Most Helpful Customer Reviews
37 of 42 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
The Great Event of the Nineteenth Century, April 12, 2004
This review is from: Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation: The End of Slavery in America (Hardcover)
Abraham Lincoln issued the final version of the Emancipation Proclamation on January 1, 1863. Near the end of that year, the artist Francis Carpenter determined to paint "a historical picture of the first reading of the Proclamation of Emancipation". Carpenter spent six months in the White House beginning in February, 1864, created a historically important painting of the reading of the Emancipation Proclamation to the cabinet, got to know Lincoln, and wrote a book detailing his experiences. Carpenter wrote that Lincoln told him regarding the Emancipation Proclamation: "It is the central act of my administration, and the great event of the nineteenth century". Professor Allen Guelzo tells the story of the Carpenter painting (p. 220-21), includes a photograph of the painting in the book, discusses Lincoln's statement to Carpenter (p. 186) and includes much more in his detailed study, "Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation: The End of Slavery in America" (2004). This book is a worthy successor to Professor Guelzo's recent study of Lincoln's religous and political beliefs in "Abraham Lincoln: Redeemer President". Professor Guelzo takes issue with a historical interpretation of the Emancipation Proclamation beginning with Richard Hofstadter (1948) that argues that Lincoln had little concern with the status of black Americans and issued the Emancipation Proclamation only from reasons of prudence to protect the interests of white workers. Guelzo also approaches the Emancipation Proclamation to address recent arguments by African-American scholars skeptical of Lincoln's role and pessimistic about the future of race relations in the United States. Professor Guelzo agrees that Lincoln approached the question of Emancipation cautiously. He offers several reasons for this caution. One major reason was Lincoln's fear of the reaction of the Federal courts to an attempt by the Executive to emancipate the slaves. Lincoln had good grounds for this concern as the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, Roger Taney, was the author of the notorious Dred Scott decision. Lincoln also had to act with the concerns of the border states in mind as these states were critical to the Union war effort; and he had to contend with generals and a substantial portion of the population of the North that would oppose any attempt to turn the Civil War from a war to preserve the Union to a war to free the slaves. To circumvent these obstacles, Lincoln proposed a system of compensated emancipation and asked the border states to adopt such a plan with Federal financial assistance. He also wanted to explore voluntary colonization efforts under which the freed slaves would be colonized in central America or in a location in the Western United States. Professor Guelzo describes how the border states resisted any notion of compensated emancipation. He also describes Federal legislative efforts, and efforts of some Union commanders, to protect former slaves making their way to the Union lines. These slaves were described by the term "contraband" and Congress enacted two limited statutes, called "Confiscation Acts" providing freedom for the "contrabands." In 1862, Lincoln told Secretary of State Seward and, ultimately, the rest of the cabinet, that he had determined to free the slaves in the rebelious states. Although not a believer in any traditional sense, Lincoln stated that this course was forced upon him by God and Providence. He issued the Preliminary Emancipation Proclamation in September 22, 1862 and the final Emancipation Proclamation on January 1, 1863. Professor Guelzo describes the origins of the Proclamation, and the effect of its issuance on the Union, the Confederacy, the free blacks, and the slaves. He also describes the impact of the Proclamation on the foreign affairs of the United States and on the conduct of the War -- as is well known, following the Proclamation the Civil War changed in character to total warfare.
He describes the precarious legal basis for the Emancipation Proclamation and points to Lincoln's courage and determination in the face of doubt. Although some scholars have argued that the Proclamation had, in fact, no legal effect and freed no slaves, Professor Guelzo argues persuasively that it was and remains the pivotal event of the Civil War and the single most important factor in the destruction of slavery. Following Lincoln's assasination, the Freedmen from the Southern states contributed funds for the construction of a statue of Lincoln emancipating a slave. The statue stands in Lincoln Park in Washington, D.C. It was dedicated in 1872, with remarks by Frederick Douglass. (I was moved to visit Lincoln Park to see the statue after hearing Professor Guelzo speak last year at a conference in Washington.) Douglass described Lincoln as "a white man who shared the prejudices common to his countrymen towards the colored race." (p. 249) Yet he recognized that, in issuing the Proclamation Lincoln was "swift, zealous, radical, and determined." (p. 250) In Professor Guelzo's words, the Emancipation Proclamation was "an act of spectacular political daring" (p.249) This is a thorough, well-balanced, yet inspiring study, of what indeed has fair title to be the Great Event of the Nineteenth Century. The book will help the reader understand where our country has been in securing racial justice and in bringing to pass and expanding upon the American dream.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
35 of 41 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
A Great Post Revisionist Work in honor of a Great President, March 1, 2004
This review is from: Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation: The End of Slavery in America (Hardcover)
Allen C. Guelzo wrote this superb book as a work to counter the prevalent [revisionist] school of thought that holds that Lincoln was a very reluctant emancipator - if even that. What many people hold against Lincoln, as is well known, is that he only touched slavery where slaves were out of his reach [i.e. living in confederate states in rebellion], and did not set people free where they were within his reach [i.e. in the loyal Border States of Delaware, Maryland, Kentucky & Missouri]. HOWEVER: as Guelzo points out: when Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation, he invoked the constitutionally warranted [and untried] WAR POWERS in his role as Commander-in-Chief, which only apply during wartime/times of rebellion. Slavery did NOT fall under FEDERAL jurisdiction, but under STATE jurisdiction. In other words: the institution of slavery was "protected" by the firewall protecting states from any intervention on the part of the federal government. Should Lincoln have ended slavery in the BORDER states, his action would have been declared UNCONSTITUTIONAL by the Supreme Court in a heartbeat. After all: the Border states were NOT in rebellion (and thus protected, by the U.S. Constitution, from presidential decrees/proclamations pertaining to slavery!). Further complications: Roger B. Taney [Dred Scott case!] was still chief justice of the Supreme Court (!), not exactly somebody you'd call a friend of emancipation. Further more: such executive action would surely have resulted in
the loyal Border States actually joining the Confederacy. In the fall of 1862, there was even the threat of a march on Washington D.C., a military 'Coup-d'Etat,' led by Union Commander George McClellan at the head of the Army
of the Potomac. McClellan, in no uncertain terms, "warned" Lincoln to not intervene with slavery (!). Conclusion: Lincoln did what he could do without violating the U.S. Constitution - and certainly risked his political neck.
