Thomas Jefferson Introduces the Emancipation Proclamation During His Tenure as President 1801 - 1809

Point of Divergence ... Thomas Jefferson was a complicated man. As a wealthy landowner, Thomas Jefferson owned many slaves on his plantations. And to all accounts, he treated his slaves rather well at the time, only using the whip in rare and extreme cases of fighting and theft. He made sure his slaves did not work on Christmas and had Sundays off as well, and provided financial incentives for doing good work as well. He also felt the relationship between slave and master was harmful. Jefferson did at one point propose phasing out slavery entirely in the States, but it was shut down numerous times. Jefferson eventually stopped discussing the prospect entirely, and mentioned it very seldom in his presidency. He wrote to a friend as follows, ""I have long since given up the expectation of any early provision for the extinguishment of slavery among us."

Lets for argument's sake say that Jefferson during his tenure as President was able to issue an earlier version of the Emancipation Proclamation 60 or so years before Abraham Lincoln took office. How would this earlier proclamation change the US as we know it today, and would we be experiencing an earlier civil war as a result?
 
It won't be the same Emancipation Proclamation as OTL.
It has to be something with enough political support for the time. Probably some sort of gradual manumission.
Bear in mind Jefferson is still 30odd years before the British can enforce an abolition of merely trade of slaves.
 
The Emancipation Proclamation only applied to slaves in states that were in active rebellion against the Union, who were thus considered contraband. So unless there's a civil war going on during Jefferson's presidency, it would do nothing.
 
It won't be the same Emancipation Proclamation as OTL.
It has to be something with enough political support for the time. Probably some sort of gradual manumission.
Bear in mind Jefferson is still 30odd years before the British can enforce an abolition of merely trade of slaves.
I'd agree that some sort of "Freedom of the Womb" policy would be more likely than outright abolition however the US does have a smaller population than the British Empire.

There would likely be large amounts of unrest all across the nation, not just the South. I doubt that any states would try to secede, however that is always a possibility. The question would be if Jefferson would try to reconquer the states that try.

Another important question: is this before or after the Louisiana Purchase?
 
Another important question: is this before or after the Louisiana Purchase?

I wasn't really thinking about the exact year, but I did see the Louisiana Purchase took place in 1803. For the scenario purposes, I am going to say this proclamation takes place after the 1803 Louisiana Purchase.
 
The Constitution allows the importation of slaves to be outlawed after 1808. That happened. Suppose Jefferson took it a step further in his last year in office and was able to pursue legislation to allow children of slaves to be born free. Sure, there would be some "cheating," but eventually slavery would pass from old age and without a war.
 
The Constitution allows the importation of slaves to be outlawed after 1808. That happened. Suppose Jefferson took it a step further in his last year in office and was able to pursue legislation to allow children of slaves to be born free. Sure, there would be some "cheating," but eventually slavery would pass from old age and without a war.
It would be more than just "cheating." It would be downright unconstitutional, which is what Jefferson despised. Remember that being anti-slavery ≠ being an abolitionist. Even if Jefferson's opposition to slavery was strong enough to take action against it, there's no way that he could get anything through Congress. Even in 1860, the anti-slavery mainstream opposed any federal restrictions on slavery where it already exists as a violation of states' rights.

The problem with this thread is that it assumes the "president as an emperor" dynamic, which was very much not the case during Jefferson's time. The president was subservient to Congress, and the federal government was on roughly equal footing with state governments.
 

Marc

Donor
Free children of slaves... And who is going to feed, clothe and shelter them? Not their parents, who won't be getting anything from their owners and just barely get enough for their own survival. Not the slave-owning class, who would have little to gain (save their souls) in supporting the offspring of their property.
A best-case scenario could be constructed where free children are taken care of in exchange for being committed to a lifetime of indentured servitude after reaching adulthood.
 
Jefferson was anything but anti-slavery in his deeds. He was not above selling slaves to raise funds for changes to Monticello and did not free any large numbers in his will. If I recall correctly he only freed some of Sally Hemmings’ (and his) children.
 
Top