Robert E Lee The Great Emancipator

[Rick Smith]

(06-08-2013 02:20 PM)LincolnMan Wrote:  I have to say in reading all the postings on this particular thread- I don't agree with it all- but I've sure enjoyed reading all of the different perspectives on it. I was a bit taken aback when I first read the title of the thread - but my patience won out and I waited to see what the responses would bear. I'm glad I waited. I do seem to recall that Gary Gallagher had an article in the Civil War Times or one of the other Civil War related mags that was specifically about Lee and the issue of slavery. Does anyone remember this article? I think his piece was based on some new letters that had been discovered- written by Lee- that demonstrated his keeping slaves much longer than he could have. Gallagher was quite forthcoming that Lee sanctioned slavery by his actions. Please forgive me for trying to remember the specifics of the article. Hopefully, someone is familiar with the work I'm referring too.

One of the reasons that Lee kept his slaves as long as he did {1859-1862} is due to his decision to educate them before setting them free. It took longer to do it this way. Lee signed the last manumission papers in December of 1862.

From 1854 to 1859, Grant lived and worked at White Haven, a plantation owned by his father-in-law, Col. Frederick Dent.

This is from the White Haven historic site: Ulysses Grant freed the only slave he is known to have owned, William Jones, in March 1859. It is unclear exactly when or why he acquired Jones from his father-in-law, Colonel Frederick Dent. “I Ulysses S. Grant…do hereby manumit, emancipate and set free from Slavery my Negro man William, sometimes called William Jones…forever.”

Grant may have owned at least one slave for as long or even longer than Lee had his.

Wonder if Gallagher thought that Grant sanctioned slavery?