What you think would have happened "if" doesn't prove anything. The Congress that passed it was largely replaced afterwards, and the states sure weren't impressed.
Had Buchanan not signed it, Lincoln would have.
Once again, what you think would have happened proves nothing. What didn't happen proves everything.
The vast majority of Republicans supported it.
Then it must have been ratified and made law.
The guy who wrote it was a Republican.
So was David Duke. The Republicans aren't defined by everyone who chooses to associate with them. When Americans wanted abolition passed, they voted Republican in 1864.
In reply to "I see where you're coming from now, but I was referring to the link and getting it passed in Congress, which didn't happen until the Republicans got enough votes to pass it in 1865. Of course the states had to ratify it and they did, but it had to pass Congress first, and in 1864 it was the democrats, the party of Jefferson Davis, who blocked it. And note the states ratified abolition but didn't come close to ratifying the Corwin Amendment, even though they could have.", you commented on the Corwin Amemndment but not on the bold. I posted it again so you could comment on it.
I'll refer you to the fact that abolitionists simply could not win elections. I've already posted the editorial opinions from several major newspapers
I'll choose the results of the 1858, 1860, and 1864 elections over op-eds.
(including the NYT ha ha!).
If you're depending on the NYT to prove your case, you should quit now. I meant that as a dig at their credibility, not at you.
Unfortunately the history of this is pretty widespread in the Northern states...thus to drive them out.
You state the obvious. Of course there was racism in the North regardless of the verasity of each of the examples listed, but your two examples of Kansas and Oregon did more to refute your point then prove it.
As the numerous sources I cited attest, the Confederate Army enlisted Blacks from early on.
Enlisted as in recruited, or enlisted as in forced by their masters? Most were of the latter, and many of them escaped to the North when they got the chance.
What happened in elections years later does not matter. What does matter is that it passed the Northern dominated Congress with the necessary supermajority, was signed by one president and endorsed by another. It was offered to the original 7 seceding states and was rejected.
Once again, what you think would have happened proves nothing. What didn't happen proves everything.
What did happen is that Lincoln orchestrated it from its writing to its passage through Congress. Even Lincoln hagiographers like the admitted plagairist Doris Kearns-Goodwin acknowledge this.
Then it must have been ratified and made law.
No for the reason I outlined - the original 7 seceding states rejected it.
So was David Duke. The Republicans aren't defined by everyone who chooses to associate with them. When Americans wanted abolition passed, they voted Republican in 1864.
A Republican wrote it. The Republican president elect orchestrated it and lobbied for it. Most Republicans voted for it.
In reply to "I see where you're coming from now, but I was referring to the link and getting it passed in Congress, which didn't happen until the Republicans got enough votes to pass it in 1865. Of course the states had to ratify it and they did, but it had to pass Congress first, and in 1864 it was the democrats, the party of Jefferson Davis, who blocked it. And note the states ratified abolition but didn't come close to ratifying the Corwin Amendment, even though they could have.", you commented on the Corwin Amemndment but not on the bold. I posted it again so you could comment on it.
By that date, most Northerners had come over to supporting abolition. That was not the case prior to the war and even a couple years into the war. It certainly was not why they chose to start the war.
I'll choose the results of the 1858, 1860, and 1864 elections over op-eds.
Abolitionists did not win in 1858 or in 1860. In fact, they did not even come close to winning either year.
If you're depending on the NYT to prove your case, you should quit now. I meant that as a dig at their credibility, not at you.
Oh I know. Its just hilarious to see such a bastion of Leftism having taken this position in the past. This is the paper that still has not returned the Pullitzer prize won by Holodomor denying Stalin apologist Walter Duranty after all.
You state the obvious. Of course there was racism in the North regardless of the verasity of each of the examples listed, but your two examples of Kansas and Oregon did more to refute your point then prove it.
Oh I disagree. Both states adopted constitutions that excluded Black people.
Enlisted as in recruited, or enlisted as in forced by their masters? Most were of the latter, and many of them escaped to the North when they got the chance.
Forced? There's practically zero evidence of any Blacks having been "forced" to serve in the Confederate army. Its tough to "force" anybody that you have to give guns to......
When Americans wanted abolition passed, they voted Republican in 1864.
The was no Republican convention or Republican nominee in 1864.
Lincoln teamed up with Democrat Andrew Johnson as his running mate and they won the nomination at the convention of the National Union Party, and the pair won election as members of the National Union Party.