More handpicked essays just for you.
A detailed analysis of the emancipation proclamation
A detailed analysis of the emancipation proclamation
Emancipation proclamation research paper
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Opinions about the Emancipation Proclamation changed drastically from 1861 to 1863. At the beginning of the war, the freeing of slaves was looked down upon by most everybody in the United States but as the war continued, it became more accepted to the point where citizens celebrated it. The Sacramento Daily Union and the Sacramento Bee were two newspapers that printed the general opinion of citizens in California. On October 5, 1861, near the beginning of the war, Sacramento Daily Union expressed their hatred of emancipation. The article stated that both races will never be able to live completely equal in unity. They also stated that emancipation would be the end of the black race (Doc A). By stating this the reader of the articles …show more content…
But as the war continued, opinions changed. Near the middle of the war, on September 24, 1862, Sacramento Daily Union expressed their newly found acceptance towards emancipation. The article stated that the rebels celebrate knowing that their power is withheld due to their slaves but as a benefit of the war all citizens should not return fugitive slaves and that if slaves are returned to their master this will be considered treason (Doc C). This article is much less biassed than Document A stating only facts about the war and war strategies. The feelings that citizens in California have at the time of the printing is that emancipation will be accepted due to advance their war strategy. At this point emancipation, in the citizens eyes, has gone from hated to accepted. While nearing the end of the war, on January 5, 1863, Sacramento Bee printed about the celebrations of their city. They described the cheers for proclamation, and their joy. It described that nobody in the rejoicing room objected the idea of emancipation but if, 4 years earlier, somebody would have told them what would happen in the future, they would have been looked down upon. Here citizens are celebrating emancipation and the citizens are living happy rather in fear as they were at the start of the war. Any viewer can see that the general opinion of emancipation immensely changed from the beginning
Many newspapers in the South praised the decision and started defending it against the Northern papers that condemned it. One such article from the Richmond Enquirer said, “A prize, for which the athletes of the nation have often wrestled in the halls of Congress, has been awarded at last, by the proper umpire, to those who have justly won it. The nation has achieved a triumph, sectionalism has been rebuked, and abolitionism has been staggered and stunned.” Since the South thought that the decision settled the question of slavery, they didn’t publish nearly as many articles and editorials as the North did. Most of the stuff they did publish was praising the decision and condemning the Northerners as “rebels” for not submitting to the ruling as the law of the land. Is was not just the North and South that had a reaction to the Dred Scott decision, people in the West had an opinion on the
The scope of the investigation is limited to the Second Great Awakening and the American Abolitionist Movement from 1830-1839, with the exception of some foundational knowledge of the movement prior to 1830 to highlight the changes within the movement in the 1830s. The investigation included an exploration of various letters, lectures, and sermons by leading abolitionists from the time period and a variety of secondary sources analyzing the Second Great Awakening and the Abolitionist Movement from 1830-1839.
After the Turner revolt, the topic of slavery took over American politics (3,91). Congressman David Wilmot suggested that legislation prohibit slavery in new territories that were conquered from the victory in a war with Mexico (3,91). Wilmot acted in hopes of stopping slavery’s expansion westward but his movement did not pass with the Senate and was therefore disregarded (3,91). The South’s population was slowly becoming overshadowed by the North’s, leaving little room to stop anti-slavery legislation (3,91). When California was admitted as a free state in 1850, the US was left with no slave state to balance this addition and some southerners desired a separation of slave states from the union (3,92). Congressmen and senators started to fear their political opponents tremendously; tension was slowly building up (3,92). The Compromise of 1850 admitted California as a free state but also passed a law making it painless for slave-owners to recover their escaped slaves from free states (3,92). Congress then passed the Kansas-Nebraska Act which allowed inhabitants to decide whether Kansas would be a free state or a slave state (3,92). In hopes of victory, the opposing sides invaded the territory which was after nick-named “Bleeding Kansas” by the easterners (3,92). This unsettled region would be the perfect setting to launch a crusade against slavery (3, 92). This scheme was exactly what John Brown had in mind (3,92).
The abolition of slavery started in 1777. In the North the abolition of slavery was the first to start. But, in the South it started during the 1800’s. The Northern states gave blacks some freedom, unlike the Southern states. The national population was 31,000,000 and four and one-half, were African American. Free african males had some limits with their freedom. There were many political, social, or economic restrictions placed on the freedom of free blacks in the North, but the three most important are, Political and Judicial Rights, Social Freedom, and Economic.
On January 1, 1863, President Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation; as the country headed toward the third year of the civil war. This proclamation stated: “that all persons held as slaves are, and hence forward shall be free,” however this only applied to the states that were no longer part of the union, leaving slavery untouched in other states. However the Emancipation Proclamation was needed to benefit African Americans.
New York City at the time of the Civil War can be explained as a small roaming forest fire with the potential to cause an exponential amount of damage, not only to the city but the Union. The city, in a state of constant turmoil over a great many things; race, class, politics, and a constantly diminishing amount of available employment opportunities for it’s 800,000 citizens. The riots, which took place in New York between July 13 and July 17, 1863, are called by most, the “New York City Draft Riots.” When in all actuality the enactment of the draft was simply the catalyst to the already engulfing issues that had plagued and divided the city among lines of every distinction. The events over these five days are still widely viewed as the most destructive civil upheaval in terms of loss of life and the “official” number of those who gave their lives in those five days is estimated around 119.
