[DiogenesLamp]

Nobody is interesting in hearing how your slavers wanted "freedom".

Incorrect. What they are not interested in hearing is how the Union leadership was going to offer the Southern states protection for everything the Union leadership claimed to be fighting against.

People don't want to hear that Lincoln was treating the issue of slavery like a bargaining chip, and was willing to tolerate it indefinitely if it kept him in control of the Southern states ability to trade directly with Europe.

You don't care about the rights of the Southern states in any fashion whatsoever, you simply want to justify what was done to them in supporting the policies and positions that we have all been taught to prefer.

[BroJoeK]

DiogenesLamp: "What they are not interested in hearing is how the Union 100% of Democrat leadership was going to offer the Southern states protection for everything the Union leadership Fire Eaters claimed to be fighting seceding against."

Fixed it, as well as possible.

There was no Union "fighting against" in March 1861.
Corwin was Democrats hoping to keep their fellow Democrats from declaring secession.

DiogenesLamp: "People don't want to hear that Lincoln was Democrats were treating the issue of slavery like a bargaining chip, and was were willing to tolerate it indefinitely if it kept him them in control of the Southern states ability to trade directly with Europe rule over Washington DC."

DiogenesLamp: "You don't care about the rights of the Southern states in any fashion whatsoever, you simply want to justify what was done to them in supporting the policies and positions that we have all been taught to prefer."

I care that, in 1860 Southern states had a constitutionally protected right to slavery in their own states, which Lincoln did not then intend to overturn.
I care even more that Confederates never had a constitutionally protected right to start, declare & wage war against the United States, nor was Lincoln ever willing to grant such a "right" to them.