English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2006-11-26 07:53:57 · 7 answers · asked by artemis15202 2 in Arts & Humanities History

7 answers

They are all wrong, the Emancipation Proclamation did nothing. Lincoln was reluctant to issue an Emancipation Proclamation but you would have thought from what one is taught in class these days this was his primary concern. He issued the proclamation to save the Union making impossible for foreign Governments to intervene on behalf of the Confederacy. Even though the English supported (indirectly) slavery, they like other countries were officially against the practice. By his actions, Lincoln was showing the US was against slavery but not the Confederacy. If like the leaders of these countries at the time, you took the time to read and study the act you would see it does nothing and in fact, Lincoln thought that the Afro American was not the equal of whites and his plan was to resettle the slaves in either the Amazon or Western Texas.

Most people are not aware that there was a series of action and even proclamations for instance Lincolns correspondence of October 14, 1862 to the military and civilian authorities of occupied Louisiana.

“Major General Butler, Governor Shepley, & and [sic] all having military and naval authority under the United States within the S[t]ate of Louisiana. The bearer of this, Hon. John E. Bouligny, a citizen of Louisiana, goes to the State seeking to have such of the people thereof as desire to avoid the unsatisfactory prospect before them, and to have peace again upon the old terms under the constitution of the United States, to manifest such desire by elections of members to the Congress of the United States particularly, and perhaps a legislature, State officers, and United States Senators friendly to their object. I shall be glad for you and each of you, to aid him and all others acting for this object, as much as possible. In all available ways, give the people a chance to express their wishes at these elections. Follow forms of law as far as convenient, but at all events get the expression of the largest number of the people possible. All see how such action will connect with, and affect the proclamation of September 22nd. Of course, the men elected should be gentlemen of character willing to swear support to the Constitution, as of old, and known to be above reasonable suspicion of duplicity. (CW 5:462-3, italics added).

NOTE: The italic show that Lincoln rather then issue an Emancipation Proclamation or free the slaves was still willing to allow the Southern States back into the Union. One will find this all the way up to the 1865 visit to Camp Lookout.

At the same time Lincoln was issuing the Emancipation Proclamation he was petitioning his cabinet to negotiate and appropriate funds to force the Blacks else where.

In 1864, Jeff Davis and other Southerner leaders would contemplate outlawing slavery and probably would have if the opportunity had arisen.


Slavery was abolished by the 13 th Amendment which was ratified December 8, 1865. On Jan. 1, 1863, U.S. President Abraham Lincoln declared free all slaves residing in territory in rebellion against the federal government. THIS EMANCIPATION PROCLAMATION actually freed few people. It did not apply to slaves in border states fighting on the Union side; nor did it affect slaves in southern areas already under Union control. Naturally, the states in rebellion did not act on Lincoln's order. But the proclamation did show Americans-- and the world--that the civil war was now being fought to end slavery.

God Bless You and The Southern People.

2006-11-26 08:59:58 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

It's a good question. The Emancipation Proclamation did very little. It did not free the all slaves in what is now the U.S. The emancipation proclamation only "freed" the slaves in those states that were rebelling. There was still legal slavery in states such as Kansas. Besides President Lincoln really didn't have thee power to end slavery. The job of the executive branch is to execute the laws. At the time slavery was still constitutionally legal. Slavery was abolished in the U.S. with the 13th amendment.

2006-11-27 15:04:41 · answer #2 · answered by Jon W 1 · 0 0

First, a correction -- the claim that the Emancipation Proclamation (put into effect January 1, 1863) freed no one is quite mistaken. On the contrary, it IMMEDIATELY established the freedom of many fugitive slaves, encouraged others to flee (thus ensuring their own freedom-- they would NOT be returned), and meant that, whenever the Union army was able to take a territory, its slaves would immediately be free as well.

Also the proclamation DID open the way for later gains. Along with the practice of allowing blacks to fight (and gain much respect doing so) and Lincoln's other political efforts, it helped convince border states to end slavery (as Lincoln had long urged them to do voluntarily), and finally to passage of the 13th amendment.

And the complaint that the Emancipation Proclamation did not free slaves in UNION territory is very misleading. The whole point is that the President had NO constitutional authority to simply declare slaves free because he wanted to! The basis for the Proclamation was his WAR powers -- the right to deprive those in rebellion of property and other means of supporting that rebellion.

-------------------

Slavery was OFFICIALLY abolished throughtout the United States, when the 13th amendment to the Constitution was ratified by the states

Year 1865

(more precisely - Congress passes the amendment -January 31, 1865
[Lincoln signs it, although this is not required with Constitutional amendments]
amendment receives the required approval of legsislatures of 3/4 of the states -December 6, 1865
Secretary of State offiicially s the amendment's ratification: December 18, 1865)

Summary of dates:
http://www.nps.gov/malu/documents/amend13.htm

more of the story of the 13th amendment -
http://www.mrlincolnandfreedom.org/inside.asp?ID=56&subjectID=3
Check out the WHOLE site for interesting articles on Lincoln, the Emancipation Proclamation, etc. It should make clear that Sothron's claim that Lincoln did not really want to free the slaves is totally bogus. (In his final months he also began to push the idea that educated blacks and those who had fought in the war ought also be given the right to vote.)

----------

BUT there's a problem with the 1865 date for the ending of slavery.

Many have argued that this date is not accurate, because the South managed by various legal means to keep many blacks in a state that, except for the name, was slavery. Chief among these were the system of "peonage" (debt-slavery) and the "convict lease system", both of which persisted until the early 20th century.

Under the convict lease system, blacks might be arrested for petty (or even trumped up) charges, given very long sentences, then brutally worked by the state (think of the famous/infamous chain gangs) or leased out to farms or businesses. The system was frequently criticized, but only began to be dismantled during "the Progressive era". The last state to end this practice (also the first to use it, beginning in 1846) was Alabama. The legislature mandated that it end on June 30, 1928.

Hence, according to some reckonings, the date at which slavery was finally legally abolished was:
July 1, 1928.

http://www.archives.state.al.us/thisweek/chrono.html
http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/database/article_display.cfm?HHID=214
(see Frederick Douglass's criticism of the system:
http://www.historyisaweapon.org/defcon1/fredouconlea.html)

How Southern states circumvented the 13th amendment (allowed by the federal courts):
http://www.bc.edu/schools/law/lawreviews/meta-elements/journals/bclawr/45_2/02_TXT.htm

2006-11-26 10:55:18 · answer #3 · answered by bruhaha 7 · 0 0

The thirteenth modification is what freed the slaves and abolished slavery. people who declare that the Emancipation Proclamation freed slaves are forgetting the fact that the president had no authority to unfastened slaves consequently Lincoln could no longer unfastened all of us along with his proclamation. It required a constitutional modification because of the fact the outstanding court had reported that slavery became into constitutional because of the fact the form existed until now the thirteenth modification.

2016-12-10 16:31:00 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

It ended in practice in 1863-65 with Abraham Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation; it legally ended with the Thirteenth amendment of 1865.

2006-11-26 08:04:26 · answer #5 · answered by soulful thinker 5 · 0 0

The answer above is right, but it depends on what you mean by slavery. If one does not have a salary worth the name could be slavery too.

2006-11-26 08:05:44 · answer #6 · answered by Robert E. B 2 · 0 0

around 1863, with the Emancipation Proclamation.

2006-11-26 08:02:15 · answer #7 · answered by utopian.outcast 3 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers