This Day In History - History Channel Daily Email

[Steely Dan]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

September 22: General Interest

1862 : Lincoln issues Emancipation Proclamation

On this day in 1862, President Abraham Lincoln issues a preliminary Emancipation Proclamation, which sets a date for the freedom of more than 3 million black slaves in the United States and recasts the Civil War as a fight against slavery.

 

When the Civil War broke out in 1861, shortly after Lincoln's inauguration as America's 16th president, he maintained that the war was about restoring the Union and not about slavery. He avoided issuing an anti-slavery proclamation immediately, despite the urgings of abolitionists and radical Republicans, as well as his personal belief that slavery was morally repugnant. Instead, Lincoln chose to move cautiously until he could gain wide support from the public for such a measure.

 

In July 1862, Lincoln informed his cabinet that he would issue an emancipation proclamation but that it would exempt the so-called border states, which had slaveholders but remained loyal to the Union. His cabinet persuaded him not to make the announcement until after a Union victory. Lincoln's opportunity came following the Union win at the Battle of Antietam in September 1862. On September 22, the president announced that slaves in areas still in rebellion within 100 days would be free.

 

On January 1, 1863, Lincoln issued the final Emancipation Proclamation, which declared "that all persons held as slaves" within the rebel states "are, and henceforward shall be free." The proclamation also called for the recruitment and establishment of black military units among the Union forces. An estimated 180,000 African Americans went on to serve in the army, while another 18,000 served in the navy.

 

After the Emancipation Proclamation, backing the Confederacy was seen as favoring slavery. It became impossible for anti-slavery nations such as Great Britain and France, who had been friendly to the Confederacy, to get involved on behalf of the South. The proclamation also unified and strengthened Lincoln's party, the Republicans, helping them stay in power for the next two decades.

 

The proclamation was a presidential order and not a law passed by Congress, so Lincoln then pushed for an antislavery amendment to the U.S. Constitution to ensure its permanence. With the passage of the 13th Amendment in 1865, slavery was eliminated throughout America (although blacks would face another century of struggle before they truly began to gain equal rights).

 

Lincoln's handwritten draft of the final Emancipation Proclamation was destroyed in the Chicago Fire of 1871. Today, the original official version of the document is housed in the National Archives in Washington, D.C.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[stuckincincy]

n

 

On this day in 1862, President Abraham Lincoln issues a preliminary Emancipation Proclamation, which sets a date for the freedom of more than 3 million black slaves in the United States and recasts the Civil War as a fight against slavery.

 

And in 1877, the Democrats agreed to break the deadlock in the Presidential election between Hayes and Tilden, and approve Hayes as President in exchange for the end of Reconstrution and the removal of federal troops, which resulted in the Jim Crow Laws.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compromise_of_1877

 

The KKK was empowered in their activities directed towards Republicans and freedmen.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ku_Klux_Klan

 

 

 

3...2...1...I give this post maybe 3 hours of life.

[Steely Dan]

And in 1877, the Democrats agreed to break the deadlock in the Presidential election between Hayes and Tilden, and approve Hayes as President in exchange for the end of Reconstrution and the removal of federal troops, which resulted in the Jim Crow Laws.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compromise_of_1877

 

The KKK was empowered in their activities directed towards Republicans and freedmen.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ku_Klux_Klan

 

 

 

3...2...1...I give this post maybe 3 hours of life.

 

It's amazing how much the Republican and Democrat party's have changed, isn't it.

[Chef Jim]

A proclamation freeing the slaves = 699 words

The Gettysburg Address = 278 words

 

Today's politicians can't do anything under 1,000 pages and tens of thousands of words.

 

Not that politicians other than Lincoln were not long winded but one of the reasons Lincoln was one if not the best.

[stuckincincy]

It's amazing how much the Republican and Democrat party's have changed, isn't it.

 

Nice try!

[DC Tom]

After the Emancipation Proclamation, backing the Confederacy was seen as favoring slavery. It became impossible for anti-slavery nations such as Great Britain and France, who had been friendly to the Confederacy, to get involved on behalf of the South.

 

 

Wow. That is not even remotely true.

[Steely Dan]

A proclamation freeing the slaves = 699 words

The Gettysburg Address = 278 words

 

Today's politicians can't do anything under 1,000 pages and tens of thousands of words.

 

Not that politicians other than Lincoln were not long winded but one of the reasons Lincoln was one if not the best.

 

If you want me to speak for five minutes,

give me a week to prepare.

But if you want me to speak for an hour,

I can start right now.

Mark Twain

[Steely Dan]

Great point!

 

Fixed!

 

 

Wow. That is not even remotely true.

 

I was curious about that when I read it too.

[stuckincincy]

Fixed!

 

 

 

 

I was curious about that when I read it too.

 

My flying monkeys have left the Wicked Witch's castle and are searching for you to avenge your so-called "fix"...

 

[DC Tom]

I was curious about that when I read it too.

 

The European countries supported the Confederacy on strict economic grounds - England, particularly, had serious concerns about unemployment in their textile industry, and was more interested in cotton imports from the South than the issue of American slavery (despite being rabidly anti-slavery themselves - the Royal Navy through the mid-18th century was extremely active in interdicting the Atlantic slave trade).

 

The idea that the Europeans abandoned all their internal economic interests because Lincoln made a speech is ludicrous - it had more to do with the fact that the Confederate Army got their asses kicked at Antietam, which gave the Europeans their first serious doubts about the viability of the Confederacy. That statement was simply yet another misleading (in this case, blatantly false) statement feeding the mythos that the Civil War was somehow about slavery.