As early as 1861, Lincoln advanced his own favored plan of gradual, compensated emancipation. Lincoln knew the limits of federal power as far as ending the institution of slavery was concerned: only the legislatures of individual states could vote to end slavery legally. Therefore: Lincoln doctored a plan to offer economic incentives that would make it attractive to
slave states to abolish slavery by their own choice. The federal government would issue federal bonds to states that would end slavery as compensation for the capital loss emancipation would bring about. Lincoln's Secretary of the
Treasury, Salmon Chase, calculated that should the federal government buy the freedom of all four million slaves in America at the time of the Civil War, this would still be less costly to the U.S. than a singly year of fighting the Civil War (!).
When I asked Guelzo how he'd assess the meaning of the Emancipation Proclamation during a teacher seminar at the Ashbrook Center for Public Affairs in Ohio, his answer was, "The Emancipation Proclamation was to the abolishment of slavery what D-DAY was to the end of the war in Europe." Lincoln would use ANYTHING within his power to legally end slavery, whether by proclamation or compensated
emancipation. In the end, it was the 13th Amendment to the Constitution which legally ended the institution of slavery in America. "Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation" is a must-read that will enlighten and captivate both teachers and students of American History.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
12 of 13 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Lincoln the Stratgeist, April 1, 2005
This review is from: Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation: The End of Slavery in America (Hardcover)
Lincoln the Strategist
This is a wonderful book. It paints a portrait of a side of Lincoln rarely discussed, Lincoln the cunning politician and master of strategy. Lincoln by careful political and military maneuvering did what the fiery rhetoric of the abolitionists had failed to; free all slaves everywhere.
The majority of Northern whites were not abolitionists and were not willing to fight a war with the South, strictly to free black slaves. Lincoln knew and understood this, and cast the war in terms of preserving the union. However thru a series of gradual, and seemingly unconnected actions, Lincoln set the die for the eventual abolition of slavery and the equality of all people.
Consider Lincoln's decision to accept southern slaves into the union army. This decision could be easily be justified on the grounds of military expediency. It was common practice for one army to seize the property of the opposing side and then to use that property against it's former owner. When the Union overran a Confederate artillery position, they would seize the cannons and use them against the South. What could be more sensible and non controversial than to use seized southern property(slaves) against the south?
However by training and arming recently freed black slaves and clothing them in the uniform of the U.S. Government, Lincoln seriously eroded the thesis of slavery; that blacks were an inferior race deserving only of slavery and not citizenship. When the war was over these black veterans would be another obstacle to a continuation of the previous precarious, legal status of blacks. It was inconceivable that a slave who had joined the Union army and fought for the Union could later be returned to slavery or denied citizenship.
The Emancipation Proclamation was a conditional document issued by Lincoln pursuant to his powers as commander in chief. The proclamation provided that, in six month if the rebellion was still active then all persons held as slaves where the Union was not in power would be freed. Thus the Emancipation Proclamation could be defended as part and parcel of the war effort and not a special effort to free slaves or improve the status of blacks. If the rebels did not lay down their arms and submit to the Union within the generous period of time of six months, their most useful and valuable property, their slaves would be forfeit. After all, what country at war does not seize the property, either public or private of it's enemy. To this day the United States, like most countries has a "Trading with the Enemy Act" which provides for the seizure of the private property of citizens of a foreign country, which the United States is in conflict with.
By making the Emancipation Proclamation a conditional document Lincoln set the stage for the 13th Amendment(which abolished slavery everywhere): had the war ended with the Emancipation Proclamation still in effect all the slaves of the confederacy would have been free, however thousands of slaves in the border states would remain in bondage. This would be an untenable situation, leaving aside the fact that the war had converted many union soldiers into hard core abolitionists, it would re ignite many of the pre civil war problems, like the fugitive slave issue.
This was the genius of Lincoln. Through a series of small and carefully plotted steps he brought the Country and the body politic, to a place where they had not intended to go, but did so in a manner, that few noticed the change in direction, and fewer still objected.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
|
