|View single post by HankC|
|Posted: Thu Jun 19th, 2008 09:07 pm||
|Texas Defender wrote:
Correct, Political considerations drove the EP, along with the failure of the Confiscation acts. One of the greater considerations was that northern families were becoming disgusted with the death toll and the idea that slave property was still being protected. The idea that the purpose of the EP was to foment slave revolt is indefensible.
How were they unprotected? And if you leave it's protection how can you claim it's protecetion? The purpose of my roof is to keep the rain off me but if I go out in the yard and get wet, can I blame my roof?
I would maintain that by not forbidding secession, the Constitution allowed it. As you say, that disagreement was why the war was fought.
That places a pretty large percentage (maybe 75%) of all free northern blacks in the army. It is correct that some 200,000 served as official USCT; many others, perhaps more, served in non-combat roles as teamsters, laborers, cooks, etc...
the north was plenty mad over the siezure of arsenals, mints, custom houses and post offices before Lincoln was inaugarated. Lincoln issued a number of warnings and made moves to protect the south from itself...
But since Mr. Lincoln was determined to preserve the Union by any means, war would have happened even if the southerners never touched any federal property.
strictly an opinion...
correct... there were 4,000,000 slaves on December 6, 1860. After Lincoln's administration, on December 6, 1865 there were none...