[DoodleDawg]

So your saying Lincoln freed the northern slaves? and Grant did not own a slave!!

Lincoln was instrumental in getting the 13th Amendment through the House and Senate, and made sure it was part of the 1864 Republican platform. That led to the end of slavery in the Northern states and your claim was that Lincoln did nothing to end slavery in the North. Grant owned one slave which he freed in 1859, not after the Civil Was as you also claimed. So both of those were incorrect.

[DiogenesLamp]

That led to the end of slavery in the Northern states and your claim was that Lincoln did nothing to end slavery in the North.

That is dodging his point. Lincoln didn't ORDER the slaves freed in areas under which he had control. He did order them freed in the South, which was clearly contrary to constitutional law if you operate under the claim that the Southern States were still part of the Union.

The only way you can legally justify freeing slaves is to assert the Southern States were no longer part of the Union, and therefore not subject to Constitutional laws.

So long as the South is regarded as subject to Constitutional law, it was legally impossible to free their slaves, just as it was legally impossible to free Northern slaves at that time.

[ontap]

But he specifically excluded the northern states from the Emancipation Proclamation which meant he did indeed free the southern slaves while leaving the northern slaves in slavery. As to when Grant sold his slave you are right except that his wife kept hers slaves until they escaped. I indeed was mistaken about when Grant freed his slave. Don't know where I got that but should have verified it before posting!!!