ACW Reconstruction Question

In that case I can only suppose that either

a) They weren't paying attention when the War in Heaven and PoS came up in Sunday School, or

b) They were, but somehow went on believing something they'd heard long in the past, without noticing its incompatibility with the WiH and PoS lessons.

I suspect (b) is more likely. If you have believed something for a long time, it is very easy to miss such inconsistencies.

6 one way.... doesn't matter I think we can all agree that the Mormon Church pre-1890 was not very nice, it had issues with outsiders and brown people

if the US government wants to get rid of the Blacks and put down the Mormons they send black settlers that way, hopefully a large number of those settlers are vets of the 54th Massachusetts and other black units of the civil war.
 
The workability of any such scheme would depend on two things - the political power of the abolitionists in congress (I suppose it should be former abolitionists) and the cost of the whole resettlement exercise. I recall there were proposals to 'ship them all back to africa' but that these where abandoned due to the cost involved (or it was unconstitutional to shove people on ships if they didn't want to go).

So there was a 'get rid of them' impulse, to put it bluntly. I'm not well versed enough in the period to say if it was wide spread or not.

As to the immigration side of things, given the time would non-abolitionist whites choose to move to a state populated by african-americans??

Any such scheme would be setting up future states where african-americans would have meanigful votes and probably early entry into national politics (ie black govenors/congressmen/senators). How forward thinking were politicians of the time?
 
Northwest Texas

Wasn't there a movement OTL to settle former slaves in northwest Texas. If that had gone foreward there would have been a black majority area in the west. Maby even a seperat country?
 
The workability of any such scheme would depend on two things - the political power of the abolitionists in congress (I suppose it should be former abolitionists) and the cost of the whole resettlement exercise. I recall there were proposals to 'ship them all back to africa' but that these where abandoned due to the cost involved (or it was unconstitutional to shove people on ships if they didn't want to go).

So there was a 'get rid of them' impulse, to put it bluntly. I'm not well versed enough in the period to say if it was wide spread or not.

As to the immigration side of things, given the time would non-abolitionist whites choose to move to a state populated by african-americans??

Any such scheme would be setting up future states where african-americans would have meanigful votes and probably early entry into national politics (ie black govenors/congressmen/senators). How forward thinking were politicians of the time?
I think the 'ship them all back to africa' Idea died out do to the cost plus some of the supporters wanted to make exceptions for those that served in black regiments and their families, and then realised that the exceptions would be to hard to carry out (army records left quite a bit to be desired at the time)...

Also, there were some black goveners during reconstruction: the reconstruction governments of the south were 'supposed' to be composed of southerners that hadn't supported the confederacy, which ment most of the southern whites were out, leaving southern blacks, and carpet-baggers torun the government... part of the reason Jim Crowe laws were popular when the whites regained eligablity...
 
Also, there were some black goveners during reconstruction: .


Afaik, no Negro was ever elected Governor of a State. Iirc, a Black Lieutenant Governor of Louisiana served as Acting Governor for a time during an impeachment trial.

There were two Black US Senators from Mississippi. Hiram Revels did an unexpired term in 1870-1, and Blanche K Bruce a full term from 1875-81. Iirc, Bruce was elected by a lame duck session of the last Republican Legislature, as a way to cock one final snook at the incoming Deocrats.
 
From the discussion so far, and from my own recollection of reading over the kids' shoulders when they were studying history, I don't think the OP is feasible. Way too many people in the "settlement class" ( :D ) and not nearly enough useful land on which to settle. A couple of (poorly supported) thoughts:
  • Construction was in progress on the Transcontinental Railroad, and land anywhere near the tracks was gaining in value. Absent a very hard push by the Radicals, the freedmen (gender-neutral for brevity) are going to be shut out of not only the proven arable land but also the land near the railroad right-of-way.
  • At that time, the Great Plains were just being considered for agriculture, and the techniques for successful farming were still being learned. Dropping millions of freedmen out there under the Homestead Act and hoping they make it is not going to go well.
  • Given the numbers of people involved, a large number of freedmen will instead choose to seek a living in the cities. (I saw the term "the Great Migration" in at least two of the kids' history books.) This is similar to the migrations from Ireland of a generation past. Any attempts to prevent these folks from doing so will make a mockery of Emancipation.
  • I would expect that offers of "forty acres and a mule - out West" would get a reasonable number of takers, and they might for safety settle in a number of relatively small areas (maybe a few hundred square miles each) and form some legacy subcultures analogous to the Amish.
  • I think the best prospects for a freedmen-majority state remain in the Old South, with the premise that a harsher Reconstruction enables one or two states to develop a large small-farmer and craftsman population which expands into the factories as industry comes back.
 
So the way to do it is to lure the whites out of the south. Which state or states would be most likely candidates? Those that had suffered most damage in the war?
 
So the way to do it is to lure the whites out of the south. Which state or states would be most likely candidates? Those that had suffered most damage in the war?

much of the Midwest is Southern boys, so much so that the south of llinois (known as Little Egypt) almost joined the CSA


any ways in 1860 the CSA was 40% black, South Carolina was 57% and Mississippi was 55% black, Louisiana was 47% black and Alabama, Florida and Georgia was 45% black, all by way of saying that you need to keep blacks from leaving the South not so much making whitie leave the south.
 
The problem with that being that it sets up the same race relation issues as OTL. I was hoping to avoid the bulk of that via the relocation and also give the former slaves a bit of a leg up at the same time.
 
Top