Slavery was illegal in EVERY Northern state prior to the war some as long as 70 yrs. before. It was illegal NOWHERE after the War. Where did you come up with that.
There was nothing wrong with Lincoln freeing slaves within the rebelling states and not the loyal Border states. He never claimed to be fighting the war to free the slaves in any case and making the Proclamation posed a great danger to the South.
Grant owned no slaves. You need to forget the false claims of those trying to defend the RAT Rebellion which appears to provide the basis for most of the mistakes in your post. These people are liars.
"There was nothing wrong with Lincoln freeing slaves within the rebelling states and not the loyal Border states."
There is, if you are going to continue to cling to the notion that the Civil War was fought over slavery.
free dixie,sw
I guess you don't consider Maryland a Northern State, or Ky, or WVA for that matter. True, all were south of the mason Dixon line, but they were under Union control and slavery was legal in all three the day the war ended and continued to be legal until the 14th Amendment was passed and ratified, which was a considerable time after the war ended.
You are right about one thing. Lincoln did not claim to be fighting the war to end slavery. Although you would never know it going to public schools.
And as far as your denying that Grant owned slaves, you might want to pick up a history book. Of course, he pulled a Kerry and claimed that they belonged to his wife and he was powerless to free them.
Grant signed a document freeing one slave "William Jones" in 1959. However, during the war, Grant made to effort to free any of the slaves his father-in-law had given to his wife.
Remember, you are entitled to your own opinion; however, you are not entitled to your own facts.