Boll Weevil arrives pre Civil War

[DuQuense]

The boll weevil (Anthonomus grandis) is a beetle measuring an average length of six millimeters, which feeds on cotton buds and flowers. Thought to be native to Central America, it migrated into the US from Mexico in the late 19th century and had infested all US cotton-growing areas by the 1920s, devastating the industry and the people working in the American south. During the late 20th century it became a serious pest in South America as well. Since 1978, the Boll Weevil Eradication Program in the US has allowed full-scale cultivation to resume in many regions.

Infestation

The insect crossed the Rio Grande near Brownsville, Texas to enter the United States from Mexico in 1892 and reached southeastern Alabama in 1915. By the mid 1920s it had entered all cotton growing regions in the US, traveling 40 to 160 miles per year. It remains the most destructive cotton pest in North America. Mississippi State University has estimated that since the boll weevil entered the United States it has cost US cotton producers about $13 billion, and in recent times about $300 million per year.

So what if the Boll Weevil had arrived in the US on a ship 100 years earlier than It did OTL.
Arrives in Charleston or Savannah in the 1790's and by 1820's is established from Virginia to east Texas. by the mid 1820's.

?What effect would a early1800's collapse of the US cotton Industry have on the whole Slavery issue.?
With Britain having to turn to Egypt? and India? or South America? in the 1820's for it's cotton, ?what effect would this have?

?How about if it was only 50 years pre Civil War?
The insect crossed the Rio Grande near Brownsville, Texas to enter the United States from Mexico in 1842 and reached southeastern Alabama in 1855.
By the mid 1860s it had entered all cotton growing regions in the US.
?With the Cotton Economy collapsing, would the South fight so hard to hold onto their Slaves?

 

[DuQuense]

My Roommate thinks that the whole States Rites, Tariffs, Rural Life v Industrialization, Southern Culture, ect, would have lead to a Civil War anyway.

 

[MrP]

My Roommate thinks that the whole States Rites, Tariffs, Rural Life v Industrialization, Southern Culture, ect, would have lead to a Civil War anyway.

If the impact is to knock the bottom out of the Southern economy, I'd imagine it'd be more likely that the South would then industrialise. But I'd defer to someone with more in-depth knowledge of pre-ACW Southron economics.

 

[Draco]

If the impact is to knock the bottom out of the Southern economy, I'd imagine it'd be more likely that the South would then industrialise. But I'd defer to someone with more in-depth knowledge of pre-ACW Southron economics.

Short term the effects are probably negligible since the modern cotton gin didn’t appear till the mid 1790’s so Cotton isn’t a huge money maker at this point. Long term cotton farming might not even pickup in this timeline due to the weevil if that happens slavery also won’t see the massive growth in the south that it did in our timeline. Beyond that all I can say is there will likely be some pretty massive butterflies resulting from this POD.

 

[Germaniac]

The South will defiantly be forced to diversify as it did in OTL. It will develop much more substantial amount of food products like corn, and significantly more Tobacco and Sugar. Slavery could actually increase in the United States as these new crops are as labor intensive or even more that cotton, specifically Sugar. Sugar needs to be harvested for much longer than Cotton adn the Slaves will be driven much harder thus the percieved need for more slaves. The issue in the coming Civil War will likely be a wholeharded effort against slavery.

 

[robertp6165]

So what if the Boll Weevil had arrived in the US on a ship 100 years earlier than It did OTL.
Arrives in Charleston or Savannah in the 1790's and by 1820's is established from Virginia to east Texas. by the mid 1820's.

?What effect would a early1800's collapse of the US cotton Industry have on the whole Slavery issue.?
With Britain having to turn to Egypt? and India? or South America? in the 1820's for it's cotton, ?what effect would this have?

?How about if it was only 50 years pre Civil War?
The insect crossed the Rio Grande near Brownsville, Texas to enter the United States from Mexico in 1842 and reached southeastern Alabama in 1855.
By the mid 1860s it had entered all cotton growing regions in the US.
?With the Cotton Economy collapsing, would the South fight so hard to hold onto their Slaves?