When the Civil War was approaching its third year, United States President Abraham Lincoln was able to make the slaves that were in Confederate states that were still in rebellion against the Union forever free. Document A states that on January 1, 1863, Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation and that every enslaved person residing in the states that were “In rebellion against the United States” were free and that the Executive Government of the United States and that the military and naval authority were to recognize them and could not act against them at all. Although the Proclamation did not free every slave in the Confederacy, it was able to release about 3.5 million slaves. Along with freeing all of those slaves, it also stated that African American men were allowed to enlist with the Union and aid them in the war.
The Emancipation Proclamation changed the Civil War because they were no longer fighting to preserve the union but now to free slaves. This was an issue for the south because if they lost then they would lose all there slaves. That would affect their economy because the production of recourses would be lower because there would be no one to work the plantations. The north wanted to free slaves because they didn’t agree that it was right to hold people to make them work and to treat them harshly like they did on the plantations. While the Emancipation Proclamation did not free a single slave, it was an important turning point in the war because it was transforming the fight to preserve the nation into a battle for human freedom. The purpose
In 1863, the Emancipation Proclamation was in fact “proclaimed” there was still slavery in a new name. Just because, slavery was no longer permitted, it did not eliminate the ability for sharecropping to exist. The Emancipation Proclamation did not even free all slaves, meaning slaves in the borderline states were not free. The only slaves that were free, were the slaves that were in the states that went against the Union. However, it can be observed that there was a technological and medical revolution.
Also known as the Second Great Awakening, the Abolitionist Movement swept through the colonies in the early 1830’s. This was a movement to abolish slavery and to give blacks their freedom as citizens. Many men and women, free and enslaved, fought for this cause and many were imprisoned or even killed for speaking out. If it were not for these brave people, slavery would still exist today. The Abolitionist Movement paved the way in eradicating slavery by pursuing moral and political avenues, providing the foundation for the Underground Railroad, and creating a voice for African Americans.
Lincoln 's decision to issue the Emancipation Proclamation in 1863, was to up the North 's support so they wouldn 't go to the confederate side. Not only a change in North war, but a change in the slavery, like granting the slaves their freedom so they wouldn 't have any more slave revolts which would cause even more chaos in other words another war. "The Emancipation Proclamation granted freedom to the slaves in the Confederate states if the states did not return to the Union by January 1,1863. In addition, under the proclamation, freedom would only come to the slaves if the Union won the war." Abraham Lincoln president at the time, the northerners also known as the Union, the south also known as the confederates, and slave states still in
At this point of time of the war; in 1862/1863 the Union army was losing against the Confederacy; the Confederacy was leading the war. The number of Union’s casualties was twice the number of the Confederacy’s casualties. Lincoln waited to issue the proclamation because when announcing out loud his first draft, his cabinet suggested him to wait so that it would not be seen as a desperate act. That is why, in September 17, 1862, when the Union army won the battle of Antietam that 5 days later, Lincoln said that if the Confederacy army has not surrender by the New Year, all slaves in the Southern states would be free. Different opinions over the cause and impact of the proclamation can be found in political cartoons. In a cartoon by John Tenniel, it shows that the Emancipation Proclamation was seen as an act of desperation and was his “last card to play to win the war” . The purpose of this cartoon, drawn in 1862 is controversial as to what Lincoln wanted initially, when he issued his em...
Lincoln declared that “all persons held as slaves” in areas in rebellion “shall be then, thenceforward, and forever free.” Not only liberate slaves in the border slave states, but the President has purposely made the proclamation in all places in the South where the slaves were existed. While the Emancipation Proclamation was an important turning point in the war. It transformed the fight to preserve the nation into a battle for human freedom. According the history book “A People and a Nation”, the Emancipation Proclamation was legally an ambiguous document, but as a moral and political document it had great meaning. It was a delicate balancing act because it defined the war as a war against slavery, not the war from northern and southern people, and at the same time, it protected Lincoln’s position with conservatives, and there was no turning
The drive to end slavery in the United States was a long one, from being debated in the writing of the Declaration of Independence, to exposure of its ills in literature, from rebellions of slaves, to the efforts of people like Harriet Tubman to transport escaping slaves along the Underground Railroad. Abolitionists had urged President Abraham Lincoln to free the slaves in the Confederate states from the very outset of the Civil War. By mid-1862, Lincoln had become increasingly convinced of the moral imperative to end slavery, but he hesitated (History.com). As commander-in-chief of the Union Army, he had military objectives to consider (History.com). On one hand, emancipation might
The United States rests upon a foundation of freedom, where its citizens can enjoy many civil liberties as the result of decades of colonial struggles. However, African Americans did not achieve freedom concurrently with whites, revealing a contradiction within the “nation of liberty”. It has been stated that "For whites, freedom, no matter how defined, was a given, a birthright to be defended. For African Americans, it was an open-ended process, a transformation of every aspect of their lives and of the society and culture that had sustained slavery in the first place." African Americans gained freedom through the changing economic nature of slavery and historical events like the Haitian Revolution policies, whereas whites received freedom