He had no constitutional power to emancipate slaves in areas that were under the authority of the United States. I do not know why that is such a difficult concept for you to grasp, but it seems to be, since this is about the 3rd time it has been raised. So, here it is again. Constitution give US no power to regulate slavery or free slaves in the states. Lincoln has no power to touch slavery in the states. So, Fremont has no power to end slavery in Missouri. Hunter likewise cannot claim that the SC region he controls in now under US control and also free the slaves. The EP is a war measure, issued in Lincoln's capacity as Commander-in-Chief of the Army. It can only be directed against people in rebellion and against territory controlled by people in rebellion. Even at that, Lincoln has some doubts about its constitutionality and worries that the Supreme Court (the proslavery Taney is still Chief Justice) will overturn it if there is a case based on it. Thus, Lincoln also backs Thirteenth Am., which solves the problem. -- Paul Finkelman Chapman Distinguished Professor of Law University of Tulsa College of Law 3120 East 4th Place Tulsa, OK 74104-3189 phone 918-631-3706 Fax 918-631-2194 e-mail: [log in to unmask] [log in to unmask] wrote: > 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 To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html