Out of the Storm: A Legacy

By Anthony B. Cochran

The history we know is sometimes incomplete. The stories we get are those shaded by time or cultural perspectives of the day. Historical accounts of African Americans during the Civil War vary. Some aspects, such as their involvement in military activities are generally not well known, if at all.  Anthony B. Cochran’s Out of the Storm: A Legacy is an important addition to the bookshelves of historians and genealogists because it showcases African Americans’ heroism during the Civil War, not their servitude. 

Out of the Storm lists African American recipients of the Medal of Honor for service performed during the Civil War.  It also identifies other previously  unrecognized African Americans who performed feats of valor and heroism on the battlefield. Cochran, who studied history in college, provides genealogical information for as many of these soldiers as possible. As a US veteran, of the Vietnam War, Cochran also includes excerpts of battlefield reports detailing challenges, battlefield strategy and tactical planning involving units of African American soldiers. 

• Language: English
• Publisher: Outskirts Press
• Release date: Apr 24, 2024
• ISBN: 9781977271938

Anthony B. Cochran

Anthony Cochran (BA History. MA Management) provides a unique perspective based upon specialized experience and study in American History and Genealogy. He is a Vietnam Veteran and recipient of the Army Commendation Medal awarded during his tour of duty in Vietnam. He is a member of several veterans organizations including the American Legion, Vietnam Veterans of America, Inc., Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW), AMVETS, and Veterans of the Vietnam War, Inc.

Book preview

PART I

CHAPTER 1

Call to Arms and the Revolutionary War

As most American colonies moved toward independence from England in the years preceding 1776, Native and African Americans (free and slave) were generally excluded from the state militias. Washington in taking command at Cambridge prohibited the enlistment of all Negroes. The matter was discussed in the Continental Congress and as a result Washington was instructed by that body to discharge all Negroes whether slave or free. When the enlistment of Negroes came up again in the council of the army, it was unanimously agreed to reject slaves and by a large majority to refuse Negroes altogether. By these instructions, Washington, as Commander of the Army, was governed, late in 1775. (Woodson 1922, 59)

It was likely that many African Americans, free and enslaved, noted the irony of the colonial leaders’ appeals for freedom and liberty, for the rights of man, with an emphasis on the idea of equality of all men. The colonial appeals for the rights of man to life, liberty, and basic freedom versus the maintenance of the institution of slavery presented an inherent conflict of values. The contradiction was not lost on many already bound by slavery. The conflict of this concept, embedded in the Declaration of Independence, also did not go unnoticed by European nations, who also observed the colonists maintaining their peculiar institution while appealing for support to exercise basic individual rights and liberty. The question of whether to arm free blacks for the quest for independence was discussed and debated among the colonists. Forgotten was the participation of African Americans in the American colonization efforts prior to 1776 and in the French and Indian Wars, and as such, very little consideration was given by colonial leaders to arming slaves. American colonists in favor of enlisting the support of Negroes were discouraged by those fearing the concept of arming slaves and the possible impact to their general safety. Others had a different perspective. A few were of the opinion that the Negroes seeking the opportunity, might go over to Great Britain, as was the case with the delegates from Georgia to the Continental Congress, who had grave fears for the safety of the South. Woodson (1922, 60).

Despite the lack of public support for arming African Americans, many free blacks expressed their fervent loyalty to their country and its ideals. In the North, the general opinion was that blacks did not have the capability and skills needed for military service or battle. However, in certain Northern states, the right of free blacks to bear arms was recognized and accepted, as indicated by black participation in local militias; these included the states of Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Rhode Island. One of the first to give his blood on behalf of American liberty was Crispus Attucks, an African American living in Boston, Massachusetts, and a former slave who had taunted a British officer, an incident which served as a prelude to the Revolutionary War.

Some enslaved African Americans sought and received permission to enroll in the local militia. However, for the vast majority of male slaves, military service was not an option.