I think slavery is dead. In OTL, there was a strong anti-slavery movement in the South after the Revolution which came close to achieving emancipation in Virginia and elsewhere. It was really only the arrival of the cotton gin, which allowed large scale cotton cultivation to be profitable, which saved the institution. Insert the boll weevil into the mix circa 1792, then the anti-slavery movement is not derailed, and the South most likely emancipates the slaves before 1830.

As to whether that prevents a Civil War in the future, given that secessionism was not solely a Southern phenomenon and had been threatened over many issues which weren't related to slavery, I think it was probably inevitable that secession would occur at some time in the history of the United States. Whether that would cause a civil war would depend on the circumstances of the secession and the response of the federal government to it.

 

[darthbalmung]

The thing with a full blown Civil War occuring is the lack of a catalyst, especially one involing secession, as there's nothing that would be as divise. It might be possible that the Gilded Age, if it happnes, might cause an a Civil War in trying to create a socialist republic

 

[Sovereign12]

This is going to be quick, and skip many potential issues, but basically...


Without cotton there is really no need for slaves. And using slaves for food crops would be almost useless except for at harvest time.

So, many of these plantations may keep fewer slaves, but companies moving slaves around to pick crops may be more feasible. Yet, here you would not need as many slaves also, with the result of slaves being given their freedom or just released. Basically this is an altered form of sharecropping.

As the North continues to grow in population, from births and immigration, the power of the North in the federal government would still increase as it did in OTL. Without cotton more Southern whites head north looking for jobs, increasing the difference in populations between the North and South. Eventually, some Southern politician gets the idea to give the "freed slaves/ Free black people" the right to vote. At first this would only be in a given southern state, but eventually a push would be for the right to vote in a federal election (There could possibly be a push for women to have the right to vote earlier also, just to increase the political power base).

So, if a civil war does come about it may be the North objecting to the South giving free black men (and possibly all women) the right to vote.

What would be interesting here is the South is the one defending the free black peoples equal rights under the law.

 

[Germaniac]

The Idea that without cotton there won't be slaves is ridiculous. The economies would simply shift to tobacco and Sugar, Both labor intensive crops.

 

[robertp6165]

The thing with a full blown Civil War occuring is the lack of a catalyst, especially one involing secession, as there's nothing that would be as divise.

We don't know that. The butterflies released by such a drastic POD...you are basically forcing a complete remake of the economy of half the country...would mean a very different history which could lead to other issues arising. The one time before 1860 when secession came close to happening...the Hartford Convention of 1814...came as a result of our involvement in a war which was opposed by one section of the country. Who's to say something like that won't happen again? Or something entirely unexpected?

 

[robertp6165]

The Idea that without cotton there won't be slaves is ridiculous. The economies would simply shift to tobacco and Sugar, Both labor intensive crops.

Except cotton replaced tobacco and sugar production in most places in OTL, and prior to that slavery was on its way out, with strong anti-slavery movements in the South and Southern legislatures considering emancipation legislation. It was the extreme profitability of cotton production after the introduction of the cotton gin which saved slavery in OTL. Stay with tobacco and sugar, which were far less profitable, and the anti-slavery movement will win.

 

[Draco]

The Idea that without cotton there won't be slaves is ridiculous. The economies would simply shift to tobacco and Sugar, Both labor intensive crops.

There are a few problems with your theory. First you can’t just decide to grow sugar cane wherever you want a lot of the places where cotton thrived simply don’t have the climate if they did you’d have seen much greater cultivations in the states then what there was historically. Tobacco is also a non starter because I don’t see it ever reaching the level of demand as cotton did so as to warrant any exponential increase in cultivations from what we had in our time line. I’m also relatively sure it didn’t come close to matching the profit margin that cotton had post cotton gin but I’d need to check to be hundred percent sure. How does this relate to slavery well the thing is that slavery isn’t all that profitable outside economies of scale such as the plantations of the south. Without the wealth generated from cotton as there was in our timeline there will be far fewer plantations which results in far less demand for slaves and therefore less profit from slave trading. While I don’t see slavery dying over night in the south I just don’t see the massive growth of it that we had in our timeline.

