EMANCIPATION PROCLAMATION:
From the view of a 1903 South Carolina secondary school textbook
Home


From Chapman, John A., M.A. SCHOOL HISTORY OF SOUTH CAROLINA. Richmond: Everett Waddey Co., 1903.

The following is from "Chapter XLI Emancipation Proclamation."

See what turn of the century children in the South learned.

"On January 1, 1863, President Lincoln issued his Emancipation Proclamation, declaring all slaves, in the States at that time in rebellion against the United States, free. This proclamation is one of the most important papers ever written, certainly, one of the most important documents ever issued from any department of the United States government.

"On September 22, 1862, President Lincoln issued his preliminary proclamation, declaring that unless the States and parts of States then in rebellion should lay down their arms before January 1, 1863, he would on that day, issue a proclamation declaring the slaves in such States and parts of States, free, unconditionally. In the preliminary proclamation of September 22d, it is said: "And the executive government of the United States, including the military and naval authorities thereof, will recognize and maintain the freedom of such person or persons, or any of them, in any efforts they may make for their actual freedom."

"In all civilized countries in all ages of the world it has been considered a crime to incite or excite servile insurrections. And one of the reasons urged by our fathers of the Revolution for the Declaration of Independence by the colonies against the king was: "He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavored to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers the merciless Indian savages, whose known rule of warfare is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes, and conditions." Whether Mr. Lincoln so meant it or not cannot now be said, but this Emancipation Proclamation can hardly be read with any other understanding than that it was a direct call upon the slaves to assert and maintain their freedom, by any means in their power, even by the indiscriminate slaughter of helpless women and children, if they felt it necessary. And the military and naval authorities are enjoined to "recognize the freedom of such persons, and to do no act or acts to repress such persons, or any of them, in any efforts they make for their actual freedom." Then again, towards the close of the proclamation, he says: "And upon this act, sincerely believed to be an act of justice, warranted by the Constitution, upon military necessity, I invoke the considerate judgment of mankind and the gracious favor of Almighty God."

"We observe that the author of this proclamation does not seem to care for the freedom of the slave, except in so far as the assertion of that freedom might be instrumental in suppressing the rebellion. Nor does he seem to care what horrors might attend its operation, so the rebellion could be repressed. The freedom of the slave was entirely a secondary object, as all States and parts of States not in rebellion, even though they held slaves, were expressly exempted from its operation. Mr. Lincoln was a good man, but he was a fanatic on the subject of the Union; and he would willingly have seen the Southern country made desolate, the inhabitants swept away, and all traces of their occupancy destroyed, so that the Union could be preserved.

"The Union was to him what Rome was to a true Roman, and he would have died gladly for its glory. His Union was not a Union of free and equal States, such as Jefferson desired; but a Union of territory, one and indivisible. Suppose the slaves all over the South had asserted their freedom and risen against their masters, a result naturally to be expected from such a proclamation, the rebellion might indeed have been at an end, but it would have ended in a universal massacre, not equaled by that of Hayti. Another consideration sets the seal of condemnation to this proclamation: it was issued after the Confederate disasters at Antietam and elsewhere, when it was seen by astute observers that the fortunes of the Confederacy were beginning to wane. This was done advisedly. The time chosen was opportune. Draper says: "In the summer of 1862, Mr. Lincoln had read at a cabinet meeting a draft of a proclamation of emancipation. The Secretary of State, Mr. Seward, though completely approving of its character, thought the time inopportune, and that, instead of coming after disaster, it ought to come after a victory. To this, on consideration, Lincoln agreed.

"The time for such a proclamation was not when Lee was in view of Washington and the expulsion of the national authorities from the capitol itself by no means an improbability. There was a day on which it seemed more likely that the Confederacy would dictate terms than have to submit to them--a day on which it would have been absurd, indeed, for the vanquished president to tell his antagonists, flushed with victory, that he was going to free their slaves. I made a solemn vow before God,' said Lincoln, subsequently, 'that if General Lee was driven back from Maryland, I would crown the result by a declaration of freedom to the slaves.' The battle of Antietam was fought; and Lee, driven across the Potomac, retreated into Virginia on the night of September 19th. The losses of the South in this sortie had been awful. Mourning was sitting in black at every Southern fireside. And now Lincoln remembered the vow he had made: 'Whatever shall appear to be God's will, that will I do.'"

"Three days after this great Southern disaster, when "mourning was sitting in black at every Southern fireside," Lincoln issued his preliminary proclamation of September 22d. It ought to be added here that only a short time before Mr. Lincoln removed General Fremont from command of the Department of the West, because he had issued a proclamation freeing all the slaves of rebels in his Department, saying the war was for the Union and for no other purpose. Mr. Lincoln cared nothing for the States as States. His idea was that a State was formed from the Union, and was an integral part of it, and could no more secede from it than a county could secede from a State. So holding, he thought Secession was absolute ruin, and that the whole structure would fall to pieces if any part was removed. Such error is fatal to republicanism and creates a despotism under democratic forms.

Updated November 29, 2003.