OK, point taken. However, was that the behavior of some sort of hard-bitten adherent of the fictional “Slave Power” that all these marxist-educated historical illiterates prattle on about on these threads? No, it wasn’t.
Speaking of freeing slaves, let’s turn to the Union and Ulysses S. Grant. What was the disposition of his slaves? And, yes, they were his under the law of that time, not his wife’s.
This cut and dried, north good, south bad, abolitionist vs. slavers, black and white history is fiction. It was far more complicated than that and I continue to be surprised that so many FReepers continue to fall for it.
Read, for goodness sake. It’s not as if it’s difficult to access these historical materials anymore, so there’s just no excuse to remain indoctrinated.
The slaves you mention did not belong to Grant or his wife. The were the property of Fredrick Dent. They were never allowed to travel with the Grants when they were in a state where slavery was against the law. Dent’s slaves were freed in January of 1865, when Missouri outlawed slavery. The one slave that Grant actually owned was given his freedom by Grant 1858. Plus what difference did it make whether Grant owned slaves or not. It was legal to do so time.