Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: MACVSOG68
Why would the Proclamation have influenced England? Hadn't England long since abolished slavery, the slave trade, including in its colonies?<

In 1860 and 1861 the loss of the cotton trade through the blockade (the Anaconda Plan) hurt English manufacturing a great deal. The Confederacy had ambassadors and trade reps in England encouraging them to step in and negotiate a cease fire at best or a military alliance with the South if needed so they could start trade anew. I'm not sure the Union could have coped with that.

Since the war "wasn't about slavery" there was no reason for England to stay neutral. On the other hand, Lincoln knew full well that England could not step in supporting the Confederacy for moral reasons if it meant saving the institution England had outlawed.

If you read the Proclamation, it only affected territory in rebellion, hence people in places like Maryland and Kentucky could keep their slaves. Since Lincoln and the North controlled precious little territory in rebellion, the Proclamation only had affect wherever the Union Army happened to be standing at that time. This fact even caused some serious problems for Sherman and a large number of runaway slaves that followed the Army since it was the only place where they were remotely safe. I believe it was in South Carolina where Sherman crossed a river and left a legion of runaways behind to face a vindictive group of Confederates. This was a catastrophe for the blacks in that episode.

I don't think you can look at the Emancipation Proclamation as a sign that Lincoln abhored the institution. You can, however, look at the rest of his life to catch a glimpse of how he felt about it. Some people said he felt the way he did because, as a youth, his own father treated him as a slave to be sold to other homesteaders to do forced manual labor so the old man could rake in a few pennies.

Whatever the reason, it's utterly silly to indict Lincoln as a racist. He was an emancipator of the first order comparing him to most citizens of that era. He was positively cutting edge as an emancipator among people that had a chance to do anything about the institution.

76 posted on 02/10/2007 10:25:29 AM PST by stevem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies ]


To: stevem
Yes, I was aware of the efforts of a few of the British to acknowledge the Confederacy. Much of Parliament was against such recognition. There is clear evidence that Britain knew the Union would not accept any British influence on the side of the Confederacy, which I presume kept them out. But I'm still unsure of why the Proclamation would have had any influence one way or the other. If the Confederacy lost, then slavery was ultimately going to be abolished. If the Confederacy won, then slavery would have continued for quite some time.

Since the war "wasn't about slavery" there was no reason for England to stay neutral. On the other hand, Lincoln knew full well that England could not step in supporting the Confederacy for moral reasons if it meant saving the institution England had outlawed.

There were three possible outcomes: the Confederacy would either win or lose outright, or reach an accord with the Union to rejoin with slavery. None of those options provided England with a good reason to renounce its neutrality in favor of the Confederacy.

If you read the Proclamation, it only affected territory in rebellion, hence people in places like Maryland and Kentucky could keep their slaves.

Lincoln knew he could not do anything about abolition without a constitutional amendment. He even feared that his Emancipation Proclamation would fail the test of law. Which is why he helped push through the 13th Amendment to the Constitution in 1864 and 1865, though it was not ratified until after his death. But he deplored slavery and made it well known. His announcement that he would not force the issue if the Confederacy returned simply reflected his priorities of the Union first and slavery second.

Whatever the reason, it's utterly silly to indict Lincoln as a racist. He was an emancipator of the first order comparing him to most citizens of that era. He was positively cutting edge as an emancipator among people that had a chance to do anything about the institution.

I agree completely. Very well said. He believed like almost everyone, that the Africans not only belonged in their homeland, but would want to return. He believed that the two cultures had nothing in common, simply because he had not seen any mixing of the races as we do today. I consider him to be the greatest president given what he did not only to save the Union, but to abolish slavery and lay the foundations for the 14th and 15th Amendments. And he faced the greatest crisis of any president, before or after.

80 posted on 02/10/2007 12:46:49 PM PST by MACVSOG68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson