WI: The Entire Pierce Family Dies in Train Crash, January 1853?

Stolengood

Stolengood

Banned
On January 6th, 1853, a train derailed and rolled down an embankment on its way from Boston to Andover, Massachusetts. This train carried President-elect Franklin Pierce, his wife Jane, and their 11-year-old son, Benjamin. In the event, Benjamin was crushed to death in the accident, and left gruesomely nearly decapitated -- his death plunged the Pierces into grief for most of the President's term of office.

What if the accident had been more fatal, however? What if the entire family, nearly two months before Pierce was due to be inaugurated as President, had perished in the train crash?

America had never had a President die before his inauguration; in the event, the office would presumably devolve onto the Vice President-elect, William R. King. But King was gravely ill with tuberculosis at the time; IOTL, he had to be sworn into office in Cuba, where he was attempting to regain his health, 20 days after Pierce had been inaugurated, and he (King) died weeks later, at his home in Alabama. How could he possibly serve -- and what possible contingency could be made in the event of his death, for a Presidency?

There's also the matter of the Electoral College to factor in; how would they react if they met after Pierce's death? Would they agree to vote King in, go for a completely different candidate (who actually has a chance of living out his term), or would the vote scatter, giving the Presidency to Pierce's opponent, Winfield Scott, who had lost considerably in the popular vote? What happens?

All these factors are for you to consider -- and I leave them to you. Have a good discussion! :)
 

Mikestone8

Stolengood said:
There's also the matter of the Electoral College to factor in; how would they react if they met after Pierce's death? Would they agree to vote King in, go for a completely different candidate (who actually has a chance of living out his term), or would the vote scatter, giving the Presidency to Pierce's opponent, Winfield Scott, who had lost considerably in the popular vote? What happens?
Click to expand...


The Electors met and voted on the first Wednesday in December, so it was already too late for that.

Effectively, the Senate would choose the successor to King, pending a new election in Nov1853. OTL that would have been Senator David R Atchison of Missouri, but Benjamin Fitzpatrick of Alabama would also be a possibility - maybe others.
 
Stolengood

Stolengood

Banned
Mikestone8 said:
Effectively, the Senate would choose the successor to King, pending a new election in Nov1853. OTL that would have been Senator David R Atchison of Missouri, but Benjamin Fitzpatrick of Alabama would also be a possibility - maybe others.
Click to expand...
Which out of the pack are the more likely, do you think? Also, what makes you bring up Fitzpatrick, specifically?
 

Mikestone8

Stolengood said:
Which out of the pack are the more likely, do you think? Also, what makes you bring up Fitzpatrick, specifically?
Click to expand...

Because he had already been President pro-tem, from Jan-March 1853, and would be so again later. I don't offhand know why Atchison was chosen in March '53 by the new Senate.

There's Douglas, but he's a Northerner, and the Democratic caucus probably has a Southern majority, so (unless Northern Dems are willing to vote for a Whig) the Pres Pro Tem is pretty certain to be a Southerner.
 
Stolengood

Stolengood

Banned
What I'm curious about is how the country, politically or otherwise, reacts to this -- particularly since William R. King is going to die a month after the inauguration, unless they decide to expedite the process (which may be unlikely, considering Fillmore is technically in office until March).

What're the odds there's some form of chaos (however unlikely that would be)? Fillmore being a dick and trying to hold onto power, or Congressional partisans trying to push aside the ailing King in order to put their favorite son in the vacant Presidency, or something like that?
 

chornedsnorkack

Stolengood said:
What if the accident had been more fatal, however? What if the entire family, nearly two months before Pierce was due to be inaugurated as President, had perished in the train crash?
Click to expand...
Benjamin and Jane hold no political office. It is quite sufficient if Franklin alone dies, and Benjamin and Jane survive.
 

chornedsnorkack

Would the lame duck Congress do anything about the fact that the vice-president elect was not even present in United States?

William King was not a vice president (for whose becoming president there were two fresh precedents). He was vice president elect. Would anyone in the lame duck Congress argue that he would not validly become President on 4th of March?
 
Stolengood

Stolengood

Banned
chornedsnorkack said:
William King was not a vice president (for whose becoming president there were two fresh precedents). He was vice president elect. Would anyone in the lame duck Congress argue that he would not validly become President on 4th of March?
Click to expand...
The Electoral College had already met; I don't think Pierce's death invalidates their decision. I do, however, wonder how much word would leak out that King was nowhere near healthy enough for the full office of President -- and whether that would further throw the country into chaos?
 

chornedsnorkack

King was not Vice President, though.
When would the news reach Washington that King cannot physically arrive in Washington by 4th of March?
 
Indigo

Indigo

Having done a TL on this - essentially, with Pierce dead, King would presumptively be President, and what with him being in Cuba and all, he'll be dead also before he has a chance to do anything. So that leaves Pres. pro tempore David Rice Atchison. Given that this means there's a special election later in 1853, Atchison probably pisses northerners off enough in that time that he's not elected for a full term.
 

Mikestone8

chornedsnorkack said:
Would the lame duck Congress do anything about the fact that the vice-president elect was not even present in United States?

William King was not a vice president (for whose becoming president there were two fresh precedents). He was vice president elect. Would anyone in the lame duck Congress argue that he would not validly become President on 4th of March?
Click to expand...


Well, the 12th Amendment speaks of the VP-elect acting as POTUS "as in the case of the death or other Constitutional disability of the President".

That would seem to give King a legal right to succeed.
 

chornedsnorkack

What was the OTL timeline of King´s movements?

Departed for Cuba on 17th of January, expecting to be back by 4th of March
arrived in Cuba early February, still expecting to return in time
sometime in February figured he could not be back for inauguration, and asked different arrangements.

When, exactly?
 
Stolengood

Stolengood

Banned
chornedsnorkack said:
What was the OTL timeline of King´s movements?

Departed for Cuba on 17th of January, expecting to be back by 4th of March
arrived in Cuba early February, still expecting to return in time
sometime in February figured he could not be back for inauguration, and asked different arrangements.

When, exactly?
Click to expand...
Well... if he only left for Cuba in February, obviously that'd be all butterflied by Pierce dying the first week of January. Depending on how quickly word would reach the South, he'd have to at least stay a bit longer in-country to acknowledge his own ascension to the Presidency.

Question is, though, would people be concerned at all as to whether or not King would live to see his own inauguration, two months down the line?
 
Stolengood

Stolengood

Banned
Derek Jackson said:
The then succession law called for a Presidential election that fall.

How much had sectional feelings grown by then?
Click to expand...
Hmmm... it's possible a Whig remnant stays viable a little while longer ITTL, despite the Republican Party having formed in February 1853; Southern Whigs, at the very least, would want to get together a platform for the '53 election, especially since the Republicans had just formed and are probably nowhere near strong-enough yet to put together a national campaign.
 
Stolengood

Stolengood

Banned
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top