SI
SI
discoversearch

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.
Politics : Liberalism: Do You Agree We've Had Enough of It? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Ann Corrigan who wrote (21794)2/26/2008 10:37:26 AM
From: longnshort  Respond to of 224657
 
Lee Freed his slaves before the war, Grant didn't free his 20 slaves until after the war. Why ?



To: Ann Corrigan who wrote (21794)2/26/2008 10:39:58 AM
From: longnshort  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 224657
 
The Emancipation Proclamation did not free all slaves in the United States. Rather, it declared free only those slaves living in states not under Union control. William Seward, Lincoln's secretary of state, commented, "We show our symapthy with slavery by emancipating slaves where we cannot reach them and holding them in bondage where we can set them free." Lincoln was fully aware of the irony, but he did not want to antagonize the slave states loyal to the Union by setting their slaves free.



To: Ann Corrigan who wrote (21794)2/26/2008 10:42:07 AM
From: longnshort  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 224657
 
On Jan. 1, 1863, U.S. President Abraham Lincoln declared free all slaves residing in territory in rebellion against the federal government. This Emancipation Proclamation actually freed few people. It did not apply to slaves in border states fighting on the Union side; nor did it affect slaves in southern areas already under Union control.