I'm not from the US so I never studied the civil war in school in any real detail. I'm currently watching "The civil war" and I have a question as follows:
It says that Late in 1861 Lincoln still hadn't emancipated the slaves as he was afraid 2 more states would secede, which 2 states was he concerned about? I know that Delaware, Kentucky, maryland and Missouri had high levels of secessionism so I suspect it was 2 of these.
Either Kentucky, Maryland, or Missouri. Although Delaware was technically a slave state, it never seriously considered secession.
shareKentucky and Maryland
share[deleted]
Thanks for the reply, that's interesting.
shareNo way, not Maryland. I live in Maryland. Maryland was under martial law at the time, so there was really no way it could secede, even if it wanted to. In fact, they had tried before the war had started, and that's the very reason why martial law was declared. Anyone with rebel sympathies was arrested and habeas corpus was suspended. Delaware probably wouldn't have seceded either. The two states would have definitely been Missouri and Kentucky, since they already had shadow governments in the Confederate States which represented them in the rebel legislature.
shareThis is correct. The Confederates under A.S. Johnston and Leonidas Polk were holding a line in Kentucky in late 1861, although it was far too overextended and necessitated a withdrawl. Missouri was a highly confused situation, even after the Federal victory at Wilson's Creek in the early summer of 1861.
Both states had a highly charged political atmosphere. While the majority of the population was probably Unionist in both states, the political and social elites were generally slaveholders and therefore had a great self-interest in the Confederate cause. Both states also contributed a large number of troops to both sides, although ultimately far more to the Union than the Confederacy.
As was stated above, Maryland was under martial law in large part out of a reaction to the attack upon the 6th Massachusetts Regiment in Baltimore in June (?) of 1861. This was necessary since the Confederate sympathizing regions tended to be in the Eastern portion of the state surrounding Washington. Western Maryland was predominantly Unionist, a fact belatedly learned by Robert E. Lee in 1862. Delaware, although a slave state, had a negligible contribution to the Confederacy in comparison to its support for the Union.
Pretty accurate, but Wilson's Creek was a Southern victory, not a Federal one.
share"I pray to God we win this war.But we must have Kentucky to win".Kentucky was one of them.Missouri would have to be the other.
Cullen
ANY state the Mississippi flowed through was necessary to save the Union. Im sure Missouri was even more important due to the conflux of so many rivers there.
shareThats true. The Maryland legislature was in fact preparing the vote on the orandance of secession when Lincoln UNCONSTITUTIONALLY imprisoned a lot of the politicians and even newspaper editor southern sympathizers. Maryland PROBABLY would have then ratified the ordanance of secession and joined the South.
But no. I just want to point out that Lincoln was no hero. Every problem we have in the United States Government today with it being to big and powerful and capapble of sucking our freedoms away and taxing us to death is because it started with Lincoln trampling over the Constitution.
I think nearly every President, whether great or mediocre, has done something that might reasonably be labeled as unconstitutional. If Lincoln did exactly what you said in the exact context in which you put it (i.e. with impunity and active disregard for the rule of law), then mightn't we please recall that in so doing, he PRESERVED THE FREAKING UNION!! Do you really wish that there were now a USA and a CSA? How could we have waged two world wars in such a state, preserving the entire world in the aftermath? Would there still be legalized slavery in the CSA?
Before the Civil War, other nations referred to us as "they." Afterward, the referred to us as "it." Goodness knows this country isn't perfect, but I sure prefer that to what you propose. Get a concept of proportion!
Kentucky and Missouri.
shareLincoln's means were not justified by the end. Yes, he preserved the "freaking Union," much like George III tried to "preserve the British Empire." For some reason the latter just doesn't have the same ring to it despite the striking similarities. And how two American states would have reacted to war in Europe is a poor excuse for advocating the North's conquest. But no, slavery would certainly not be legal in a 2006 Confederate States of America.
shareBut no, slavery would certainly not be legal in a 2006 Confederate States of America.
Typical republican.
shareTypical republican.
One thing to never forget: The Republican party of today was the Southern democratic party of 1865-1968; the Dixiecrats "seceded" from their party following Nixon's "Southern Strategy."
sharethe 2 states were Kentucky and Missouri. i being born and raised in Kentucky, knew this from childhood. Yes, we did have a confederate capital in Bowling Green. which later moved to Danville i believe. there was a confederate constitution "on paper"...but it was never ratified and made law.