0
Lincoln did believe that slavery was morally wrong, but there was one big problem: it was sanctioned by the highest law in the land, the Constitution. The founding fathers didn't explicitly write the word "slavery" but they did include key clauses protecting the institution.
However, he did not believe that white and black people should have the same rights. In the fourth debate with Stephen A Douglas at Charleston, Illinois in September 18, 1958, Lincoln said this:
"I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor o f bringing about in anyway the social and political equality of the white and black races -- that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together in terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot live, while they do remain together there must be a position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race. I say upon this occasion I do not perceive that because the white man is to have the superior position the negro should be denied everything."
Lincoln's position on social and political equality for black people evolved over the course of his presidency. In his last speech, he argued for limited black suffrage, saying that any black man who served the Union during the Civil Wat should have the right to vote.
Lincoln believed that slavery must be banned from the territories. But he was not an abolitionist. He did not preach the abolition of slavery where it existed. He did not want to see it expand. In his debates with Douglas, Lincoln often said that slavery was protected by the Constitution in those states where it existed and Northerners should sympathize with Southerners, not attack them. Lincoln also remined Douglas that the Supreme Court, in the Dred Scott Decision, had declared "popular sovereignty" unconstitutional. Lincoln believed that if the South continued to force the issue as in the Scott Decision and the Fugitive Slave Act, the long run would be a sectional dispute.
No Abraham Lincoln did not agree with the ruling in the Dred Scott case. The ruling stated that slaves were not US citizens and thus had to remain as slaves.
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
Why did it take so long to make a decision for Dred Scott's lawsuit?
*farts*
What years did the Dred Scott decision take place prior to the Civil War?
The Dred Scott decision or Dred Scott v. Sandford, took place in 1857. His case was based on the fact that he and his wife Harriet Scott were slaves, but had lived in states and territories where slavery was illegal, including Illinois and Minnesota (which was then part of the Wisconsin Territory). Dred Scott lost the case when The United States Supreme Court ruled seven to two, on the grounds that he, nor any person of African ancestry, could claim citizenship in the United States, and that therefore Scott could not bring suit in federal court under diversity of citizenship rules.
Why was the czar's decision to take command of the Russian army an unwise one?
If you are referring to Czar Nicholas II, it is because he was not a military commander by training, even though he thought he was really quite fantastic.
Why didnt Russia take part in the big four negotiations?
it was being discriminated against because of its communist government, and Soviet Russia pulled out of the war
Who was called ol fuss and feathers?
General Winfield Scott. A hero of the War of 1812 and the Mexican War, Scott had been head of the US Army, general in chief, since 1839. He had been in the army since 1808, for fifty-three years when the Civil War began. There was no system of retirement for military officers then, and pay being low few had much in the way of savings, and so had to serve until they died. Scott was 75 years old when the war started, and weighed 450 pounds. He was 6' 8" tall, so it wasn't as obese as it sounds, maybe. He fell asleep in the middle of conversations. A block and tackle had to be used to hoist him onto his long-suffering horse on the rare occasions when he tried to ride. Scott was a Virginian, but never thought of parting from the Union. Since he was obviously unable to take the field and lead an army himself, he offered command of the US field army to his brilliant aide from the Mexican War, whom he considered the most capable officer in the US Army, Robert E. Lee. Lee of course turned him down, resigned, and went south.
Why did it take so long to make a decision for Dred Scott's lawsuit?
*farts*
How did the south feel about the dred Scott decision?
The South generally supported the Dred Scott decision because it upheld the rights of slaveowners to take their slaves into any territory. They saw it as a victory for states' rights and slaveholding interests.
How did the southerners feel about the Dred Scott decision?
Many Southerners supported the Dred Scott decision because it reinforced the rights of slaveholders to take their slaves into free territories. They viewed the decision as a victory for states' rights and property rights over federal power.
What did the south think about the dred Scott decision?
The South supported the Dred Scott decision, as it reinforced the rights of slave owners to take their slaves into territories where slavery was prohibited. They viewed it as a victory for protecting their property rights and upholding the institution of slavery.
What caused Southern slave owners to be happy with the Dred Scott Supreme Court decision?
Southern slave owners were happy with the Dred Scott Supreme Court decision because it allowed them to take their slaves into slave free territories and not give up ownership. The case undermined local sovereignty.
How did Dred Scott CASE affect the civil war?
The Dred Scott Decision helped lead to the Civil War because it caused fighting between the North and South. The North was angry because people in the north had decided not to allow slavery in their states, and the Dred Scott decision allowed slaves to be brought into their states. The Dred Scott decision basically said that if a slave was brought to a free state they were still a slave because they were property. so even a free state wasn't really free. Most southerners were happy with the decision because it allowed them to take slaves with them to free states and territories and reinforced the idea that slaves had no rights as U.S. citizens. Dred Scott's case caused more trouble between the North and South.
What did the Supreme Court rule in the Dred Scott case?
The ruling in the Dred Scott case allowed slave owners to take their slaves with them into the Western territories of the United States.
What years did the Dred Scott decision take place prior to the Civil War?
The Dred Scott decision or Dred Scott v. Sandford, took place in 1857. His case was based on the fact that he and his wife Harriet Scott were slaves, but had lived in states and territories where slavery was illegal, including Illinois and Minnesota (which was then part of the Wisconsin Territory). Dred Scott lost the case when The United States Supreme Court ruled seven to two, on the grounds that he, nor any person of African ancestry, could claim citizenship in the United States, and that therefore Scott could not bring suit in federal court under diversity of citizenship rules.
Where did the Dred Scott decision take place?
The Dred Scott Decision, which essentially said the government did not have the right to interfere in where a slave owner took his slave, whether it was free territory or not, took place in Missouri. It denied the Missouri Compromise was legal and that blacks were citizens. It really didn't even define them as human beings, calling them property instead.
What did the supreme. court rule in the dred Scott case?
The ruling in the Dred Scott case allowed slave owners to take their slaves with them into the Western territories of the United States.
How did the ruling on the Dred Scott case affect the slavery debate?
The Dred Scott decision ruled that slaves were not citizens of the United states. Instead, they were the property of their masters. Therefore, a slave owner was within his rights to take a slave with him, even to free states.
Why was the Supreme Court decision in the case of Dred Scott vs Sanford considered a victory by the Southerners?
Southerners saw the Dred Scott decision as a victory because it upheld the rights of slaveholders to take their slaves into any state or territory, regardless of whether slavery was legal there. The decision also declared that African Americans, whether free or enslaved, were not American citizens and therefore could not sue in federal court, reinforcing the notion that they were property, not people.