[Beerball]

The European countries supported the Confederacy on strict economic grounds - England, particularly, had serious concerns about unemployment in their textile industry, and was more interested in cotton imports from the South than the issue of American slavery (despite being rabidly anti-slavery themselves - the Royal Navy through the mid-18th century was extremely active in interdicting the Atlantic slave trade).

plus that whole revolution thing & 1812 were still fresh in their memory

[stuckincincy]

The European countries supported the Confederacy on strict economic grounds - England, particularly, had serious concerns about unemployment in their textile industry, and was more interested in cotton imports from the South than the issue of American slavery (despite being rabidly anti-slavery themselves - the Royal Navy through the mid-18th century was extremely active in interdicting the Atlantic slave trade).

 

The idea that the Europeans abandoned all their internal economic interests because Lincoln made a speech is ludicrous - it had more to do with the fact that the Confederate Army got their asses kicked at Antietam, which gave the Europeans their first serious doubts about the viability of the Confederacy. That statement was simply yet another misleading (in this case, blatantly false) statement feeding the mythos that the Civil War was somehow about slavery.

 

Crop rotation was not known to much of a degree then. The fields were getting depleted, so new territory was sought - along with (generally) cheap labor to work the land.

 

I reject your comment about a "mythos", implying that the moral rejection of slavery wasn't an issue in the minds of many. There was no dearth among the US population at the time, that held strong views in opposition.

 

Hence the resistance to the westward expansion of slavery.

 

Certainly, the European support was with their own pocketbooks in mind. That view is historical and is still in effect.

[Booster4324]

Crop rotation was not known to much of a degree then. The fields were getting depleted, so new territory was sought - along with (generally) cheap labor to work the land.

 

I reject your comment about a "mythos", implying that the moral rejection of slavery wasn't an issue in the minds of many. There was no dearth among the US population at the time, that held strong views in opposition.

 

Hence the resistance to the westward expansion of slavery.

 

Certainly, the European support was with their own pocketbooks in mind. That view is historical and is still in effect.

 

I am inclined to believe you, as you were there...

[DC Tom]

Crop rotation was not known to much of a degree then. The fields were getting depleted, so new territory was sought - along with (generally) cheap labor to work the land.

 

Yes, it was. Crop rotation was known and practiced since the High Middle Ages.

 

I reject your comment about a "mythos", implying that the moral rejection of slavery wasn't an issue in the minds of many. There was no dearth among the US population at the time, that held strong views in opposition.

 

Hence the resistance to the westward expansion of slavery.

 

Completely incorrect. First of all, some of the most bitter fights in Congress in the early 19th-century were over maintaing a "correct" balance of slave vs. free states - the "resistance" to westward expansion wasn't "resistance" to slavery, it was an interest in keeping a balance between "slave" and "free" state representation. Second...the Union Army almost dissolved over the Emancipation Proclamation itself. The prevalent view in the North was that, while they'd fight for the Union, they wouldn't fight for blacks. Conversely, nearly half the southern states seceded not over slavery, but over the federal government's presumed right to enforce the union by military action.

 

The fundamental reality of the Civil War is: no one gave a **** about the blacks...as evidenced by none other than the Emancipation Proclamation itself; dumping millions of indigent and unskilled people with no conceviable means of support onto a war-ravaged economy and letting them fend for themselves.

[stuckincincy]

I am inclined to believe you, as you were there...

 

Close.

 

My ancestors were believers, as I am (and I have read the words of the many posters who express a vehement intolerance of those that choose to believe in God) and they were a small part of the Underground Railroad. One of the many small destinations out there then, for folks with eyes up in the night, following the Drinkin' Gourd.

 

Later years, the State kicked my family off their productive farm, kicked out those good folks that a century before opened their arms and took risk, using the eminent domain hammer (and taking away their livelihood) so they could construct a Psych facility in a certain well-known suburb.

 

So much to think about. Perhaps someday I'll expound about this whole race thing.

[DC Tom]

Later years, the State kicked my family off their productive farm, kicked out those good folks that a century before opened their arms and took risk, using the eminent domain hammer (and taking away their livelihood) so they could construct a Psych facility in a certain well-known suburb.

 

 

Now THAT'S irony!

[stuckincincy]

Now THAT'S irony!

 

Bitter!!!!

 

[Steely Dan]

My flying monkeys have left the Wicked Witch's castle and are searching for you to avenge your so-called "fix"...

 

 

Gangsta Kitty gets nervous anytime the word "fix" is uttered. He's tough but not that tough.

 

 

I am inclined to believe you, as you were there...

 

 

Dat ain nice!

[Chef Jim]

Yes, it was. Crop rotation was known and practiced since the High Middle Ages.

 

 

 

Completely incorrect. First of all, some of the most bitter fights in Congress in the early 19th-century were over maintaing a "correct" balance of slave vs. free states - the "resistance" to westward expansion wasn't "resistance" to slavery, it was an interest in keeping a balance between "slave" and "free" state representation. Second...the Union Army almost dissolved over the Emancipation Proclamation itself. The prevalent view in the North was that, while they'd fight for the Union, they wouldn't fight for blacks. Conversely, nearly half the southern states seceded not over slavery, but over the federal government's presumed right to enforce the union by military action.

 

The fundamental reality of the Civil War is: no one gave a **** about the blacks...as evidenced by none other than the Emancipation Proclamation itself; dumping millions of indigent and unskilled people with no conceviable means of support onto a war-ravaged economy and letting them fend for themselves.

 

Or worse yet, shipping them back to Africa.

[/dev/null]

Yes, it was. Crop rotation was known and practiced since the High Middle Ages.

 

Did they rotate every 12,000 miles?