Year: 1864

The Conservative insists, in the most positive
TERMS that the resolutions adopted by the Governors
do not contemplate the employment of slaves as
soldiers. 1t says:


1--WE repeat the proposition was not hvorab,v
entertained by the meeting. The meeting. as we
understand, was opposed to the proposition but did
not, we presume, feel called upon to express an
OPINION on that point, as it was new question but
designed simply to express itself in favor of their
Delng employed by the consent OF owners, as cooks
teamsters, &c"


Of course this statement is made by authority of
Gov. Vance. We reply that the proposition pas
not only "favoraOly entertained by the meeting"
but the meeting took ground in favor of the propo
stion by adopting the following resolutions:


Z" And whereas, the public enemy having pro-
claimed the freedom of our slaves, are forcing into
their armies the able-bodied portion thereof the
more efectualy to wage their cruel and bloody war
against US; Therefore be it


hEs0tced, That it is the policy and obvious duty
OF all slave owners timely to remove their slaves
from the line of the enemys approach and espec
lally those able to bear arms and when they shall
fal to do so that it should be made the duty o. the
proper authorities to enforce the performance of
this duty and to give to such owners all necessary
assistance as far as practicable.


Res0L1eG, That the course Of the enemy in appro-
prating our slaves who happen to fall into their
hands to purposes of war, seems to justify change
Of policy on our part and whilst owners of slaves
under the circumstances should freely yield them to
their country, recommend to our authorities
under proper regulations, to appropriate such part
Of them to the public service as may be required"


Could language be palmer than that? First
slave-oWners are admonlshed to remove their slaves
especially those able to bear arms; secondly, the
fact that the enemy has employed slaves soldiers
is referred to- justify a change of policy on our
part and thirdly, the circumstances are referred
to as an inducement to owners to freely yield their
slaves, to be employed in accordance with the new
policy thus suggested, forced upon by the ene-
my. Slaves are already employed on fortifcations
and they have been used in this State as teamsters
How could we be expected to change" "poli-
ey already established, and to which no Southern
er objects? Why refer to the employment of slaves
as soldiers by the enemy, if the purpose was not
thus to employ them ourselves?


The Conservative says it will continue to hold its
position of opposition to the employment of negro
soldiers "unt convinced that it is in error" The
Conservative is in no condition to use such language
independence of opinion is very desirable, but the
Conservative, as is well known, is the dependent
organ of the Governor. Its publisher is one of his
shade officers, and must obey orders or resign.
Error" with the Conservative would consist in op-
posing tie whirns the opinions of the Governor,
whatever those whims or opinions may be-


But the Confederate of Monday last takes the
same view that We do, to wit that the resolutions
of the Governors do I" contemplate the recommend
alton Of the employment of slaves as armed soldiers
in the SERVICE" And the Confederate goes further,
and makes argument in favor of the proposition,
though it says it declines to "assume any position,
until We are more enlightened" The Confederate
says the proposition to ari2 the negroes was "a
question antedating the war-Gnticipatea by oery
many" &c. We never heard of this before. We
are sure that if Virginia and North Carolina had
foreseen that the negroes would be armed and that
they had before them not only the loss of their
slave property but all the horrors of nsurrection
AMI servie war, they would not have seeded from
the old government.