[gatex]

"...Name one NORTHERN state that had slaves after those in the South were freed. Just one!..."

Maryland, Kentucky, Missouri, and Delaware.

"When in September 1862, Lincoln issued his preliminary Emancipation Proclamation, it was a military move, giving the South four months to stop rebelling, threatening to emancipate their slaves if they continued to fight, promising to leave slavery untouched in states that came over to the North...."

....

"Thus, when the Emancipation Proclamation was issued January 1, 1863, it declared slaves free in those areas still fighting against the Union (which it listed very carefully) and said nothing about slaves behind Union lines...."

[source --A People's History of the United States - 1492 - Present, by Howard Zinn, page 187]

[Non-Sequitur]

Maryland, Kentucky, Missouri, and Delaware.

Try again. Missouri and Maryland ended slavery by January 1865. Kentucky and Deleware lost their slaves in December 1865, the same time that the parts of the southern states not covered by the Emancipation Proclamation did.

Under what authority could Lincoln have ordered the freeing of slaves in the North?

[laotzu]

I'm guessing that, having been provided clear evidence, that it suddenly doesn't matter that the North kept slaves after those in the South were freed.

Now, how did I know ahead of time that you really didn't think it mattered?

[Ditto]

"Thus, when the Emancipation Proclamation was issued January 1, 1863, it declared slaves free in those areas still fighting against the Union (which it listed very carefully) and said nothing about slaves behind Union lines...."

Under what provision of the Constitution could Lincoln have issued an executive order to free slaves in areas not in rebellion?