"A House Divided": USA without a Civil War TL

1860:

Point of Departure:

Seward’s speech at the Republican convention of 1860. Citing the “irrepressible conflict” he was deemed too radical to sway voters.

In this ATL, Seward makes a conciliatory speech, and sways those who believed he was too radical for the nomination. He wins the nomination 240 – 95.

The Presidential Election of 1860


The Democratic Party had already split, and Steven Douglas and Breckinridge both vied for the nomination. Despite Douglas’ tireless efforts he only carried New Jersey, Illinois, and Missouri. Breckenridge garnered the whole south, while Bell captured the three states of the Upper South. In many counties, Seward and Douglas did not even appear on the ballot. When the election comes to pass, Seward had won the election
He gathered 165 electoral votes, beating Douglas’ 27, Bell’s 54, and Breckinridge’s 61.

Southern Secession

Enraged by the result, fire-eaters in the South immediately called for secession and Republicans ignored these calls as bluffs. On December 22, after several days of meeting, South Carolina seceded from the Union with a convention vote of 165 – 4. Within six weeks the breakup of the Union had begun

1861:

The Crittenden Amendments

The Crittenden Amendments were narrowly passed in the Senate and House on January 17th after much effort on the part of Seward (who supported it in OTL). Consisting of six Amendments it included the addition of a homestead act giving 125 acres to any citizen that farm it for four years, and the prohibition of slavery south of 30 degrees, unless the amendments were revoked. It also reversed the Supreme Court decision, Dred Scott v. Sandford. One point of contention was the removal of the original amendment that had not allowed Congress to change the amendments. After much wrangling, this was deemed unconstitutional by the Senate.

The Senator Stephen Douglas pointed out that even the Bill of Rights could be modified and changes, and that this would set a dangerous precedent.

Another proposed amendment would have outlawed secession, but this was deemed too radical.

As a result, there is no Confederate Convention in Montgomery and the states of the Deep South return to the Union beginning with Alabama and Mississippi.

This is vilified by many republicans, including Abraham Lincoln, and Seward was seen as a “traitor” for the South. Many of these Republicans, mostly former Free-Soilers repudiate the president and the nascent Republican Party split with the majority of the Republicans following Lincoln’s and Chase’s leadership

On the other hand, many Democrats who had no opinion about the question of slavery, and Southern Unionists were happy that the Union was preserved.

Secessionists and Fire-eaters in the South, especially, were gradually silenced as they could not rail against the slavery hating designs of Northern Free-Soilers such as Chase. Many more moderate papers in the South applauded the quick and timely actions of President Seward, who gained much popularity in the South, while losing the same amount in the North.

Most of the year continued quietly, without much fuss due to the stalemate in Congress between the Democrats and Republicans. One proposal that is put forth later in the year is a proposal for the colonization of free blacks to Liberia or another area. Passed by both houses, it was one of the only bills to do so during the year, and set aside 10 million dollars for the project. The 37th Congress is later renamed the “Sluggard’s Convention”.

The Monroe Doctrine

The Mexican Civil War continues apace as the year progresses. Napoleon III of France contemplates intervention, but is warned by President Seward that any action by the French would invoke the Monroe Doctrine. After Britain declined to support Napoleon’s actions, the French decided against the intervention in Mexico. Benito Juarez’ government is relieved and US is pleased at the establishment of a friendly power to the South. Taking a page from Napoleon Bonaparte’s book, Juarez confiscated a good deal of the Church’s wealth, and uses that to pay for the debt. This creates some powerful enemies within the church, but Juarez is able to overcome these obstacles, and his rule until his death in 1871 was peaceful and benevolent.

1860election.png
 

Darkest

Banned
Good first installment! I like the simple premise; you can do quite a bit with it. Very creative, plausible... so, good luck! I hope it turns out well. :)
 
1862:

Many take advantage of the Homestead Act, and move out west. This will set the stage for another Sioux uprising. After a harsh winter, the Santee Sioux rise up, and kill roughly 150 whites before being crushed by the United States government. Over 100 Sioux are executed, and about 2,000 troops were deployed to Minnesota to keep order.

As the year progresses, the party fault lines begin to show. The parties tend to coalesce into two new groups. The Democrat-Republicans, made up of mostly Democrats, Moderate Republicans and Southern Unionists, were neither pro- nor anti-slavery, having decided that the issue of slavery had been satisfactorily resolved, called for the colonization of free blacks and a lower tariff. The former Republican Party, now called the Liberty Party, now much more radicalized, was weakened, but it still gathered strength from its Northern strongholds. Its main issues were immigration, prohibition, and the tariff.


The Dominican Intervention

The troubles in the Dominican Republic caused a great debate in Congress. An island with a large free black and mulatto population, the Democrat-Republicans Party believed it prime territory for the colonization of free blacks. When Spain invaded, the Democrat-Republicans agitated to invade the country. Seward was favorable to this action, citing the Monroe Doctrine, Seward urges the very sick Steven Douglas to introduce a bill to “allow the US to intervene upon the island of Hispaniola, to create a colony for the export of free negros. Said colony shall never become a state but instead will remain a territory until its eventual independence.” Slavery would be outlawed, but the colony would not have any representation in Congress, thus allaying Southern fears of a free state in the heart of the Caribbean. It would function with a separate legislature pertaining to domestic affairs, while the US would take care of all external affairs.

Many rabid slavocrats believed that this bill was a form of Northern expansionism that would lead to Free states, while others argued that it would provide a release for freed slaves, many of whom like Frederick Douglass, had been strong supporters of abolition. The bill gets the support of many Liberty figures such as Lincoln, who did not believe tin the equality of blacks. On the other hand, many former “Radical Republicans” like Benjamin Wade, and abolitionists like Frederick Douglass and William Lloyd Garrison spoke out against the movement as a crime against the constitution.

Congress eventually passes the bill after much discussion. The US sends an ultimatum to the Spanish, enforcing the Monroe Doctrine as they had against France. The Spanish, struggling to stabilize after the Carlist wars early in the century were in no position to oppose the US. By the end of August, the US had landed its forces under Albert Sidney Johnston.

Marching from the north, the US government forces quickly captured the town of Monte Criste and the fertile Cibao valley. The president of the Republic, Pedro Santana, entered into negotiations with the invading army and by October, the Republic was under US control. Independent cavalry units operating under the leadership of J.E.B. Stuart were able to snuff out most of the independent caudillos, but it was some years before the whole country was unified.

The intervention acted as a unifier for the increasing sectionalism of the states, and thus kept the country together through the next decade. The intervention also solved what Judah P. Benjamin termed as the “problem of free negros” in a land of whites. Considering that his native Louisiana had one of the largest populations of free blacks in America, Benjamin was most likely echoing one of the main complaints of his constituents.

The Slump of 1862/1863

The cotton harvest of 1862 was one of the largest on record, reaching 6 million bales of cotton that year. Cotton production had been increasing for years, and the record harvest of the last five years had induced many farmers to devote even more land to cotton. This would have disastrous effects for the year to come. The English textile mills had a surplus from the previous year, and a vast oversupply was created. This led to a slump that was almost a reverse of the panic of 1857. Many planters and small farmers were hit hard, while Northern businesses were relatively untouched. This further accelerated the flow of slaves from the Upper South to the Deep South, where cotton was cheaper to produce.

While most large planters were able to weather the crisis, this caused many small farmers to lose their farms. The year 1863 was a new high for foreclosures, and many of the farmers either moved north or out west, where they were able to claim land due to the Homestead Act. Many large planters bought out their neighbors, and increased the average size of a plantation by 15%. Furthermore, the slave-holding population in the South drop 10% over the next three years especially in Virginia and Kentucky, causing some Southeners to rail against the rise of “Cotton Latifundia”. Among these was Nathan Bedford Forrest, himself a very rich man, yet one who was self-made, and sometimes offended the sensibilities of tide-water cavaliers of Virginia and South Carolina.
 
Sounds great. But I think that a bit more drastic action would have to be taken to appease the slave states. I dunno a constitutional amendment saying there must be an even number of slave and free states at the same time.
 

Darkest

Banned
The South only needs to be appeased so much. You don't have to make them happy or even comfortable within the Union. Just toss them a tiny concession once in a while, and don't threaten slavery or state's rights. In that case, there will never be enough popular opinion to begin the Civil War. Anyway, Kidblast, keep the timeline going, this is great stuff! I particularily like the idea to seperate the political parties as you did into Democratic-Republicans and Liberties. The Dominican Intervention was great, as was the slump of 62-63. All very plausible, all very unique in alternate timelines.
 
Sounds great. But I think that a bit more drastic action would have to be taken to appease the slave states. I dunno a constitutional amendment saying there must be an even number of slave and free states at the same time.

I believe that the secession of the CSA was like most revolutions. The work of a small highly motivated group of ideologues. In this case, it was mostly the work of "so-called" fire-eaters who hated the north.

Most southeners especially those from the upper South saw no reason to secede if they thought their rights were being respected, and few wanted to break up the Union. In this case I believe that the Crittenden Amendments would have satisfied the South.

The full text of the amendments are here:

http://http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crittenden_Compromise#Amendments_to_the_Constitution
 
I was just thinking of this... Seward was the guy who bought Alaska, so would he as president, buy some other land (especially with the decline of sectionalism and the bloodiness of the Civil War)
 
I was just thinking of this... Seward was the guy who bought Alaska, so would he as president, buy some other land (especially with the decline of sectionalism and the bloodiness of the Civil War)

Perhaps not as states but as protectorates and colonies. Since the South won't want the ratio of free states to slave states too high, I doubt there will be many new states different from OTL. More commonwealths like Puerto Rico though.
 
