In a message dated 8/20/02 8:00:16 PM Central Daylight Time, sjellis@charter.net writes: > (By the way---it didn't have anything to do with 'slavery'---the Northerners > had 'slaves'---Lincoln didn't decide to 'free the slaves' until he realized > the North was losing so the slavery issue was 'political'---read the > Emancipation Proclamation and see that he only freed the slaves in the > states that had withdrawn from the Union--he didn't 'free' them all!) > Hey Sandy I might read it after work. But would the northern states have already freed the slaves? and the remaining slaves you are referring to in western states? Really, I don't know the history very well....just asking. One thing, that is probably true, is that the war only began when Union troops came into the South??? thank you William

Hi William, me again. It's not Sandy, but I just have to stick my nose in. In the Emancipation Proclamation Lincoln freed all the slaves in the Southern slave states. Now tell me, did that do any good? There were slaves in Maryland, Delaware and probably Pennsylvania and other "Northern" states at that time. Lincoln didn't decide on this action until he had his first Victory at ?(I'll have to look that up). He did and that thereby assured him of re-election in 1864. He then had to get the Europeans on the side of the North, mainly England and France, so he became a humanitarian and freed the slaves he technically didn't have the power to free. The War started when Confederate troops under the command of a General Beauregard opened fire on Fort Sumter. Lincoln was hedging his bets when he sent troops to the aid of the troops in the Fort. Col. Anderson who was in charge surrendered to the South after about three days of being barraged by those slices of cannon. He was allowed to withdraw "the colors" and scoot. Elaine Suhre ----- Original Message ----- From: <BarnesWK@aol.com> To: <TNMONTGO-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2002 8:33 PM Subject: Re: [TNMONTGO-L] Re: question for true southerners/Sandy > In a message dated 8/20/02 8:00:16 PM Central Daylight Time, > sjellis@charter.net writes: > > > > (By the way---it didn't have anything to do with 'slavery'---the Northerners > > had 'slaves'---Lincoln didn't decide to 'free the slaves' until he realized > > the North was losing so the slavery issue was 'political'---read the > > Emancipation Proclamation and see that he only freed the slaves in the > > states that had withdrawn from the Union--he didn't 'free' them all!) > > > > Hey Sandy > > I might read it after work. But would the northern states have already freed > the slaves? and the remaining slaves you are referring to in western states? > Really, I don't know the history very well....just asking. > > One thing, that is probably true, is that the war only began when Union > troops came into the South??? > > thank you > William >

Lincoln didn't decide to 'free the slaves' until he realized > > > the North was losing so the slavery issue was 'political'---read the > > > Emancipation Proclamation and see that he only freed the slaves in the > > > states that had withdrawn from the Union--he didn't 'free' them all!) I never heard this until I was out of school (I guess I wasn't listening all the time!); but we all now understand this was a MILITARY ploy, and had NOTHING to do with Lincoln's huminitarian interests, if any. This "Emancipation" is not half as exciting for the close student of history as it is for the casual reader! It was a DESPERATE move to gather support from a group geographically inside the Confederacy. Think a moment: what authority did Lincoln have to direct this act inside another sovereign country--the Confederacy?? He called them "states in rebellion" to mask his lack of authority! Cleo in Clarksville, cdmhogan@usit.net