Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ilaine who wrote (56648)	10/1/1999 2:57:00 PM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

There is no "perhaps", of course...conventionally, people refer to the Union side as "the North", and the Confederate side as "the South". The Border States that remained in the Union were not included in the Emancipation Proclamation. You are right, they were "southern states", but they were also part of the "North", ie, the Union.....

To: Ilaine who wrote (56648)	10/1/1999 6:20:00 PM
From: nihil	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

Remember that the Missouri Compromise was outlawed by the Dred Scott decision, so that it was null and void in 1863. Kentucky, Missouri, West Virginia, Delaware and Maryland still had legal slavery in 1862 as well as various conquered parts of Southern states. Under Dred Scott, slavery was legal in the territories. Lincoln had tried to persuade the union slave state to accept delayed compensated emancipation before the 1863 but pushed ahead against almost unanimous advice to propound and issue the Emancipation Proclamation. He turned out to be very right. Lincoln makes it quite clear in the EP that it is for suppression of rebellion that he is issuing the EP under his powers as commander-in-chief over which at least in time of war Congress has no control.

To: Ilaine who wrote (56648)	10/2/1999 9:58:00 AM
From: Edwarda	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

You are correct about the Missouri Compromise. However, slavery was legal in DC. Moreover, although one could not purchase a slave in one of the Northern states, one could bring a slave North and the slave remained legally one's property. That principle was upheld by the Dred Scott decision of the Supreme Court in 1857, which found that the physical presence of a slave in a state which did not have slavery did not, in itself, automatically free the slave.