In November 1775, the British Earl of Dunmore—representing the crown in Virginia—issued an order declaring all slaves free and opened the ranks of the military to all able-bodied men. Initially, the colonists did not take note of the British efforts to recruit and enlist the services of blacks. The loss of blacks to British forces later led to serious concerns by the colonial leaders, including General Washington, who presented the matter to the Continental Congress. The latter would eventually authorize service on a limited basis, permitting reenlistment of those who had previously served in the army. Later, the shortage of manpower and pressing needs of the war caused a change of this restrictive policy.

The African Americans who answered the call to defend their native land included Lemuel Hayes, who served as a minuteman and militia member. Woodson provides the following account of the life of Lemuel Hayes:

Lemuel Hayes was born July 18, 1753 at West Hartford Connecticut. He was a man of color, his father being of unmingled African extraction, and his mother a white woman of respectful ancestry in New England. She was then a hired girl in the employ of a farmer who had a neighbor to whom belonged the Negro to whom the woman became attached. Hayes took neither the name of his father nor his mother, but probably that of the man in whose home he was born. (Woodson 1919, 22).

Hayes was a patriot of the revolution and joined other colonists in the expedition to Ticonderoga to fight the British. (Woodson 1919,24) Other African Americans providing patriotic services were reported by William Cooper Nell, an African American born in 1816.

The pursuit of freedom by the American colonies produced unexpected and unprecedented actions on the part of certain local governments. The Rhode Island legislature drafted and enacted into law a measure that permitted the arming of Negroes into an organized militia. The law passed in February 1778 and provided that every able-bodied Negro, Mulatto, or Indian man slave, in this State may enlist into either of the…two (Continental) Batteries. (Greene, 142) It further provided for equal pay and freedom for those under the bond of slavery. This act was preceded by a Congressional draft in January 1777 to fill the ranks and vacancies within the Continental troops. This call for manpower followed the British capture of Newport, Rhode Island, in December 1776, a key slave port up to that time. In this same month General Washington appeared to reverse his stand opposing enlistment of Negroes and sought to enroll free Negroes. A key factor in support of this initiative was the request for added enlistments by General James Varnum of Rhode Island:

General Varnum, one of Rhode Island’s delegates to the Continental Congress in December 1777, made two proposals to General Washington. He first recommended that since Rhode Island’s two battalions in the Continental Line were undermanned, the two be consolidated into one…. The second proposal was more startling…he suggested that slaves be recruited instead…. He further suggested that Colonel Christopher Greene, cousin to Nathaniel Greene…be sent home to enlist the battalion. (Greene, 148-149).

The opposition for the use of slaves did not dissipate, but rather increased with encouragement by slaveholders and traders with vested interests in maintaining the practice. The new law became short-lived. In May 1778, the General Assembly passed an act stopping all enlistments of slaves after June 10, 1778…. To bar slaves legally from enlisting in the Army was one thing. Actually, to stop enrolling them was another. Necessity, now as in the past overrode legal considerations. Enlistments still went on. (Greene, 163).

This led to formation of the 1st Rhode Island Regiment, a unit composed of significant numbers of African Americans, sometimes referred to the Black Regiment. It’s role was of critical importance to the colonists as it provided needed resources for the fight for independence. By the time the regiment de-activated in 1783 it had provided five years of service in the battle for freedom.

Nell records the following acknowledgements of services provided by African Americans in Services of Colored Americans in the Wars of 1776 and 1812:

Hon. Calvin Goddard, of Connecticut, states that in the little circle of his residence, he was instrumental in securing, under the Act of 1818, the pensions of 19 colored soldiers. I cannot, he says, refrain from mentioning one aged black man, Primus Babcock, who proudly presented to me an honorable discharge from service during the war, dated at the close of it, wholly in the handwriting of George Washington. Nor can I forget the expression of his feelings, when informed, after his discharge had been sent to the War Department, that it could not be returned. At his request it was written for, as he seemed inclined to spurn the pension and reclaim the discharge." (1851, 11).

Acknowledgement of past military services by African Americans appears limited during the period following the War for Independence and War of 1812; however, a small number of state leaders did praise such efforts. One of these leaders, Governor Eustis, addressed their contributions during a speech against slavery in Missouri in 1820.

