This question asks you to analyze why Lincoln wrote the Emancipation Proclamation and also to consider if the abolition of slavery was inevitable. 

If you remember the 1860-61 unit, we talked about how the war was fought on either sides for reasons that, on the surface, have little to do with slavery.  The Union soldiers fought to keep the country together, for honor, for righteousness, and b/c they didn’t want to seem like cowards if they refused.  On the Confederate side, we heard Shelby Foote in the Civil War video say that one of the captured Confederates replying to the question, “why are you fighting?”  The soldier said, “because you’re down here”  which fits with what we’ve read about soldier motivation: to defend their land and their rights.  But how inevitable was the switch from fighting for the Union to ending slavery?  Do you think it would always change based upon the conflict?  Or did it change because of external pressure applied to Lincoln by radical abolitionists? 

Quote from Frederick Douglass: “If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning.” 

Some of the most radical abolitionists called for the confiscation of “enemy property.”  In fact, abolitionists were coming into favor for the first time in American history by late 1861.  Before the war, they were vilified and few could speak publicly w/o fear of being killed.  In March 1862, Wendell Phillips was given a formal introduction on the floor of the Senate.  The New York Tribune commented, “It is not often that history presents such violent contrasts in such rapid succession…The deference and respect now paid to [Phillips] by men in the highest places of the nation…” (McPherson 495).  By early 1862, many Republicans began seeing the fate of the nation intertwined w/ the fate of slavery – in essence, destroying slavery was pivotal if not downright required for the nation to fix itself.  In fact, radical Representative George Julian of Indiana stated in January 1862: “the mere suppression of the rebellion will be an empty mockery of our sufferings and sacrifices, if slavery shall be spared to canker the heart of the nation anew, and repeat its diabolical deeds” (McPherson 496) (my emphasis).

The most conservative Northerners who supported the war began to realize that their support of gradual, voluntary emancipation or colonization of Africa was becoming less and less popular. 

In the middle of the anti-slavery politicians stood those, like the President, who understood the need to deal w/ slavery but were unsure of how to deal with it.  Lincoln himself promised after the 1860 election not to touch slavery where it currently existed.  He felt that he had no power to do so as given to him by the Constitution.  However, in a very radical interpretation, he felt that under the War Powers clause of the Constitution he could abolish slavery in the Southern territories b/c slaves were necessary to help fight the Union.  By freeing slaves, one could imagine that the Confederate Army would need to find additional workers to dig ditches, chop down trees, rebuild bridges and rail lines, etc.  Freeing the slaves with the Emancipation Proclamation would help end the war more quickly than if he didn’t free them, he reasoned.  He even gave the slaveowners a warning in March 1862: if they refused the gradual abolition of slaves, Lincoln stated that “it is impossible to foresee all the incidents which may attend and all the ruin that may follow” if the war is continued (McPherson 498). 
Opposition to abolition was epitomized in the “copperheads” or Peace Democrats – groups opposed to the war in general and many were specifically against a draft to “fight to free the n****r” (McPherson 493).  Many of these men arrested in draft riots, like the horrible one in New York City (seen at the end of the film, Gangs of New York), were Democrats and also sometimes new immigrants to the country -German and Irish. 

Most Union soldiers fought to end treason and to keep the country together.  Some Union commanders freed the slaves under their control like Ben Butler in New Orleans.  Lincoln, hoping not to scare away the border states, ordered that these freedmen be re-enslaved (or countermanded the general’s orders – however you wish to interpret it).  However, those Unionists in the border states were aware of the changing sentiment throughout the North.  Congress passed a law in the spring of 1862 allowing captured slaves to be freed by the commanding general.  But, as the human toll in the war increased dramatically, more and more soldiers and their families at home began to question why we were fighting this war. 

After reading all of this, do you think emancipation was inevitable?  Or were there forces at work trying to keep slavery in place and just bring the nation back together?  Is it a given thing that slavery had to be eradicated?  Why or why not? 

Due Wednesday, May 14. 

Also, as an aside, check out http://www.askusnow.org/ - this is something new in Maryland that provides librarian assistance to anyone who asks for it.  It’s kinda like having a trained Google helper online to assist you w/ your research. 

Sources:

Frederick Douglass bumper sticker: http://rdr.zazzle.com/img/imt-prd/pd-128064875482487184/isz-m/tl-Frederick+Douglass+on+Rebellion.jpg

Frederick Douglass quote: http://thinkexist.com/quotes/frederick_douglass/3.html

McPherson, James M. Battle Cry of Freedom.  Ballantine Books.  New York, NY: 1988.

Wendell Phillips monument picture: http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1101/1363050600_4cda0db97d.jpg?v=0