Alternate District of Columbia

JJohnson

Banned
I was noticing that the L'Enfant plan and Ellicot plan put plenty on the northeastern side of the Potomac, but the Alexandria side was essentially ignored, and eventually retroceded to Virginia in the 1840s. What could be placed on that side of the Potomac between 1790 and 1830 to tie that side of the district to the other, and butterfly away the retrocession so that today, you would be visiting Alexandria, DC?
 

Anaxagoras

Banned
I suppose if the White House is on one side and the Capitol is on the other, retrocession would be much less likely.
 
Mattruvinteress, was there ever any prposal to retrocede any part of DC to Maryland?

Iirc, Washington was a relatively small place for much of the 19c, so it might have been decided that DC was bigger than it needed to be.
 
While not really adding anything useful for the POD, I would surmise that the Alexandrian portion of D.C. was ignored in the city planning decisions because of the fact that Alexandria was already there. If you want more development south of the Potomac, have Alexandria either be much smaller in 1800 or simply not be there at all.

Or, if you really want the capital to include more of Virginia, have Washington decide that he "needs" Mount Vernon in the capital district and have *D.C. extend that far south, damn the Constitution full speed ahead!
 
Or, if you really want the capital to include more of Virginia, have Washington decide that he "needs" Mount Vernon in the capital district and have *D.C. extend that far south, damn the Constitution full speed ahead!
In that case, he'd simply decide to put it there - Congress said it needed to be on the Potomac and left everything else up to President Washington.


OTL, Retrocession was tied up with slavery. Alexandria was a major slave trading center, and the slavers feared Congress would eventually ban the slave trade in DC, so they wanted to be back under the protection of the Virginian legislature. (Eventually, Congress did as part of the Compromise of 1850.) So, you could probably prevent retrocession by settling that matter earlier one way or another - either there're enough abolitionists in Congress to ban the slave trade already or prevent retrocession, or there're so few that the slave merchants aren't afraid of them.

Alternatively, perhaps a different end to the Civil War could leave Congress thinking they need to keep Alexandria as a buffer against a possibly-again-hostile Virginia?
 
I believe there's a proposal to secede much of the populated area of DC to Maryland today, as a solution to the "no taxation without representation" issue the territory faces. It would leave just the Mall and the main political institutions inside the rump. Republicans understandably prefer it to the DC-statehood push.
 
Is it physically possible to have the C&O canal built on the Virginia side of the Potomac? Alexandria's harbor was pretty important until Georgetown overtook it, so if it continues to be the focus of the Potomac River trade and transport, it'll be harder to give away.
 
I believe there's a proposal to secede much of the populated area of DC to Maryland today, as a solution to the "no taxation without representation" issue the territory faces. It would leave just the Mall and the main political institutions inside the rump. Republicans understandably prefer it to the DC-statehood push.

I thought Republicans were against that to because they somehow believe that the Constitution "demands" that the federal district not just be the mall.*



*Republican-to-English Translation: They don't want more Black people voting Democrat.
 

JJohnson

Banned
I was thinking something like having embassies forcibly on the opposite side of the Potomac by law in the 1790s or something, forcing economic development with all the foreigners, possibly influencing cuisine, culture, and even causing somewhat of a night-life on that side of the river, where Senators, Representatives, and Presidents travel over to see shows and plays there. If all else remains the same, except for the increased cross-river economy tying the two parts closer together, maybe Ford's Theater won't play into history this time around.

Or perhaps having some monuments in the early 19th century placed on the opposite side of the Potomac, tying it historically to Washington County, so that by the 1840s, Alexandria county doesn't feel neglected in comparison to Washington County.
 
I thought Republicans were against that to because they somehow believe that the Constitution "demands" that the federal district not just be the mall.*



*Republican-to-English Translation: They don't want more Black people voting Democrat.
They prefer the black people get one more Democratic Congressperson and make statewide Maryland races even more Democratic over the inhabitants of DC getting two senators and a congressperson.
 
I was thinking something like having embassies forcibly on the opposite side of the Potomac by law in the 1790s or something, forcing economic development with all the foreigners
Why in the world would they try something like that? Around 1799, it was Washington City that needed economic development; it was essentially woods, swamp, and boardinghouses for Congressmen and journalists. Plus, tying Alexandria's economy to Washington City probably wouldn't affect retrocession, since having a state line in the way wouldn't really change things... unless it makes the slave traders pick somewhere else to set up shop? But if you go that way, you'll need a more plausible beginning.
 
Would promising to invest a proportionate amount into the economy of Alexandria in exchange for dropping the slave trade as OTL have worked to keep DC intact?
 
Would promising to invest a proportionate amount into the economy of Alexandria in exchange for dropping the slave trade as OTL have worked to keep DC intact?
Considering that the South ideologically opposed internal improvements, and that Congress had done nothing to promote the economy of Washington City, and that half of everyone was already up in arms about slavery... no.
 
Considering that the South ideologically opposed internal improvements, and that Congress had done nothing to promote the economy of Washington City, and that half of everyone was already up in arms about slavery... no.

Okay, would ACTUALLY investing a proportionate amount into the economy of Alexandria in exchange for dropping the slave trade as OTL have worked to keep DC intact? :rolleyes:
 
Okay, would ACTUALLY investing a proportionate amount into the economy of Alexandria in exchange for dropping the slave trade as OTL have worked to keep DC intact? :rolleyes:
Hmm... given how up-in-arms they were about slavery, I think any deal would have to convince the average South Carolinian planter that slavery isn't disadvantaged on net. Perhaps the best way would have been to pay for the slave traders to relocate across the state line? Even so, you still have it branded with odium, as Lincoln or Rhett would say. Not to mention that I don't think such a deal would have a snowball's chance in Florida of passing...

Otherwise, what sort of economic investment are you suggesting? Does anyone have any examples of early-1800's government-sponsored economic investment that might give us hints?
 
Otherwise, what sort of economic investment are you suggesting? Does anyone have any examples of early-1800's government-sponsored economic investment that might give us hints?

I'm not quite sure. I'd imagine something that takes advantage of its location on the water. Shipbuilding, perhaps? For both the Navy and private companies?
 
I'm not quite sure. I'd imagine something that takes advantage of its location on the water. Shipbuilding, perhaps? For both the Navy and private companies?
Hmm, there's already a Washington Navy Yard; I'm not sure whether building another so close would be considered a good or bad thing...
 
Top