully and fully given.

“J.  W. Menzies, “J.  J. Crittenden, “R.  Mallory.  “March 10, 1862.”

Upon the passage of the Joint-Resolution in the House only four Democrats (Messrs. Cobb, Haight, Lehman, and Sheffield) voted in the affirmative, and but two Republicans (Francis Thomas, and Leary) in the negative.  On the 2nd of April, it passed the Senate by a vote of 32 yeas ­all Republicans save Messrs. Davis and Thomson ­to 10 nays, all Democrats.

Meantime the question of the treatment of the “Contraband” in our Military camps, continued to grow in importance.

On March 26, 1862, General Hooker issued the following order touching certain Fugitive Slaves and their alleged owners: 

“Headquarters, Hooker’s division, camp Baker, “Lower Potomac, March 26, 1862.

“To brigade and regimental commanders of this division: 

“Messrs. Nally, Gray, Dummington, Dent, Adams, Speake, Price, Posey, and Cobey, citizens of Maryland, have Negroes supposed to be with some of the regiments of this Division; the Brigadier General commanding directs that they be permitted to visit all the camps of his command, in search of their Property, and if found, that they be allowed to take possession of the same, without any interference whatever.  Should any obstacle be thrown in their way by any officer or soldier in the Division, they will be at once reported by the regimental commanders to these headquarters.

“By command of Brigadier General Hooker;

“Joseph Dickinson, “Assistant Adjutant General.”

On the following day, by direction of General Sickles, the following significant report was made touching the above order: 

“Headquarters, second regiment, Excelsior brigade.  “Camp hall, March 27, 1862.

“Lieutenant: ­In compliance with verbal directions from Brigadier General D. E. Sickles, to report as to the occurrence at this camp on the afternoon of the 26th instant, I beg leave to submit the following: 

“At about 3:30 o’clock P. M., March 26, 1862, admission within our lines was demanded by a party of horsemen (civilians), numbering, perhaps, fifteen.  They presented the lieutenant commanding the guard, with an order of entrance from Brigadier General Joseph Hooker, Commanding Division (copy appended), the order stating that nine men should be admitted.

“I ordered that the balance of the party should remain without the lines; which was done.  Upon the appearance of the others, there was visible dissatisfaction and considerable murmuring among the soldiers, to so great an extent that I almost feared for the safety of the Slaveholders.  At this time General Sickles opportunely arrived, and instructed me to order them outside the camp, which I did, amidst the loud cheers of our soldiers.

“It is proper to add, that before entering our lines, and within about seventy-five or one hundred yards of our camp, one of their number discharged two pistol shots at a Negro, who was running past them, with an evident intention of taking his life.  This justly enraged our men.

          “All of which is respectfully submitted.

                    “Your obedient servant,                     “John Tolen.                 “Major Commanding Second Regiment, E. B.

“To Lieutenant J. L. Palmer, Jr., “A.  D. C. and A. A. A. General.”

On April 6, the following important dispatch, in the nature of an order, was issued by General Doubleday to one of his subordinate officers: 

“Headquarters military defenses, “North of the Potomac, “Washington, April 6, 1862.

“Sir: ­I am directed by General Doubleday to say, in answer to your letter of the 2d instant, that all Negroes coming into the lines of any of the camps or forts under his command, are to be treated as persons, and not as chattels.

“Under no circumstances has the Commander of a fort or camp the power of surrendering persons claimed as Fugitive Slaves, as it cannot be done without determining their character.

“The Additional Article of War recently passed by Congress positively prohibits this.

“The question has been asked, whether it would not be better to exclude Negroes altogether from the lines.  The General is of the opinion that they bring much valuable information, which cannot be obtained from any other source.  They are acquainted with all the roads, paths, fords, and other natural features of the country, and they make excellent guides.  They also know and frequently have exposed the haunts of Secession spies and Traitors and the existence of Rebel organizations.  They will not, therefore, be excluded.

“The General also directs me to say that civil process cannot be served directly in the camps or forts of his command, without full authority be obtained from the Commanding Officer for that purpose.

“I am very respectfully, your obedient servant,

“E.  P. Halsted, “Assistant Adjutant General.

“Lieut.  Col.  John D. Shane, “Commanding 76th Reg.  N. Y. Vols.”