Whatever Lincoln did would not reassure the Confederacy that slavery was secure. The Corwin Amendment needed the support of 3/4rds of the state legislatures. It wouldn't get that. I suspect Lincoln knew that. He may not have thought it would get the required votes in Congress. What was the vote in the Congress?
In any case, it wasn't a done deal: Lincoln couldn't just wave his hand and change the Constitution
Really? That's more or less what he did to pass the current 13th amendment. (Through the Senate anyway) Well, hand waving along with bribes, threats and coercion of Southern states by use of the Army, but yeah, he more or less singlehandedly amended the Constitution.
Slavery, the spread of slavery to the territories, and the permanence of slavery as an institution had everything to do with the deeper causes of the war
That makes no sense in light of Lincoln's efforts to protect slavery by amending the constitution. Even if you are correct that 3/4ths of the states wouldn't ratify it, it still speaks to Lincolns' intent.
You cannot rationally claim the war was about ending something the very man who launched the war was trying to further protect just a month earlier.
This is a dichotomy and cognitive dissonance that I find incomprehensible.
Really? That's more or less what he did to pass the current 13th amendment. (Through the Senate anyway) Well, hand waving along with bribes, threats and coercion of Southern states by use of the Army, but yeah, he more or less singlehandedly amended the Constitution.
More sloppy thinking by Diogenes. Lincoln played a major role in the abolition amendment, but no, he didn't do it all by himself. He did fight for that amendment, and it's not likely he would have fought very hard for the Corwin Amendment. Notice what Lincoln said in his first inaugural address:
I understand a proposed amendment to the Constitution — which amendment, however, I have not seen — has passed Congress, to the effect that the Federal Government shall never interfere with the domestic institutions of the States, including that of persons held to service. To avoid misconstruction of what I have said, I depart from my purpose not to speak of particular amendments so far as to say that, holding such a provision to now be implied constitutional law, I have no objection to its being made express and irrevocable.
Not exactly fighting words, or an indication that Lincoln really believed in and would fight for such an amendment.
That makes no sense in light of Lincoln's efforts to protect slavery by amending the constitution. Even if you are correct that 3/4ths of the states wouldn't ratify it, it still speaks to Lincolns' intent.
The Corwin Amendment was something Lincoln gave half-hearted support to in order to stop or turn back the secessionist tide and prevent war. It wasn't an expression of his deepest beliefs and it wasn't taken seriously by the secessionists.
You cannot rationally claim the war was about ending something the very man who launched the war was trying to further protect just a month earlier.
I never said the war was fought to end slavery. I said slavery was a cause of the war -- the cause in different ways, some indirect and some quite deep.