ntry, so to speak, produced an
immediate response. It drew Rhett from his retirement and inspired a
letter in which he took the Government severely to task for designing
to remove from state control this matter of fundamental importance.
Coinciding with the cry for more troops with which to confront Sherman,
the topic of negro soldiers became at once one of the questions of the
hour. It helped to focus that violent anti-Davis movement which is
the conspicuous event of December, 1864, and January, 1865. Those who
believed the President unscrupulous trembled at the thought of putting
into his hands a great army of hardy barbarians trained to absolute
obedience. The prospect of such a weapon held in one firm hand at
Richmond seemed to those opponents of the President a greater menace to
their liberties than even the armies of the invaders. It is quite likely
that distrust of Davis and dread of the use he might make of such a
weapon was increased by a letter from Benjamin to Frederick A. Porcher
of Charleston, a supporter of the Government, who had made rash
suggestions as to the extra-constitutional power that the Administration
might be justified by circumstances in assuming. Benjamin deprecated
such suggestions but concluded with the unfortunate remark: "If the
Constitution is not to be our guide I would prefer to see it suppressed
by a revolution which should declare a dictatorship during the war,
after the manner of ancient Rome, leaving to the future the care of
reestablishing firm and regular government." In the State of Virginia,
indeed, the revolutionary suggestions of the President's message and
the Secretary's report were promptly taken up and made the basis of a
political program, which Governor Smith embodied in his message to the
Legislature--a document that will eventually take its place among the
most interesting state papers of the Confederacy. It should be noted
that the suggestions thrown out in this way by the Administration to
test public feeling involved three distinct questions: Should the slaves
be given arms? Should they, if employed as soldiers, be given their
freedom? Should this revolutionary scheme, if accepted at all, be
handled by the general Government or left to the several States? On
the last of the three questions the Governor of Virginia was silent; by
implication he treated the matter as a concern of the States. Upon the
first and second questions, however, he was explicit and advised armi