Which was never ratified because the original 7 seceding states turned it down. And I did not say the states that still allowed slavery would never vote to repeal it. I said it could never be repealed WITHOUT THEIR CONSENT. Meaning they could force the Northern states to offer a generous compensated emancipation scheme as the price for their vote to repeal it.
And how many slaves in the North did the South rescue?
And how is this relevant? There were states that still allowed slavery which remained in the US.
What does that say about how the South treated them, that they saw the North as an improvement?
How does this address the fact that there was widespread mistreatment of Blacks by Federal troops?
"blah blah blah blah I'm just going to spam you with the same crap I've posted 30 times already because I don't have any good answers."
There was massive racism and ill treatment of Blacks in the North. I could post all kinds of examples of the "Black Codes" or even entire states which barred Blacks from living there. No, not slaves. All Blacks.
Of course, it was already illegal in the areas they did control. After the war of abolition, it was illegal everywhere.
This is an outright lie. The US still had slavery. Even areas of the Southern states that were occupied by federal troops still had slavery. There was no "war of abolition" as Northerners went to great pains to say. They did not start the war to free slaves.
Yes I know there were still slaves held illegally in the North.
No, slavery was legal in multiple states that remained in the union. It was legal in Washington DC during the war.
Funny how you believe the quotes made from a nation that saw us as "competition" and wanted to knock us down a few pegs, but you disregard all of the quotes to the contrary, including those made by the confederates themselves.
There were some Brits who felt the way you describe. Britain had a democratic form of government and a long history of free speech so people held all sorts of opinions just as they did in the Southern states and the Northern states. Funny how you ignore what many of the leading political figures and newspapers on both sides were saying - ie that it was about money not slavery.
Seriously? Maybe we should ask Steven King what he thinks.
Dickens was a leading political commentator, not just an author.
So what? It was never ratified, and it came too late to change anything.
And how is this relevant? There were states that still allowed slavery which remained in the US.
Slaves from the confederacy escaped to the North. How many slaves in the North escaped to the confederacy?
How does this address the fact that there was widespread mistreatment of Blacks by Federal troops?
I was clear. As imperfect as the North was, it was still better from their point of view than being slaves in the confederacy. BTW, over 100,000 escaped slaves served in the Union forces. What do you think they were fighting for?
"blah blah blah blah I'm just going to spam you with the same crap I've posted 30 times already because I don't have any good answers."
The racists comments in the declarations of secession were my answer. You want to condemn the racists who were in the North but excuse the Southerners for being products of their environment.
There was massive racism and ill treatment of Blacks in the North. I could post all kinds of examples of the "Black Codes" or even entire states which barred Blacks from living there. No, not slaves. All Blacks.
I never said the North was all righteous, either during or after the Civil War. On the contrary, I acknowledge that this was a problem the abolitionists had to deal with.
By the same token, there were abolitionists in the South, who helped the slaves escape. Why aren't you pointing to them as positive examples of the South?
This is an outright lie. The US still had slavery. Even areas of the Southern states that were occupied by federal troops still had slavery. There was no "war of abolition" as Northerners went to great pains to say. They did not start the war to free slaves.
That's because they didn't start the war, but they did free the slaves when it was over. Your tortured logic to get around that is something to behold.
No, slavery was legal in multiple states that remained in the union. It was legal in Washington DC during the war.
Was it legal after the war? No.
There were some Brits who felt the way you describe. Britain had a democratic form of government and a long history of free speech so people held all sorts of opinions just as they did in the Southern states and the Northern states. Funny how you ignore what many of the leading political figures and newspapers on both sides were saying - ie that it was about money not slavery.
I don't ignore it, I just don't agree with it, at least not fully. As I have said, not everyone in the North was for abolition and it took some major politicking to get it done. Frederick Douglas wrote on that, and I've admitted it, yet you keep coming back to that.
Dickens was a leading political commentator, not just an author.
He was also all over the map on that issue. I want to research further.