 

[Sovereign12]

Just found an interesting bit of info. Wyoming was the first state, rather territory, to give women the right to vote in 1869 OTL. If we have the South pushing the rights of Free Black People to vote, along with women, and it turns into a Civil War, states like Wyoming would back the South if not outright join on their side.

Just for fun I fixed up a map. I'm going on the assumption that the states would look pretty much like OTL. Except Virginia stays mostly intact and Northern Idaho goes with the newly renamed Confederation of American States. DC in still in the USA, while most of Maryland went with the CAS.
Kansas, Nebraska, and the Indian Territory I kept neutral to make it interesting. I'm figuring the year is 1870-71.

If the ex-slaves were started to be released from bondage around 1850, I could see a potential incentive for them to move out west (colorado, Wyoming, Utah, New Mexico, Arizona, and Idaho. While most stay in the South before the war, enough have moved to those Territories to help push for their voting rights there, strengthening the South position.

 

[Germaniac]

There are a few problems with your theory. First you can’t just decide to grow sugar cane wherever you want a lot of the places where cotton thrived simply don’t have the climate if they did you’d have seen much greater cultivations in the states then what there was historically.

The Deep South as in Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi, Georgia, and Florida have the climate to produce Sugar. They will diversify and decide to produce the more labor incentive Sugar cane. These regions will, with the need of more slave laborers, see a rebirth of the slave trade in the Caribbean, and at the time will see a rise in the demand for slaves. While regions to the north will produce more Tobacco and will need much larger crops to get a profit and thus need more free labor. More Slaves = more abolitionists. With the harsher treatment of slaves in the sugar plantations the worse abolitionist movements movements will push. I see a Civil war in the 1840's

 

[Germaniac]

Just found an interesting bit of info. Wyoming was the first state, rather territory, to give women the right to vote in 1869 OTL. If we have the South pushing the rights of Free Black People to vote, along with women, and it turns into a Civil War, states like Wyoming would back the South if not outright join on their side.

Just for fun I fixed up a map. I'm going on the assumption that the states would look pretty much like OTL. Except Virginia stays mostly intact and Northern Idaho goes with the newly renamed Confederation of American States. DC in still in the USA, while most of Maryland went with the CAS.
Kansas, Nebraska, and the Indian Territory I kept neutral to make it interesting. I'm figuring the year is 1870-71.

If the ex-slaves were started to be released from bondage around 1850, I could see a potential incentive for them to move out west (colorado, Wyoming, Utah, New Mexico, Arizona, and Idaho. While most stay in the South before the war, enough have moved to those Territories to help push for their voting rights there, strengthening the South position.

First Alaska stays russian, or given to the British as a war gift.There is no chance that the USA or CSA can coexist. The CSA is dependent of Slave labor and has so little industrialization that it won't survive/

however that is a northern college point of view so i dont really know

 

[Sovereign12]

First Alaska stays russian, or given to the British as a war gift.There is no chance that the USA or CSA can coexist. The CSA is dependent of Slave labor and has so little industrialization that it won't survive/

however that is a northern college point of view so i dont really know

This isn't what the two nations would look like after a war, this is what I saw as the general division between this particular version of the War Between the North and the South. I meant to circle in red Philadelphia and New York as remaining in the Union during this war for the Rights of Free Black men. I figured these two cities had a huge Abolitionist movement, which may have changed into one for Freed-mens Rights.

