Slavery was ended in all the states in rebellion by reason of the Emancipation Proclamation. (Just to tidy things up, loyalist state governments organized in the occupied parts of Virginia, Louisiana and elsewhere freed the slaves in those places.)
The Emancipation Proclamation provided for the freeing of all slaves with compensation to owners in the loyal areas, if the military age men among them joined the Union Army. (The usual signing bonus was paid to the master.) As a practical matter, this provision ended slavery in the loyal areas, as well as the rebellious areas.
As for tidying things up in the loyal areas:
Slavery was ended in the District of Columbia, a territory of the U.S., by Act of Congress.
Slavery was ended in Missouri (a Union slave state) by reason of General John C. Fremont, as Commander of the Army of the West, when he ended the so-called true by which that state was to be neutral, and installed a loyalist state government, and that state government ended slavery. Lincoln was aghast at this act (although he would himself invoke military necessity in issuing the Emancipation Proclamation), and relieved Fremont. Fremont was later appointed Commander of the Army in West Virginia, and did well - for a Union man - against a certain Southern general in that place. You may have heard about this fellow, General Stonewall Jackson (this was before he got his nickname).
Slavery was ended in Kentucky (another a Union slave state) by reason of an amendment to the state Constitution, passed by the necessary majorities in each chamber of the state legislature.
Slavery was ended in Maryland (another Union slave state) similarly by reason of an amendment to the state Constitution. In this case, ratified by the people by popular vote, the absentee military votes being crucial. (Whenever I think of the absentee military vote, I think about these votes. The absentee military votes are very precious to me.)
The only place I don’t know about is Delaware. But, this Union slave state only had 500 slaves to begin with. I just suppose each of them was freed via one or another expedient, thus making the issue moot. I suppose one day, I’ll nail this one down.
To my satisfaction, the 13th Amendment - which is the focus of the movie - did not free one single person from slavery. It’s purpose was and remains to establish a Constitutional principle. In fact, that principle allows slavery (we would say ‘servitude’ so as to distinguish it from American Negro Slavery), in the case of debtors in default and criminals, which is quite traditional in history.
It is a slander on white people to not recognize that we did what was right by our fellow human beings when we had the opportunity. But, a fair presentation of history is not the agenda of the other side. Presenting the good along with the bad, and letting the reader judge for himself, that’s not it. Showing that all of us are sinners and yet capable of rising above sin. Showing that there are many heroes, most of whom are not named in the history books. Showing that people are often torn between competing loyalties.
There are some really good things in this movie, but it is not the movie I would have made. Civil Wars just don’t really support the easy narrative that some of us are holy and others of us evil. Civil Wars are often grounded in making differences into moral imperatives as opposed to differences about which we might seek to resolve either through bargaining or by appeal to the humanity of others.
It is said slavery is all we are fighting for, and if we give it up we give up all. Even if this were true, which we deny, slavery is not all our enemies are fighting for. It is merely the pretense to establish sectional superiority and a more centralized form of government, and to deprive us of our rights and liberties."
--- Maj. General Patrick R. Cleburne, CSA, January 1864, writing on what would happen if the Confederacy were to be defeated.
Thank you for your informed post and balance
Bump for later.