Emancipation Proclamation and the Union Army

[Pruitt]

Hellboy,

Louisiana raised a lot of troops over the period of the war. In 1865 there were very few in the field. In the Red River Campaign Taylor was trying to get the paroled troops back into service from Vicksburg and Port Hudson. Almost all voted with their feet. New Orleans had most of the Louisiana population, yet was far behind the Union lines. Lots of former Confederates were in this area. One of the reasons Taylor was so set on chasing banks with the Texas, Arkansas and Missouri troops was possession of New Orleans could compel thousands of ex-Confederate troops to return to the colors.

Pruitt

[Stryker 19K30]

Didn't the Emancipation Proclamation only emancipate slaves in the rebelling territories, that had officially seceded from the Union, and TN was not named or any of the slave border states, and it didn't affect the few slaves in the North.

I might be wrong but I remember something like this from a class on it long ago.

[Eric Wittenberg]

Originally Posted by Stryker 19K30

Didn't the Emancipation Proclamation only emancipate slaves in the rebelling territories, that had officially seceded from the Union, and TN was not named or any of the slave border states, and it didn't affect the few slaves in the North.

I might be wrong but I remember something like this from a class on it long ago.

Correct, and that's what made it such a brilliant political maneuver. It changed nothing, but it made the war about slavery and made it impossible for the French or British to intervene on the side of the Confederacy. Brilliant. Just brilliant.

[Pruitt]

Josh,

The Emancipation Proclamation did affect the Slaves in the Federal areas. There was practically no enforcement of Slavery. If a Slave in Delaware (very few) or Kentucky decided to go north, who was going to bring them back? There were major problems in the southern Occupation areas, too. Many young healthy ex-Slaves would follow the Union Army around saying "Feed Me!". Butler just drafted them and assigned them to work for pay on Plantations occupied by the Union Army and worked by his friends.

Pruitt

[67th Tigers]

Originally Posted by Eric Wittenberg

Correct, and that's what made it such a brilliant political maneuver. It changed nothing, but it made the war about slavery and made it impossible for the French or British to intervene on the side of the Confederacy. Brilliant. Just brilliant.

Actually it precipitated the third (of four*) intervention crisis with Britain, and the British started to move to intervene in June-July 1863, when a private members bill recognising the Confederacy was introduced by John Roebuck. The fact that the motion was tabled to complete the 1863 Fortification Bill meant it was due to be debated the day after news of Lee's defeat at Gettysburg arrived and the proposer withdrew the motion undebated.

Intervention is not finally off the table until mid-1864 when Lee is forced back to Petersburg, after which there is a drawdown of British forces deployed in theatre.

* They were:

June/July 1861 (wake of 1st Bull Run, stop the war and bring both sides to the table)
December-January 1861/2 (Trent)
September/October 1862 (wake of Antietam, fear of a slave revolt)
June/July 1863 (Private members bill backed by a known Francophile after consulting the French Emperor, withdrawn after Gettysburg)

[TomDeFranco]

Originally Posted by 67th Tigers

Actually it precipitated the third (of four*) intervention crisis with Britain, and the British started to move to intervene in June-July 1863, when a private members bill recognising the Confederacy was introduced by John Roebuck. The fact that the motion was tabled to complete the 1863 Fortification Bill meant it was due to be debated the day after news of Lee's defeat at Gettysburg arrived and the proposer withdrew the motion undebated.

Intervention is not finally off the table until mid-1864 when Lee is forced back to Petersburg, after which there is a drawdown of British forces deployed in theatre.

* They were:

June/July 1861 (wake of 1st Bull Run, stop the war and bring both sides to the table)
December-January 1861/2 (Trent)
September/October 1862 (wake of Antietam, fear of a slave revolt)
June/July 1863 (Private members bill backed by a known Francophile after consulting the French Emperor, withdrawn after Gettysburg)

Was any consideration given by the British government to the fact that the South was losing the war in the western theater?

[TJAdams]

Originally Posted by D1J1

A hue and cry went up when it was first announced, but when the reality dawned that one of those men might wind up taking the ball that could otherwise be aimed at you, acceptance went up.

Someone else leading the charge in front of you does make one see things differently.