A Confederate Quagmire: Richmond annexes Santo Domingo

[Deleted member 109224]

The US Annexation of Santo Domingo is an oft-brought up subject on this board. Buenaventura Baez was desperate to have somebody or anybody annex his country - the US, the French, the British, the Spanish, whoever. Given that the Spanish, who still had slavery, did take up Baez on the offer (and were promptly driven out afterwards), Baez clearly had no qualms with annexing his country to a nation with slavery.

The Confederates meanwhile were some expansionist and grubby little jerks. Somebody coming along and offering them more territory for slavery? How could they say no.

So, what if the Confederate States had annexed the Dominican Republic? The CSA now has to fight a Guerrilla War in a country in which the population is armed to the teeth and has very recent experience driving out occupiers.

Would the US pick a fight over this? Would the UK? Would the costs and failure of a Dominican War cause massive political tumult in a CSA that likely is still getting its footing as an independent country? Could the CSA itself see domestic uprisings over this?

 

[Deleted member 67076]

No, Baez would never sell to the Confederates. Slavery was the absolute anathema to anyone in the Dominican political scene. Even the thought of slavery was what kicked off the Dominican Restoration War (alongside racial discrimination). And everyone knew the Confederacy wanted to expand and maintain slavery. It would not fly even with Baez himself, whose own mother was an ex slave.

Given that the Spanish, who still had slavery, did take up Baez on the offer (and were promptly driven out afterwards), Baez clearly had no qualms with annexing his country to a nation with slavery.

That was Pedro Santana, who appealed to haciendos and emigrees in Cuba and had to get an open guarantee that military officers would retain their ranks, slavery would not be expanded on the island (the Spanish respected this, but still wasn't enough), and transferring all national and local debts to the Spanish crown.

The more likely scenario is Baez inviting Confederates to invest in cotton production, and then the new immigrants assimilate pretty quickly.

 

[Mort the Reaper]

The more likely scenario is Baez inviting Confederates to invest in cotton production, and then the new immigrants assimilate pretty quickly.

In that scenario, I think we might get something along the lines of the Confederados.

 

[Seleukeia]

Why not have the Spanish retain the Dominican Republic instead? They win the Dominican Restoration War, and the island remains under their control until it is taken over by the United States in 1898.

 

[John7755 يوحنا]

I am not sure that legally the CS could restore slavery... Prior cases in Southern state courts ruled that a person who gained freedom from slavery due to existence within countries that abolished slavery, could not be re-enslaved. The same likely is the case for a collective body of people, such as a country, which would then be integrated into the CS. Now, I am sure that some sort of legal reform regarding debt slavery or such could be developed, but most states did not permit say a slave who was freed in a foreign country, to be then re-enslaved upon entry into the US. In the Dred Scott case, the issue is different in that the argument was that slaves cannot be removed from their masters or their placement, due to the statute that the US cannot confiscate property, thus the situation is different.

 

[Deleted member 67076]

Why not have the Spanish retain the Dominican Republic instead? They win the Dominican Restoration War, and the island remains under their control until it is taken over by the United States in 1898.

The Spanish can't win the war is the first issue. It became too much of a money sink and the casualties were climbing up. (over 10K casualties on the Spanish side) The second is, like with Cuba, independence is more likely to occur in 1898. Assuming the Spanish American War happens of course.

 

[Seleukeia]

The Spanish can't win the war is the first issue. It became too much of a money sink and the casualties were climbing up. (over 10K casualties on the Spanish side) The second is, like with Cuba, independence is more likely to occur in 1898. Assuming the Spanish American War happens of course.

But the war doesn't even have to really start the first place. The war began because the Dominicans, despite assurances from Madrid itself, believed that the Spanish would reinstitute slavery in Santo Domingo. if you can get the Dominicans to understand that this was not the case, Spanish rule probably gets a lot more stable.

 

[History Learner]

I really don't see this occurring, given the prior mentioned reasons but also because the Confederate leadership was not diabolical expansionists looking to extend slavery everywhere. Case in point is the Vidaurri Affair.

 

[Deleted member 67076]

But the war doesn't even have to really start the first place. The war began because the Dominicans, despite assurances from Madrid itself, believed that the Spanish would reinstitute slavery in Santo Domingo. if you can get the Dominicans to understand that this was not the case, Spanish rule probably gets a lot more stable.

That would require the Spanish soldiers stationed to not be racist and to fix the installed labor code of the country which dramatically raised prices in first 2 years of recolonization.

 

[Fiver]

I really don't see this occurring, given the prior mentioned reasons but also because the Confederate leadership was not diabolical expansionists looking to extend slavery everywhere. Case in point is the Vidaurri Affair.

The Confederates were expansionist, they tried to annex New Mexico, Colorado, Missouri, Kentucky, and West Virginia. They did not see slavery as diabolical, they said they had a "beneficent and patriarchal system of African slavery, that the Cornerstone of Confederate society was "the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery subordination to the superior race is his natural and normal condition", that "a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization". The Confederate Constitution required that all Confederate states be slave states and all Confederate territories be slave territories.

 

[History Learner]

The Confederates were expansionist, they tried to annex New Mexico, Colorado, Missouri, Kentucky, and West Virginia. They did not see slavery as diabolical, they said they had a "beneficent and patriarchal system of African slavery, that the Cornerstone of Confederate society was "the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery subordination to the superior race is his natural and normal condition", that "a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization". The Confederate Constitution required that all Confederate states be slave states and all Confederate territories be slave territories.

The Confederacy considered slavery integral to the system, yes, but that doesn't mean they were rabid expansionists. Further, to conflate wanting what became West Virginia, which was considered a part of Virginia by both sides until 1863, with expanding into Santo Domingo is to conflate two entirely unlike situations. Case in point is the interactions with Vidaurri in Mexico to get an idea of what I mean.