Would someone explain the reasons that Lincoln, the great
emancipator, refused to allow both Fremont and Hunter to militarily
emancipate the slaves in the regions that they militarily took control over
in the South, if it was clearly within his power to allow them to do so under
the same authority pursuant to which he issued the emancipation proclamation
in 1863.  I assume that his personal commitment to emancipation, assuming he
actually had one (as opposed to his political commitment, which seemed to
come and go) was as strong in 1862 as in early 1863, so what was the problem
in the cases of Fremont and Hunter?

       I am also interested in how Lincoln rationalized his oath to uphold
the Constitution when he was inaugurated in light of his emancipation of
Southern slaves, the ownership of which was Constitutionally protected in
1863 at the time of the issuance of the EP.

JDS

To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions
at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html