I was recently having a discussion with a friend regarding historical figures and how currently we tend to demonize certain ones for the negative aspects of their character while other figures seem to get a pass. She stated that Abraham Lincoln wanted to abolish slavery only for the southern states but intended to allow it to continue in the northern states. Is there any truth to this? I thought that by the time of Lincoln's presidency the northern states had already abolished slavery but she said that wasn't true, that there were types of slavery that were "grandfathered in" and that Lincoln intended to allow that to continue but only for the northern states.
u/FeedinMogwais0001
Southern" states you mean the states that would stay in the Union versus those who would join the Confederacy.
Your friend is right under the definition I have given above. There were slave states that did not leave the Union (Kentucky, Missouri, Maryland, Delaware), and slavery continued in those states till the 13th Amendment abolished slavery (even the Emancipation Proclamation only freed slaves in the rebellious states). From the beginning, Lincoln was very careful to maintain that he did not wish to end slavery in the states were it already had existed, only to block its institution in the Western territories (hence he was a "free-soiler"). In fact, up until around 1861-62 slaves which escaped to Union camps were returned to their owners, this practice stopped when their confiscation was justified because they aided the war effort.
Moreover, there were a few "free" states where slaves still existed, and this is what your friend was referring to. See, some states like Vermont or Massachusetts banned slavery outright, but other states like Pennsylvania or New York instead created laws of gradual abolition, which said that any slaves in those states who were slaves when these laws were passed (1790s-1810s) would remain slaves for life, but their children would be freed when they reached a certain age (varied by state but usually around 20). However, these laws meant that there were still a few (very old) slaves in supposedly free states.
Moreover, rules like the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 and the the Supreme Court case Scott v. Sanford meant that there were still slaves in Free States either escaped or brought their by their masters, but their legal status was still that of a slave.
Hope that answered your question!
Source David Henkin, Becoming America
Edit: tagged OP