Sorry, but Corwin’s amendment originated with Democrats like Senator Jefferson Davis, was pushed by Democrat President Buchanan, passed by Democrats over Republican objections and signed by President Buchanan.
Lincoln’s role in it was minimal to non-existent.
So it was ratified by only four states — two Northern and two Border.
Sorry but it was named after Thomas Corwin...a Republican. Lincoln fully knew about it and endorsed it. As he said many times, he was only to happy to protect slavery. His real interest was in high tariffs and massive corporate subsidies overwhelmingly going to Northern business interests.
Mississippi Senator Jefferson Davis worked to reassure Southerners by protecting slavery, until his own state seceded.
Other Democrats took up the baton and brought enough Republicans, i.e., Corwin, to pass their amendment.
Again, Lincoln’s role was little to non-existent.
Nah, the real desperation is among you PC Revisionists who have consistently sought to deny that Lincoln’s main concern was in reviving Henry Clay’s “American system” of high tariffs and corporate welfare and that he was only too happy to protect slavery.
Jefferson Davis was quite clear in saying multiple times that the Northerners’ real interests were totally in getting legislation passed that would line their pockets at the South’s expense AND that any concerns they expressed about slavery were a mere pretense to further the partisan sectional legislation that would benefit them.
Lincoln said he wanted slavery to be safe, rare, and legal.
What he actually wanted is anyone’s guess. He said enough stuff on the record to prove anything.
Many southerners felt Lincoln, if elected, would look for a pretext to attack and destroy the south. For some reason they did not want this to happen.
Sure and supported by Senator Seward, soon to be Lincoln's Secretary of State.
This was your typical "moderate" Republicans doing their moderate thing, trying to "compromise" with Democrats to keep Democrats from going insane.
As usual, it didn't work.
But evidence of Lincoln's involvement or approval is slim to none and hard-core Lincoln Republicans opposed it.
So blaming Corwin on Lincoln, regardless of how necessary to the Lost Cause mythology, is misguided & misdirected.
FLT-bird: "As he said many times, he was only to happy to protect slavery."
Until Confederates rejected his peace offers, after that, not so much.
FLT-bird: "His real interest was in high tariffs and massive corporate subsidies overwhelmingly going to Northern business interests."
A basic tenet of Lost Cause mythology unsupported by any factual evidence.
Lincoln's "real interest" was to "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States" according to his oath of office.
FLT-bird: "Nah, the real desperation is among you PC Revisionists who have consistently sought to deny that Lincoln’s main concern was in reviving Henry Clay’s “American system” of high tariffs and corporate welfare and that he was only too happy to protect slavery."
Clay was a Southern Whig, Virginia born, a slave-holding plantation owner with no interest -- none, zero, nada interest -- in aggrandizing the North at the South's expense.
What Clay wanted was to, ahem, "put Americans first" by protecting US producers, North, South and West, against foreign competitions.
That was indeed Lincoln's aim too, and was in no way antithetical to all Southerners.
Instead it was just "politics as usual" in which tariff rates rose & fell over time depending on various coalitions & alliances in Congress.
Sure, the "tariff of abominations" did drive South Carolina to threaten nullification or secession in 1832 under President Jackson (Southern slaveholder), but nothing in effect or proposed in 1860 remotely approached such levels.
In 1860 moderate tariffs were "politics as usual" not cause for secession.
That's why Deep South Fire Eaters focused on the Black Republican threat to slavery.
FLT-bird: "Jefferson Davis was quite clear in saying multiple times that the Northerners’ real interests were totally in getting legislation passed that would line their pockets at the South’s expense AND that any concerns they expressed about slavery were a mere pretense to further the partisan sectional legislation that would benefit them."
I think Davis was actually saying something a bit different, but if you do indeed have genuine quotes to that effect, then feel free to post them here.
However -- the bottom line with Davis is that he was a Unionist up until the moment Mississippi declared secession.
So none of his pre-secession statements can be read as justifying secession, but only as expressing his partisan political views within the United States Senate.