Lincoln And The Emancipation Slavery

One of the biggest divisions between the north and south was slavery. The south needed slaves to tend to crops such as cotton, which became a major part of the south’s economy after the invention of the cotton gin. The north, meanwhile, gained an increasingly large number of abolitionists opposing slavery. The abolitionists believed that slavery was immoral and were influenced by former slaves like Frederick Douglass, as well as through literature, including Uncle Tom’s Cabin. Although the divisions over slavery would not end until later on agreements like the Missouri Compromise of 1820 reduced tensions by preventing any new states above the 36 30’ parallel from joining the union as a slave state.

An example of a presidential executive order which congress did not authorise would be Abraham Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation.

The Civil War was started by many events that proved to served sectional tensions, where the Kansas-Nebraska Act proved the tensions that had failed to be resolved. Northerners became more opposed to slavery, whether for moral or economic reasons, while Southerners became more united in their defense of slavery as an institution. Different ideas over slavery were shared. This caused sectional tensions and as the North and the South were trying to come with a consensus of what to do, things became more intense. Political sectionalism occurred because of certain events happening throughout the government. The repeal of the Missouri Compromise, which was followed by the Kansas Nebraska Act was a main cause in the lead of Civil War. Since the Kansas-Nebraska Act effectively repealed the Missouri Compromise, tensions regarding the issue and stance of slavery became more debated throughout the country.  As the North and the South became increasingly different, their goals and desires separated as well. Arguments over national policy became more aggressive. Between the 1840s and 1850s, both the North and South evolved extreme positions that had as much to do with serving their own political interests as with the morality of slavery. As long as there were an equal number of slave-holding states in the South as non slaveholding states in the North, the two regions had even representation in the Senate and neither would dictate to the other. However, each new territory that applied for statehood threatened to upset this balance of power. Southerners consistently argued for states rights and a weak federal government, but it was not until the 1850s that the issue of secession was raised. Southerners argued that having the Constitution ratified and having agreed to join the new nation in the late 1780s, that they would retain the power to cancel the agreement. There were controversial attempts at a solution that included legal compromises and debates such as the Compromise of 1850, the Kansas-Nebraska Act in 1854, and the Lincoln-Douglas Debates in 1858. However, Southerners felt that the laws favored the Northern economy and were designed to impede the South. Although, the Fugitive Slave Law of 1850 which was in favor of

Lincoln still has not found the right man for the job. Richmond is under the control of the Confederates which is making is more and more furious and it is making him look bad. To try and salvage his reputation, he created the Emancipation Proclamation, which took effect on January 1, 1863. This such ruling is for the eleven rebellion states, to free the slaves. The Confederacy wasn't having it. This confused some people because Lincoln freed the slaves where he couldn't, instead of where he could. It was a smart business strategy to ensure the four states who had slavery, but were on the Union's side, stayed there. He also did this to prevent England and France from joining in on the Confederate side of war, which worked. Lincoln thought that

“If my name ever goes in history, it will be for this act.” – Abraham Lincoln (Freedman, 67)

Even though Hofstadter's view contradicts everything we have been told about Abraham Lincoln he was still a historical figure that made such an impact on American History. One document he wrote that made a big impact on America was the Emancipation Proclamation. The proclamation stated "that all persons held as slaves" within the rebellious states "are, and henceforward shall be free." Abraham Lincoln published the first Emancipation Proclamation on September 22nd, 1862. It stated that if the Southern states did not stop their rebellion by January 1st, 1863, the Proclamation would go into effect. When the Confederacy did not back down, Lincoln released the final Emancipation Proclamation on January 1st, 1863, as the United States approached

Until it was abolished in 1865, slavery thrived in the United States since the nation’s beginnings in the colony of Jamestown in 1607. In 1776, the founding fathers stated that “all men are created equal” when they declared independence and started a war that freed the 13 colonies from the oppressive rule of Great Britain. However, after “the land of the free” had been established, slavery had yet to be eliminated. After the war of 1812, sectionalism began to grow prevalent in America. The Industrial Revolution in the early to mid-1800s advanced the country technologically while further dividing it as the North became industrialized and the South became more agrarian and reliant on slave labor. Sectionalism was increased by westward

Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation: The End of Slavery in America, a Lincoln Prize winner, was written by Allen C. Guelzo and published in 2004. In the book, he makes a case that President Abraham Lincoln, through the utilization of the Emancipation Proclamation of 1863, was efficacious in liberating the slaves. His argument varies from others that have visually examined the argument pertaining to the Emancipation Proclamation and whether it did, or did not, efficaciously emancipate slaves during the Civil War. On the antithesis side of his argument are those who do not visually perceive Lincoln as the “Great Emancipator” and argue that the executive order did not genuinely free the slaves in the broadest term but only those who lived in states that were declared in revolt. Therefore, those slave states that were not formally in revolt to the United States did not have to liberate their slaves because of the Proclamation leaving millions of them in involuntary servitude. Because of the differing viewpoint of others, Guelzo offers a consequential contribution to the field of study pertaining to Lincoln, slavery, and the Civil War.

Lincoln's reelection brought the end of slavery. as a war measure, the Emancipation Proclamation was developed. It would not be binding once the war ended. So when he was elected in 1864 Lincoln quickly secure the final demise of slavery. Congress passed the 13th Amendment in 1865 and enough Union states ratified the amendment and made it part of the Constitution and abolish slavery in the United States forever (Schultz, 2013).

From Guezlo’s introduction of “Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation: The end of Slavery in America”, he acknowledged that this is one of the representative of President Lincoln’s writings in the history demonstrating his dedication to free “four million black slaves”. At the end of Guezlo’s introduction, he proposed the idea of how Lincoln would be a white friend to African American due to the power, the position he had that can help him to start deliverance. The author stated, “It would be special pleading to claim that Lincoln was in the end the most perfect friend black Americans have ever had. But it would also be the cheapest and most ignorant of skepticisms to deny that he was the most significant” (359). The president was described as a manumitter who broadens the destinies for the Negroes. Moreover, this is also an opportunity to solve the happening concerns between masters, slaves, and many others involving folks. Additionally, in Guezlo’s pieces of evidence, he suggested that there was always the thought of releasing African American slaves in Lincoln’s mind even from the day when he first had the presidential oath. The president implied the “hatred” he had on slavery, of how it might affect the world, “I hate it because of the monstrous injustice of slavery itself …” (354). Lincoln insisted that having slavery is equal to the violation of the Declaration of Independence as well as the belief of the Republicans of how this issue would influence the whole society.

     What did Abraham Lincoln do and think regarding slavery during the Civil War? In Abraham's First Inaugural Address he states "I do but quote from one of those speeches when I declare that I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so."" (Pg 53-54) Lincoln did not want the South to be afraid of his Republican Presidency either. That was why he made these statements at his Inauguration about slavery. Lincoln also talks about leaving the returning of fugitive slave clause alone, and keeping it in the Constitution. He

During the Abraham Lincoln’s short time as president, he managed not only to save a nation deeply divided and at war with itself, but to solidify the United States of America as a nation dedicated to the progress of civil rights. Years after his death, he was awarded the title of ‘The Great Emancipator.’ In this paper, I will examine many different aspects of Lincoln’s presidency in order to come to a conclusion: whether this title bestowed unto Lincoln was deserved, or not. In order to fully understand Lincoln, it is necessary to understand the motives that drove this man to action. While some of his intentions may not have been for the welfare of slaves, but for the preservation of the Union,

By the time Lincoln became President, the division over slavery was too deep to heal.

The main reason Abraham Lincoln was called "The Great Emancipator" was on the grounds that he marked the Emancipation Proclamation. Other than that he didn't need anything to do with the slaves. As indicated by Mackubin Owens (2004) it should make every one of the slaves free however it just liberated slaves where the concentrated had no force. It neglected to apply the slaves inside of the dependable slave states or in those components of the Confederacy underneath Union administration. To be sure, Lincoln neglected to free the slaves; they liberated themselves (para 4).

In the year 1828 and 1831 future President Abraham Lincoln went on two flatboat journeys to New Orleans. While on the trip his cousin John Hanks wrote this once he saw slaves being sold "There it was we Saw Negroes Chained — maltreated — whipt & scourged[.] Lincoln Saw it - his heart bled - Said nothing much — was silent from feeling — was Sad — looked bad — felt bad — was thoughtful & abstracted — I Can say Knowingly that it was on this trip that he formed his opinions of Slavery: it ran its iron in him then & there — May 1831.” This was the foundation of lincoln's view of slavery. For that trip and seeing the treatment stayed with him his whole life. Although Lincoln had seen some forms of slavery before this was his first complete view