Southern Civil War lies, part 3

Boy, I guess you don't have to be down in the deep South to tell Civil War Richard Streiner, a professor at Washington College in Maryland, does the honors this time, claiming that Lincoln sabotaged Union-saving compromise in the winter of 1860-61 because he was an incipient abolitionist. lies. Yes, per the latter part of his letter to Horace Greeley, Lincoln's "druthers" were to save the Union sans slavery. But, he was committed to saving the Union, first. Second, in 1861, he was NOT an abolitionist, or even an immediate emancipationist, or anything near that. Third, re "white backlash," even AFTER the Emancipation Proclamation, Lincoln himself still wanted to get freed slaves to leave the U.S. Fourth, the later half of 1862, when he wrote Greeley, was NOT the winter of 1860-61.

Please, a history prof who doesn't tell mistruths.

Proving the not-so-good professor wrong? Northern blacks, whether free or escaped slaves. They knew better, even before but especially after they heard Lincoln's First Inaugural Address:

During these tense, violent days, Northern blacks anxiously awaited Lincoln’s inaugural address. No group was more disappointed by it than they were. Lincoln vowed to vigorously uphold the Fugitive Slave Act, suppress slave insurrections and never interfere with slavery in the slave states. He even supported the new 13th Amendment guaranteeing slavery in the states. Frederick Douglass spoke for most Northern blacks when he said that Lincoln’s inaugural “is little better than our worst fears.” In the days that followed, thousands more blacks began making plans to emigrate to another country.

That's the reality, Prof Streiner.