Perhaps not as states but as protectorates and colonies. Since the South won't want the ratio of free states to slave states too high, I doubt there will be many new states different from OTL. More commonwealths like Puerto Rico though.

Seward was an expansionist. I believe he wanted IOTL to buy Greenland along with Alaska to encircle BNA. If that ever comes to pass, then you could see the more rapid development of Canada in responce.

Regardless, I can't wait to see where you go with this......:)
 
Keep those comments coming....
I always like constructive criticism.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1863:


The first Black colonists, mostly from Louisiana, and Maryland arrive in the new Territory of Dominica. They mostly settled in the North especially in the Semana province (Samaná was to be sold to the United States as a military base during Pedro Santana's presidency in OTL, but the deal was never realized, because the United States felt that the cost was too much) and by the end of the year had a functioning government in place. Although yellow fever ran rampant throughout Sewardo the main area of settlement, it did not affect the blacks as much as the US Army which lost 1500 men to the fever throughout the spring.

Immigration became the main issue of the new Congress with many of the Liberty party senators, echoing their German Lutheran constituents, wanting to restrict immigration from Catholic countries. While not powerful enough to restrict it on a national level, key cities like Chicago and Philadelphia repeating their successes of the 1850s. The Liberty had already lost New York to the efficient party machine there under the direction of Boss Tweed, whose kleptocratic rule had already stolen 10 million dollars. In Liberty strongholds like Chicago, immigrants, especially Irish, were discriminated against, and found it hard to find jobs. Instead poor farmers from the South flocked to these cities of the Mid-West, finding jobs in the factories and mills of Chicago, Cincinnati, St. Louis, and Cleveland, making mostly former Democrats, strong Liberty supporters.

It is also in February of 1863 that the transcontinental railway bill was passed. The bill allowed for subsidies for the construction of a transcontinental railroad as well as subsidies for southern railroads, especially in the Deep South to facilitate the transport of cotton. Work on the railroad began that April in St. Joseph Missouri. It would be another 7 years before it was completed. As consequence the South was able make work for many out of work whites who would have otherwise been unemployed.

In July 13, 1863 Kansas entered the Union as the 34th State and the 19th Free State with its capital at Lawrence. This led some Texans to contemplate breaking the state into up to 5 separate states to allow for the continued slave to free-state balance. Although this never actually occurred, it was a powerful fall-back strategy that the South felt it had in the event of any Northern “aggression”.

The rest of the year was dominated by the discussion of tariffs which was only resolved the following year. This discussion fell under its traditional dichotomies with Southeners wanting a lower tariff and Northern interests wanting a higher tariff.
 
Alright new update coming up


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

1864:

The nomination of William Seward for president for the Democratic ticket was virtually assured by the end of 1863. Although still unpopular in the face of the ongoing slump in the South, he gathered enough support to gain the nomination against rivals including Forrest and James Hammond winning the nomination in the first round.

The nomination for the Liberty ticket was much more decisive however. There were many struggles behind the scenes for the nomination but finally Salmon P. Chase of Ohio was nominated.

The election was mostly concerned with the tariff and a new issue Prohibition. While this did not decide the outcome it would be a powerful divisor. With the issue of slavery much less decisive, the intense sectionalism of the previous decade was slowly falling away.

Catholics and Southeners tended to vote Democrat while Protestants and Northerners tended to vote Liberty. This was not set in stone, and some Libery candidates did well in the South, while New York remained for many years a bastion of Democrat Party Politics.

The US had finally settled the slavery question, one of its most decisive problems and the bond between the North and South seemed stronger than ever. It had a faithful ally to the South in the presidency of Benito Juarez and its annexation of Dominica had gone well. The South was recovering from its slump and the industrialization of the North continued at a fast pace.

Horace Greeley wrote in the New York Tribune on New Year’s Eve, 1865 that “America’s continued prosperity will soon mean a three course meal at every dinner, and every house a castle.”

Untitled.png
 
Looks good so far, Kidblast, the Dominican part was especially well-thought out (echoes of what would eventually come OTL). I wonder what the Haitians think of it though?

Will you cover the situation in Europe? I see several butterflies that could slow down or possibly even wipe out the unification of Germany.

And is Honest Abe just going to end up a footnote in history?
 
Looks good so far, Kidblast, the Dominican part was especially well-thought out (echoes of what would eventually come OTL). I wonder what the Haitians think of it though?

Will you cover the situation in Europe? I see several butterflies that could slow down or possibly even wipe out the unification of Germany.

And is Honest Abe just going to end up a footnote in history?

