ipl-logo

Emancipation Proclamation Dbq

840 Words4 Pages

The Emancipation Proclamation is one of the most historically significant executive orders ever given by a President of the United States of America. The proclamation would change the nation’s history and help end the nation’s Civil War. It called for the freedom of slaves in the ten states that had rebelled from the Union. It was issued as a preliminary on September 22 1862, warning that if the states did not end their rebellion, then he would order it to go into effect on 1 January 1863. As none of the southern states budged, the proclamation was signed and issued. Lincoln had to convince his cabinet that this was a necessary order, in order to put an end to slavery and also end the nation’s civil war. If you do not consider the context …show more content…

In his inaugural address he said “no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with slavery in the States where it exists” (History) and he reiterated that sentiment three months after the start of the war. The war would rage on for another two years and growing cries from his party calling for him to take action. The Republican Party argued that the emancipation was a “military necessity and that it would weaken the Confederacy and correspondingly strengthen the Union.” By the fall of 1862, the tide of the war had shifted to the south and Lincoln realized that decisive actions were necessary. Lincoln would say to his cabinet “We must free the slaves or be ourselves subdued…. The Administration must set an example, and strike at the heart of the rebellion”. (History) Lincoln was advised by Secretary of State William Seward to wait until a major Union victory before issuing the proclamation. The Union victory at the Battle of Antietam gave Lincoln the force he needed in order to issue the preliminary …show more content…

The Confederate States declared themselves as a sovereign nation and subjected themselves to applicable laws of war. They also considered slaves as property. Lincoln cited the law of war between two sovereign nations and seized their property. This skirted the issue of constitutionality as it only applied to states at war with the union. He did not end slavery and thus violate the constitution, he enacted a proclamation as the commander in chief that seized property as a necessity of war. Lincoln summed up the position, stating “I think the Constitution invests its commander-in-chief, with the law of war, in time of war.” To which he added “The most that can be said, if so much, is that slaves are property. Is there – has there ever been – any question that by the law of war, property, both of enemies and friends, may be taken when needed? And is it not needed whenever taking it, helps us, or hurts the

Open Document