And in this scenario DuQuense postulates that the Boll Weevils decimate the cotton industry ~1850. Figure the effects won't be truly felt until 1852, two years of almost no harvests. Plantations cannot afford to keep slaves at that point and no one is really looking to buy. So, what I would see happening is the plantation owners and other farmers that hold slaves just telling a good portion of them to leave. Sure some farmers will try other crops, but items like sugar cane are already being produced in other lands and in better conditions. And it may be a while before the sugar beet comes up in production, plus Europe already has a decent sugar beet industry by this time. So, export are almost nil in this regard.

Regular food crops and tobacco would have the same problem as they did in OTL when the shift from slavery to sharecropping occurred.

With slavery becoming a lessened issue, the Whig party may not collapse. The Whig party, working for State's Rights, eventually come to see the power the Northern States have in the federal government. So, some one gets the idea to give the Freed Black-men the right to vote. First in a state by state choice, mostly in the south. As their voting power comes to increase, some states begin to seriously think about adding women into the mix.

This makes the Whig Party become the part for State and Individual Rights. Many women in the North support the Whigs in passion if not in actual ability to vote. The strongest two areas women push for voting rights in the north in in Philadelphia and New York.

The Whigs idea of the American Systems, in TTL, becomes one of modernization and equal rights for all. The powerful capital giants of the North push the Democrats to stop them. The Democrats in this scenario would change from their Jeffersonian view, ironically, to a more aristocratic view because of this push by captains of industry. As the South's/Whigs gain more and more power in congress, the powers in the North finally cede from the Union. Thus starting TTL version of the ACW.

This is just a quick idea mind you. I'm not too sure about the way the political parties at the time would have actually reacted in such situation. Robertp6165 would probably be better at that part.


Also I wasn't sure what would happen to Alaska or Hawaii, I just left them on the map.

 

[DuQuense]

?any Ideas how this plays out overseas?

 

[Sovereign12]

?any Ideas how this plays out overseas?

Cotton-wise, the UK probably makes a bit more of a profit, now that the US will import cotton. Of course the US and Australia may become rivals in the wool industry. (And no, I don't see the South using slaves to herd and shear sheep.)

While not going to war, England and France may side with the South(USA) similar to OTL ACW, ironically. Of course, England may favor the North(CAS) because of the ability to sell their cotton from India to the growing textile industries. Interestingly the textile industry was manned mostly by women. In OTL 1869 was the year Laundresses went on strike in Troy, NY so it wouldn't be unreasonable.

As to the reaction around the world, I don't know. Would England take a tighter hold on India because of slightly increased cotton profits? Would the French still intervene in Mexico in 1860?

If you hold to the Butterfly effect, a POD of 1850-52 would cause the removal of or alteration to numerous births, such as;

Vladimir Lenin (April 22, 1870)
Theodore Roosevelt (Oct 27, 1858)
Paul Emil von Lettow-Vorbeck (March 20, 1870)
Cy Young (March 29, 1867)
Marie Curie (Nov 7 1867)

 

[darthbalmung]

Why would they give black people the vote? There might be the oppurtunity for them to vote, but it would along the lines of property or personal wealth to make it limited to a few. The west might offer the vote in order to get more setterls, but they wouldn't be forcing the enitre nation to do so. So why secede over that? This of course doesn't even address the issue that the racism of the 19th century is still going to be there, only it is going to be focused more on a Back to Africa movement.

 

[danwild6]

The Deep South as in Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi, Georgia, and Florida have the climate to produce Sugar. They will diversify and decide to produce the more labor incentive Sugar cane. These regions will, with the need of more slave laborers, see a rebirth of the slave trade in the Caribbean, and at the time will see a rise in the demand for slaves. While regions to the north will produce more Tobacco and will need much larger crops to get a profit and thus need more free labor. More Slaves = more abolitionists. With the harsher treatment of slaves in the sugar plantations the worse abolitionist movements movements will push. I see a Civil war in the 1840's

The soil however isn't capable of supporting sugar. Florida requires massive assistance to cultivate sugar.