"In May, 1777, the General Assembly of Connecticut appointed a Committee 'to take into consideration the state and condition of the negro and mulatto slaves in this State, and what may be done for their emancipation.' This Committee, in a report presented at the same session (signed by the chairman, the Hon. Matthew Griswold of Lyme), recommended—

"'That the effective negro and mulatto slaves be allowed to enlist with the Continental battalions now raising in this State, under the following regulations and restrictions; viz., that all such negro and mulatto slaves as can procure, either by bounty, hire, or in any other way, such a sum to be paid to their masters as such negro or mulatto shall be judged to be reasonably worth by the selectmen of the town where such negro or mulatto belongs, shall be allowed to enlist into either of said battalions, and shall thereupon be, de facto, free and emancipated; and that the master of such negro or mulutto shall be exempted from the support and maintenance of such negro or mulatto, in case such negro or mulatto shall hereafter become unable to support and maintain himself.

"'And that, in case any such negro or mulatto slave shall be disposed to enlist into either of said battalions during the [war], he shall be allowed so to do: and such negro or mulatto shall be appraised by the selectmen of the town to which he belongs, and his master shall be allowed to receive the bounty to which such slave may be entitled and also one-half of the annual wages of such slave during the time he shall continue in said service; provided, however, that said master shall not be allowed to receive such part of said wages after he shall have received so much as amounts, together with the bounty, to the sum at which he was appraised.'"

In the lower house the report was put over to the next session, but when it reached the upper house it was rejected.

"You will see by the Report of Committee, May, 1777, that General Varnum's plan for the enlistment of slaves had been anticipated in Connecticut; with this difference, that Rhode Island adopted it, while Connecticut did not.

"The two States reached nearly the same results by different methods. The unanimous declaration of the officers at Cambridge, in the winter of 1775, against the enlistment of slaves,—confirmed by the Committee of Congress,—had some weight, I think, with the Connecticut Assembly, so far as the formal enactment of a law authorized such enlistments was in question. At the same time, Washington's license to continue the enlistment of negroes was regarded as a rule of action both by the selectmen in making up, and by the State Government in accepting, the quota of the towns. The process of draughting, in Connecticut, was briefly this: The able-bodied men, in each town, were divided into 'classes:' and each class was required to furnish one or more men, as the town's quota required, to answer a draught. Now, the Assembly, at the same session at which the proposition for enlisting slaves was rejected (May, 1777), passed an act providing that any two men belonging to this State, 'who should procure an able-bodied soldier or recruit to enlist into either of the Continental battalions to be raised from this State,' should themselves be exempted from draught during the continuance of such enlistment. Of recruits or draughted men thus furnished, neither the selectmen nor commanding officers questioned the color or the civil status: white and black, bond and free, if 'able-bodied,' went on the roll together, accepted as the representatives of their 'class,' or as substitutes for their employers. At the next session (October, 1777), an act was passed which gave more direct encouragement to the enlistment of slaves. By this existing law, the master who emancipated a slave was not released from the liability to provide for his support. This law was now so amended, as to authorize the selectmen of any town, on the application of the master,—after 'inquiry into the age, abilities, circumstances, and character' of the servant or slave, and being satisfied 'that it was likely to be consistent with his real advantage, and that it was probable that he would be able to support himself,'—to grant liberty for his emancipation, and to discharge the master 'from any charge or cost which may be occasioned by maintaining or supporting the servant or slave made free as aforesaid.' This enactment enabled the selectmen to offer an additional inducement to enlistment for making up the quota of the town. The slave (or servant for term of years) might receive his freedom; the master might secure exemption from draught, and a discharge from future liabilities, to which he must otherwise have been subjected. In point of fact, some hundreds of blacks—slaves and freemen—were enlisted, from time to time, in the regiments of the State troops and of the Connecticut line. How many, it is impossible to tell: for, from first to last, the company or regimental rolls indicate no distinctions of color. The name is the only guide, and, in turning over the rolls of the Connecticut line, the frequent recurrence of names which were exclusively appropriated to negroes and slaves, shows how considerable was their proportion of the material of the Connecticut army; while such surnames as 'Liberty.' 'Freeman,' 'Freedom,' &c, by scores, indicate with what anticipations, and under what inducements, they entered the service.

As to the efficiency of the service they rendered, I can say nothing from the records, except what is to be gleaned from scattered files such as one of the petitions I send you. So far as my acquaintance extends, almost every family has its traditions of the good and faithful service of a black servant or slave, who was killed in battle, or served through the war, and came home to tell stories of hard fighting, and draw his pension. In my own native town,—not a large one,—I remember five such pensioners, three of whom, I believe, had been slaves, and, in fact, were slaves to the day of their death; for (and this explains the uniform action of the General Assembly on petitions for emancipation) neither the towns nor the State were inclined to exonerate the master, at a time when slavery was becoming unprofitable, from the obligation to provide for the old age of his slave."[546]

Gen. Varnum, a brave and intelligent officer from Rhode Island, early urged the employment of Negro soldiers. He communicated his views to Gen. Washington, and he referred the correspondence to the governor of Rhode Island.

GEN. WASHINGTON TO GOV. COOKE.

Headquarters, 2d January, 1778

Sir:—Enclosed you will receive a copy of a letter from General Varnum to me, upon the means which might be adopted for completing the Rhode Island troops to their full proportion in the Continental army. I have nothing to say in addition to what I wrote the 29th of the last month on this important subject, but to desire that you will give the officers employed in this business all the assistance in your power.

I am with great respect, sir,

Your most obedient servant,

G. Washington.

"To Governor Cooke."[547]

The letter of Gen. Varnum to Gen. Washington, in reference to the employment of Negroes as soldiers, is as follows:—

GEN. VARNUM TO GEN. WASHINGTON.

"Camp, January 2d, 1778.

"Sir:—The two battalions from the State of Rhode Island being small, and there being a necessity of the state's furnishing an additional number to make up their proportion in the Continental army; the field officers have represented to me the propriety of making one temporary battalion from the two, so that one entire corps of officers may repair to Rhode Island, in order to receive and prepare the recruits for the field. It is imagined that a battalion of negroes can be easily raised there. Should that measure be adopted, or recruits obtained upon any other principle, the service will be advanced. The field officers who go upon this command, are Colonel Greene, Lieutenant Colonel Olney, and Major Ward; seven captains, twelve lieutenants, six ensigns, one paymaster, one surgeon and mates, one adjutant and one chaplain.

"I am your Excellency's most obedient servant,

"J.M. Varnum.

"To His Excellency General Washington."[548]

Gov. Cooke wrote Gen. Washington as follows:—

"State of Rhode Island, &c,

"Providence, January 19th, 1778.

"Sir:—Since we had the honor of addressing Your Excellency by Mr. Thompson, we received your favor of the 2d of January current, enclosing a proposition of Gen. Varnum's for raising a battalion of negroes.

"We in our letter of the 15th current, of which we send a duplicate, have fully represented our present circumstances, and the many difficulties we labor under, in respect to our filling up the Continental battalions. In addition thereto, will observe, that we have now in the state's service within the government, two battalions of infantry, and a regiment of artillery who are enlisted to serve until the 16th day of March next; and the General Assembly have ordered two battalions of infantry, and a regiment of artillery, to be raised, to serve until the 16th of March, 1779. So that we have raised and kept in the field, more than the proportion of men assigned us by Congress.

"The General Assembly of this state are to convene themselves on the second Monday of February next, when your letters will be laid before them, and their determination respecting the same, will be immediately transmitted to Your Excellency.

"I have the honor to be, &c.,

"Nicholas Cooke.

"To Gen. Washington."[549]