I will be going to 1870 with just America before focusing on other parts of the World. (I have to go to the library first)

I think Abraham Lincoln will remain a foot note of history, as well as Ulysses Grant, Robert E. Lee, and Stonewall Jackson.

Any thoughts as to the next dicisive issue for 1865? I know bimetallism was a big concern of both parties during the 1880s. Any thoughts anyone has about this? I would appreaciate your input.
 
Surprised that Kansas voted Democratic; unless a lot of settlers from Missouri immigrated there after the compromises, I would have guessed it would have supported the Liberty Party (all the New Englander immigrants, ect.).

Regardless, keep up the good work.

Hmm...Nebraska and Colorado should be entering the Union soon (or their entry could be delayed through the need for "balance"). Will some of the Border States begin to give up slavery? Without the GOP trying to consolodate power, Dakota should enter the Union as one state. Also, without the Civil War, the U.S. will probably be sending more aid to the Cuban rebels with the unrest begins to grip the island soon. I do see the Liberty Party calling for reforms such as the direct election of senators, progressive taxation, and women's rights. Many of the western states, once they enter the Union, will probably be sympathetic to the Liberty Party.

Robert E. Lee could still remain somewhat noteworthy by building up his own university in Virginia, or some such project.

Can't wait for more....:)
 
Surprised that Kansas voted Democratic; unless a lot of settlers from Missouri immigrated there after the compromises, I would have guessed it would have supported the Liberty Party (all the New Englander immigrants, ect.).

Regardless, keep up the good work.

The popular vote was closer than the electoral votes tended to appear. In addition many Southeners moved to Kansas to escape the slump. I'll add that in when I revise this.

Hmm...Nebraska and Colorado should be entering the Union soon (or their entry could be delayed through the need for "balance"). Will some of the Border States begin to give up slavery? Without the GOP trying to consolodate power, Dakota should enter the Union as one state. Also, without the Civil War, the U.S. will probably be sending more aid to the Cuban rebels with the unrest begins to grip the island soon. I do see the Liberty Party calling for reforms such as the direct election of senators, progressive taxation, and women's rights. Many of the western states, once they enter the Union, will probably be sympathetic to the Liberty Party.

Thanks David, I'll use some of those ideas for a party platform. (To be honest I couldn't think of what they should stand for)

I envision the some states entering the Union a little slower. An intervention in Cuba. I can see a revived Ostend Manifesto! :cool:

Nebraska will enter by 1868, and Colorado sometime in 1873. New Mexico territory will be split. The state farther east, Jefferson, will enter a slave state in 1870 while The state to the West, Arizuma, will enter as a slave state in 1877.

There definately will be less states in this TL. Also immigration will be much reduced (There will be an extra 600,000 men who did not die) and the US will have more of a Anglo-sphere culture because of this.

Due to Northern immigration, Maryland will be the first border state to abolish slavery in 1870.
Robert E. Lee could still remain somewhat noteworthy by building up his own university in Virginia, or some such project.

Can't wait for more....:)

Lee will still be known by some military historians for his role in the Mexican American War.

He wrote a book of memoirs that was fairly popular during the 1870s, but has sadly gone out of print.

He died in 1871, and the town of Lee in Arizuma was named after him. A moderate sized city, it has about 30,000 people.
 
I can see the USA bullying Spain out of both Cuba and Puerto Rico in the 1870s, and both territories becoming eventual slave states (with Cuba perhaps being split into an East Cuba and West Cuba).

Also, the Indian Wars will be very different. The Battle of Little Bighorn will more than likely be butterflied away, so I could see someone like either of the Custer brothers dabbling into politics eventually.

The Liberty Party will probably also be big on Temperance, and in calling for restrictions on immigration (although this will lesson as the LP gradually realizes that new immigrants is an excellent way to build up more voters).

A figure you could use in your TL is Thomas Watson. IOTL, Watson was a progressive Southerner who joined the Populist Party and called for some equality between blacks and whites, seeking to bring both poor Southern whites and blacks into the Populist fold. Then he changed and became a hardcore racist and a huge anti-semite as well (he was one of the notorious characters in the Leo Frank lynching). In TTL, he could become a major Liberty politico from the Southern states, damning slavery for keeping poor whites in economic servitude to the plantation aristocracy. Not to mention slavery will be further undermined as industrialization comes southwards (maybe not as much as OTL, but still enough to change economic conditions).

Slavery won't really be suited for where OTL New Mexico and Arizona are situated. I can't see it lasting too long out there.

Anyways, keep up the good work.....:cool:
 
I can see the USA bullying Spain out of both Cuba and Puerto Rico in the 1870s, and both territories becoming eventual slave states (with Cuba perhaps being split into an East Cuba and West Cuba).
Not just there- I think it's possible for a few more filibuster expeditions into Central America to take place as well...
 
Top