He stated:

the blacks formed an entire regiment, and they discharged their duty with zeal and fidelity. The gallant defense of Red Bank, in which the black regiment bore a part, is among the proofs of their valor. In this contest, it will be recollected that four hundred men met and repulsed, after a terrible and sanguinary struggle, fifteen hundred Hessian troops headed by Count Donop. The glory of the defense of Red Bank, which has been pronounced one of the most heroic actions of the war, belongs in reality to black men, yet who now hears them spoken of in connection with it? (Nell 1851, 10).

The foregoing speech was presented as an argument against slavery, an issue that led to many Congressional debates until the close of the Civil War.

At Boston…on June 17, came the battle of Bunker Hill, another British effort to prevent local armies from developing a posture of strength and again a morale booster for the Americans…. Negroes fought with the provincial forces…. Former slave Peter Salem saw action for the second time…. Another Negro participant of Bunker Hill was Barzillai Lew of Chelmsford, a cooper turned fifer. Although only thirty years old, Lew had fought in the French and Indian War, having seen thirty-eight weeks of service in 1760 as a Pepperell enlistee in a Massachusetts company commanded by Thomas Farrington. Another Negro at Bunker Hill was Cuff Whittemore, who ‘fought to the last’ receiving a ball through his hat. (Quarles 1996, 10–11).

At the close of the Revolutionary War, a number of blacks were recognized for their courage and gallantry, and a few gained their freedom as a result of their services. Some of these soldiers emerged from the war as heroes. However, due to cultural factors relating to years of bias and prejudice, such actions and exploits were forgotten over time. Little was recorded or printed. The War of 1812 presented a challenge to American independence and provided a return of the question regarding the capability and usage of African Americans in military service.

During the War of 1812 slaves were allowed to enlist upon receiving the consent of their masters. The master was to receive the $25 bounty, and the slave to be free when honorably discharged from the Army. (Woodson 1931, 394). William Bill Flora is recorded as serving notably in both the Revolutionary War and War of 1812. During the former he served with units of the 2nd Virginia Regiment in the battle of Great Bridge (near Portsmouth & Chesapeake, Va.). Here he distinguished himself by providing covering fire for colonial soldiers crossing the bridge where he himself would be the last to cross. He later supported local forces defending the Chesapeake area from the British in 1812.

CHAPTER 2

War of 1812

The War of 1812 helped to validate American independence from Britain; it was achieved with vital support from African Americans in the Battle of New Orleans. In the prior year, America had lost much of its revenue via international shipping, which was constrained by maritime kidnappings and other acts of aggression by the Royal Navy, leaving the economy in a weakened condition. Much of this war was fought at sea. Though many African American men were not authorized enlistment into the Navy, a number of free black men served as seamen. However, the call to arms did not go unanswered in the battle against the British for New Orleans.

In January 1815 General Andrew Jackson scored a major victory over British forces, a success owed to the critical military support of African Americans responding to the call to arms. Understanding the criticality of the looming battle for New Orleans, General Jackson issued an urgent call to arms to the African American community, seeking support and assistance, specifically, armed support.

To further rally support of blacks in this conflict, General Jackson issued several proclamations, including the following excerpt recorded by William Nell in Excerpts of Speech and Proclamation of General Andrew Jackson in New Orleans Sept 21, 1814. One such published proclamation was as follows:

"To the Free Colored Inhabitants of Louisiana: Through a mistaken policy, you have heretofore been deprived of a participation in the glorious struggle for national rights in which our country is engaged. This no longer shall exist.

As sons of freedom, you are now called upon to defend our most inestimable blessings. As Americans, your country looks with confidence to her adopted children, for a valorous support, as a faithful return for the advantages enjoyed under her mild and equitable government. As fathers, husbands, and brothers, you are summoned to rally around the standard of the Eagle, to defend all which is dear in existence.

Your country, although calling for your exertions, does not wish you to engage in her cause without remunerating you for the services rendered. Your intelligent minds are not to be led away by false representation. Your love of honor would cause you to despise the man who should attempt to deceive you. In the sincerity of a soldier, and the language of truth, I address you.

