From: KARLIN@BNLCL6.BNL.GOV (P.L. Cowan)
Subject: Lincoln's motivations for the E. P. (was Slavery)
Organization: BROOKHAVEN NATIONAL LABORATORY
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 20:09:11 GMT
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.23

In <1992Aug23.050054.7981@leland.Stanford.EDU> whale@leland.Stanford.EDU writes:

: In article <1992Aug23.035253.22360@cco.caltech.edu> morphy@cco.caltech.edu (Jones Maxime Murphy) writes:
: 
: >This is very true. The slaves were freed as much as a military maneuver as for
: >any other reason.
: 
: Not true. That was his rationalization for it, because he could only issue
: edicts for military reasons. In fact, however, it was done for purely
: political reasons stemming from the conflicts between Lincoln and the
: Senate, but going deeper than that.

As I have read the situation, Lincoln issued the E. P. to forstall foreign
intervention (on the side of the CSA) from Europe. In this he was highly
sucessful. Just before Antietam the English PM wrote to his Foreign Secretary 
(one was Palmerston but I've forgotten which, since they had recently traded
places) that if the upcoming battle went favorably for the South, the time
would be right to intervine. The battle did not, and the popular support for
the North in Europe was so high after the announcement of the E.P. (days after
Antietam) that European intervention was effectively precluded.

This leads to an interesting point concerning the people governing the CSA
(not necessarily those fighting for it). I have read diplomatic inquiries
suggesting things like (a) the South resuming its place as an English Colony
and (b) The CSA giving Texas to Napoleon III of France, in exchange for help in
avoiding being  reunited with the Union. I have never seen any hint of a
suggestion that they offered to do what would have been most effective in
gaining European support, namely that which Lincoln had done, free the slaves.
I think this gives an interesting insight into the priorities of the leaders of
the CSA.

: >It created havoc at the very core of the South, and brought
: >it to state of crisis.
: 
: Not true. It had essentially no effect on the South whatever except to
: confirm the impression that they already had, that the Republican party
: wanted to take their slaves away. Since they already thought that, what
: impact could it have had?
: 

I think Mr Schmidt is overlooking the activities of the blacks in the south.
There was mass exodus of slaves from the plantations. This disrupted the
Southern economy as much or more than Sherman. (Plus I am sure that Mr. Murphy
will share more facts related to this.)

: >By the end of the war, well over 10% of the Union army
: >was ex-slaves. Freeing the slaves brought fresh, highly motivated manpower into
: >a beleaguered Union camp.
: 
: True but unrelated to the Emancipation Proclamation. That proclamation says
: nothing about arming slaves. The decision to recruit colored troops into
: the Federal army was made in late 1863, and no such troops saw action until
: 1864. (Some state-recruited colored troops, notably 54th Massachussetts, saw
: action in 1863.)
: 

I fail to understand Mr. Schmidt's point. The vast majority of Union troops
served in State regiments. The 54th Mass was recruited early in 1863 and
fought at Ft. Wagner days after Gettysburg. Ft. Wagner was not their first
battle, nor were they the first Black regimant to see battle.

Black regiments endured some of the bloodiest fighting around Petersburg. 
When the war ended the Army was in the process of establishing an entire corps
of Black troops (to be the 26th Corps I believe).

: Try not to be any more revisionist than your distorted positions force you
: to be.
: -- 
: Steve Schmidt			<><		   whale@leland.stanford.edu
: 

From the above discussion it is not clear to me who is the one being
revisionist. The remark about "distorted positions" is entirely out of place!


---------------------------------------------------------------------------
P. L. Cowan	Please send replies, comments etc. (no flames thank you) to 
COWAN@ANL.GOV 	(I'm posting this from a friend's account)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: alt.war.civil.usa