Do you believe Lincoln would have eventually issued the Emancipation Proclamation if the South hadn't seceded from the United States?

Do you believe Lincoln would have eventually issued the Emancipation Proclamation if the South hadn't seceded from the United States?

I don't know that he would have. He campaigned on not allowing slavery to expand into future states, but that might have just been to please the crowd. I believe that although he felt slavery was morally wrong, he also wanted to preserve the Union, and I think he'd have placed the preservation of the Union over the conditions of the slaves. I suspect he would have worked to improve conditions for the slaves rather than issue an edict freeing all of them at once.

I think he would have as this was a goal of his even before the secessions started. He had certain ideals that he wanted to follow through on.

I doubt it. Lincoln seemed to be a moderate who tried to resolve conflict between opposing groups. I see that events, particularly the secessions, pushed him to a more extreme position.

I agree that Lincoln's goal was to preserve the Union, I think he would have tried to stop the spread of slavery into new states and territories, but he would not have banned slavery from existing slave states

No, I don’t believe he would have issued the Emancipation Proclamation—political suicide. However, I believe that his administration would have driven towards the eventual goal of eliminating slavery. Perhaps set the tone for freedom for the succeeding administration to consider.

I believe that Lincoln would have worked towards keeping the Union together, and the Emancipation Proclamation would not have served that goal. You can always wonder, though, if it were possible for him to do at the end of his second term, when he would have nothing to lose...

I believe that both the Emancipation Proclamation, and the secession, would have occurred in either scenario, but only over the passage of time. While Lincoln became more and more familiar with the treachery of slavery and, as a person of high morals, he would have eventually gone for the whole Emancipation Proclamation. Had his initial compromise proposal of only new states being impacted worked, it would have only been a matter of time before there were more slave uprisings in the "captive" states, and the southern states would still have made an attempt to secede. It seems that it was inevitable either way.

By the time Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation, England had already abolished slavery in all her holdings worldwide. I believe there was an awakening of how atrocious slavery was in many parts of the world and it was just a matter of time before the United States would abolish slavery. The biggest obstacle to emancipation was the economic impact on the Southern states, where money was more important than freedom - or freedom only for the elite. The war was the catalyst that allowed the proclamation to be enacted once, rather than slowly and state by state.

No - I do not. While Lincoln disagreed with slavery, he believed saving the Union was more important. It’s interesting that the South’s action of seceding from the Union probably accelerated the dismantling of slavery.

I doubt that he would have issued the Emancipation Proclamation if the South had not seceded. I think he understood the enormity of the task to maintain the Union, whilst dismantling slavery. I think he believed that stopping the growth of slavery into the new states was the most that could be accomplished at the time.

I do wonder/hope that if, had he lived, he might have found a way later in his second term.

No.I do think he would have tried to restrict its spread. However, we can glean a bit of Lincoln’s thinking when Horace Greeley published, on August 19, 1862 an editorial calling for Lincoln to free all those enslaved who were under the Union’s control, Lincoln responded in National Intelligencer. He wrote “ My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and it is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do, it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that . What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union. .. I have here stated my purpose according to my view of my official duty; and I intend no modification of my oft-expressed personal wish that all men everywhere could be free.”
Now, it should be noted that Lincoln was during this time exploring options to address freeing those enslaved in the states that had seceded. However, he states his view of his primary objective most clearly. He knew if he proceeded to emancipate slaves in states that had not seceded then those states would secede. He knew that had he issued the Emancipation Proclamation prior to secession it would have provoked a fracture of the Union and he would not have risked that.

I have read that Lincoln favored a conservative approach to the elimination of slavery. I don't think he would have allowed slavery to expand, but I don't know if he would have emancipated the enslaved in as quick a manner. My understanding from previous reading is that he favored a way to end slavery without destroying the South; such as requiring owners to free the enslaved upon the owners' deaths, etc. It seems that his primary goal was preservation of the Union.

I do not think so. Didn't he campaign on statements that he would not change anything in the states that sanctioned slavery, and he would not allow its spread to new states?

I don't think he would have. I do think that Lincoln was opposed to slavery and would have looked to other ways to eliminate it or keep new states from entering the Union as slave states. But I think he issued the proclamation when the Confederate states pushed him too far.

I would like to believe he would have emancipated all slaves. President Lincoln believe slavery was wrong and that all men are created equal.

No, Lincoln was a moderate with the primary goal to preserve the Union. I believe he would have attempted to stop the expansion of slavery, perhaps worked with southern states to improve the conditions of slaves, but I don't believe he would have tried to ban slavery in the states where it existed.

No. Lincoln was elected to stop the spread of slavery into the western territories. This goal was superseded by the preservation of the union. He was not an abolitionist. And I believe he would have negotiated a compromise with the slave states before there was any succession.

Probably not--he made his position clear -- no expansion of slavery but no eradication where it existed. I think he felt it would eventually peter out

No. I think his personal sympathies changed during his presidency but he was not an abolitionist when he was elected. I agree he was a moderate and would not have taken the radical action of freeing all slaves. The authors said he did so to increase the number of soldiers.

I agree with those who say NO. Lincoln was forced by the circumstances of the war to emancipate the slaves so that they could become soldiers for the Union army. But I believe he eventually became an abolitionist (of sorts) because he realized that without the 13th amendment, his executive order freeing the slaves in wartime might not survive after the war. So he worked hard behind the scenes to get the amendment passed by Congress. It was then ratified by 27 of the 36 states, after Lincoln's death. All that being said, there is no question that Lincoln always believed that slavery was immoral. Without the war, he would have advocated a gradual, more conservative approach to the elimination of slavery.