To every noble-hearted free man of Color, volunteering to serve during the present contest with Great Britain, and no longer, there will be paid the same bounty in money and lands, now received by the white soldiers of the United States, namely one hundred and twenty-four dollars in money, and one hundred and sixty acres of land…" (Nell 1851, 19–20).

A reprint of the following article summary of the New Orleans Picayune newspaper, published in the Pennsylvania Freeman on March 10, 1851, is provided by Nell:

The Free Colored Veterans—Not the least interesting, although the most novel, feature of the procession yesterday (celebration of the Battle of New Orleans), was the presence of ninety of the Colored veterans who bore a conspicuous part in the dangers of the day they were now for the first time called to assist in celebrating, and who, by their good conduct in presence of the enemy, deserved and received the approbation of their illustrious Commander in Chief. During the thirty-six years that have passed away since they assisted to repel the invaders from our shores, these faithful men have never before participated in the annual rejoicings for the victory which their valor contributed to gain. Their good deeds have been consecrated only in their own memories, or lived but to claim a passing notice on the page of the historian. Yet who more than they deserve the thanks of the country and gratitude of succeeding generations? Who rallied with more alacrity in response to the summons of danger? Who endured more cheerfully the hardships of the camp, or faced with greater courage the perils of the fight? If in that hazardous hour, when our homes were menaced with the horrors of war, we did not disdain to call upon the Colored population to assist in repelling the invading people, we should not, when the danger is past, refuse to permit them to unite with us in celebrating the glorious event which they helped to make so memorable an epoch in our history. We were not too exalted to mingle with them in the affray; they were not too humble to join in our rejoicings…. The respectability of their appearance and the modesty of their demeanor made an impression on every observer…. They have proved loyal and ready to worship or die, if need be, at freedom’s shrine. (Nell 1851, 21–22).

Following the War of 1812, black enlistments into the Army were banned entirely. Many African Americans whose lives touched both the Revolutionary War and the War of 1812 were proud of their contributions and participation; they expected certain recognition of their service at some point. Many later filed pension applications in one or both of these wars. Notable among them is Jordan B. Noble who exemplified devotion to the flag and service to the military. He is recorded as serving in three (3) military campaigns, American freedom and independence in the War of 1812, the Mexican War (1846-1848), and action in the Civil War. Noble displayed unusual devotion to duty and was a true patriot and American defender. (Greene, 46)

CHAPTER 3

Road to Liberty

The Civil War represented the greatest crisis faced by America since its birth. It resulted in the deaths of over six hundred thousand Americans—more deaths than any other armed conflict in American history. In this war, the Confederacy proclaimed its right of self-determination and to maintain and decide the fate of its policies and practices; that is, states’ rights, which included the option to maintain the institution of slavery. The latter is sometimes referred to as the peculiar institution. Though not explicitly addressed in the Confederacy’s quest for secession, a major underlying factor was slavery, or the right to own slaves. The question of slavery and race proved to be one of the most divisive issues faced by America from its birth in 1776 to 1861. In the interest of preserving the Union, slavery was an issue President Lincoln sought to avoid.

When the war broke out, the President of the United States openly declared that it was not his purpose to interfere with the institutions of the South, meaning of course, that he had no desire to attack slavery in those commonwealths in which it existed. The South, on the other hand, anxious to win favor abroad and knowing how it would harm its cause in foreign countries to have it said that it had undertaken a war to promote slavery, declared its position one of self-defense to maintain its right to govern itself and to preserve its own peculiar institutions. The Negroes, therefore, were not to be freed and of course were not to take part in the war, as it was considered a struggle between white men. (Woodson 1922, 221).

Lincoln also stated his belief that no state could withdraw from the Union, and acts of violence against the government represented insurrection. He noted that his presidential responsibilities required him to ensure the preservation of the Union and its laws. The nation could not envision the cultural impact to society that would result from the call to arms. President Lincoln’s initial strategy of non-interference with the peculiar institution (slavery) was to keep the border states (Kentucky, Maryland, etc.) neutral in the conflict. Border states included both slave owners and those opposed to slavery. Keeping these states out of the Confederacy was a prime concern of the