Status
Not open for further replies.
I wonder if the greater acceptance of immigrants by the Blaine administration, as well as the repressive policies of the Ottomans, will lead to a greater Orthodox population in the US. Maybe we could see a Greek, Serbian, or Bulgarian Senator or even President in the distant future?

100%! A more Orthodox/Mideast Christian mix of population in the US - while losing the uniformly Protestant South - will make for a much more religiously diverse Union. The Catholic population will be much more of a bloc, too.

(Not sure on the Senator or President part, but possibly)
 
The Pineapple Kingdom: Hawaii in the 19th Century
"...though the Hawaiians cared little for such matters at this point, the rivalries in Samoa turning "hot" was of keen interest to the British - interest driven largely from the fact that the growing American and German presences in the Pacific were tied inexorably to Samoa, with each state backing a rival faction to earn influence (and a potential coaling station/captive market and colony, respectively) while the British remained neutral. The Royal Navy mobilized one cruiser out of Pearl Harbour to be dispatched as soon as word arrived of the fighting - American naval vessels were refueling in Hawaii within a month, and the HMS Calypso spotted German cruisers approaching the islands soon thereafter. The Samoan Crisis had begun..."

- The Pineapple Kingdom: Hawaii in the 19th Century
 
The Cornerstone: John Hay and the Foundation of American Global Prestige
"...fundamental to Hay's political evolution in the gauntlets to come was the Strikeout Summer of 1886, when his concerns turned to domestic matters for the first time. Though an active Secretary of State central to Washington's social scene, chairing Cabinet meetings and helping shape Blaine's court appointments much more than any of his three Attorneys General did, Hay was disinterested in the vagaries of civil service reform, educational investment or prosecutions of bigamy or Native clearances [1]. Beyond the New Navy and pushing for another Pan-American Conference to cool passions after the Chilean-American War, Hay had found himself bored outside of his small circle of friends, still reeling from the suicide of Clover Adams. He was outraged of the caricatures of him and Blaine in anti-Liberal press as "King James," a long-nosed tyrant in hoc to the banks [2], and of him as a diminutive, effete "Prince John," often portrayed as sitting on Blaine's knee. Accusations of promiscuity within his social circle bubbled up, including a rumor that Hay and Walt Whitman were involved in a homosexual tryst that involved Clara to some extent. With the explosive rioting and mass action around the United States at the instigation of the Knights of Labor, and the federal armed response to it, Hay was once again caricatured by the working class; rather than political attacks by Democrats mocking him, now he was reviled as a supine servant of the industrialists, Prince John taking on a new meaning. Hay took the time to anonymously compose a book called "The Bread-Winner" [3] excoriating the "radical laborist," and in a speech to the New York Liberal Club he described the strikers as seditionists, stating, "We failed to properly deal with sedition under Lincoln; I fear that we may fail to properly deal with it now too under Blaine."

Such a public break between the President and the man widely viewed as the favorite to succeed him in 1888 - beyond the two-term custom established by George Washington, Blaine was in perpetually poor health and was in the early stages of Bright's disease - shocked Washington. Blaine himself took the critique well, himself frustrated by the Strikeout Summer and the agitations of the labor movement; the speech did not harm their friendship, but it did make many Liberal state bosses wince, to the point that they wondered if Hay was becoming too controversial a figure to nominate in '88 where previously he had been far and away the front-runner. The midterms were rapidly approaching; Hay, with Blaine absent from public appearances due to a spell of particularly ill health that autumn, was sent out to rally the troops. Liberals flocked to him where he went, but on two occasions he had to dodge tomatoes thrown at him by opponents, further deepening Hay's increasing melancholy [4]..."

- The Cornerstone: John Hay and the Foundation of American Global Prestige


[1] This kind of ugly stuff is still ongoing of course.
[2] Gee I wonder what the long nose represents
[3] 100% true to OTL, though he wrote it a few years earlier, mostly because of strikes that damaged his personal business interests
[4] He was a man prone to spells of severe depression and self-doubt IOTL
 
Last edited:
The Eaglet Takes Flight: The Reign of Napoleon IV 1874-1905
"...the birth of Alphonse Napoleon Charles Louis-Eugene Bonaparte, hereafter known as the Prince Imperial, was perhaps the happiest day in the Emperor's life after his wedding day. Already wearing fatherhood - and the more rounded face of a man in his thirties - like a glove, now he had a son and heir to present to the world and to carry forth his legacy. The future Napoleon V was born prematurely but healthy, and though his mother had suffered through a hideously difficult pregnancy in which she feared losing her own life and the baby's more than once, her delivery was brief and easy. Celebrations abounded across the Empire, on the heels of the 30th birthday of the beloved sovereign. Only in the poor working class arrondissements of Paris was there much grumbling about such expense once more laid out, for the third time in a year, at the behest of the ruling class.

Shortly after the Prince Imperial's birth, Napoleon and Marie agreed by mutual consent that they would try for no more children, lest it challenge her frail body too much..."

- The Eaglet Takes Flight: The Reign of Napoleon IV 1874-1905
 
The Wolverine in the White House: The Presidency of George Armstrong Custer at 100
"...it also struck Custer as hugely ironic that the vast majority of his income stemmed not from the practice of law or investments, like most of his Senate colleagues, but from his writing royalties. Forgotten in the present is what a talented, witty and straightforward talent Custer was with a pen in his hand; his "My Life at War" and "My Life on the Plains" were bestsellers in the 1870s when compiled into books from magazine article form. Media savvy, Custer was often asked to write editorials on all manner of matters, generally ones related to the Senate, which turned many of his cliquish colleagues against him. Like so many things that would define the two men over the next decade, Custer's populist prose clashed with the highbrow styles of Secretary of State Hay; that the two men hated one another not just politically but personally trickled down even to their narrative voices.

In his correspondences to Libby that spring [1], as Congress voted through a massive new Navy and what Custer regarded as absurd sums for new universities, ballooning the budget past a billion dollars for the first time in American history, he noted his dissatisfaction with the Senate, with his colleagues, and particularly with his seatmate from Michigan, Stout, who controlled all of the state's federal patronage with an iron grip and who feared Custer as a rival, rather than viewing him as a partner. He was perhaps the most famous Senator to the general public though, a war hero and celebrity for his media savvy and frequent interviews and writings; a clear future Presidential candidate due purely to his notoriety than any achievements in the staid body where a man used to command was but one of fifty-four. When he toured the country with veterans of the Indian Wars, he felt the thrill of being on campaign again, and his decision was simple - the Man from Monroe would return to Michigan, as governor.

Custer's Gamble, as the press called it, was perhaps not so much a gamble. Michigan leaned Democratic and Custer was a local hero; the Liberals failed to find a solid candidate, and the state legislature was narrowly Democratic but at no threat of losing the majority with Blaine's popularity declining across the country and farmers and timber workers, the two major economies of Michigan, struggling. George and Libby held campaign events on their front porch in Monroe or on horseback, together, in town squares; the devoted pair, so bound by their love despite their stubbornness and tempers, were as inseparable on political campaigns as they had been on campaign against the Indian in the West. Custer was elected Governor of Michigan in a landslide, and his relief at having an office more suited to his discipline, demands for respect for his men and preference for singular authority was palpable as his colleagues bid him farewell when the next Congress was sworn in..."

- The Wolverine in the White House: The Presidency of George Armstrong Custer at 100


[1] Fun fact about Custer; he and his wife clashed/argued a bunch because of their strong personalities but were extraordinarily devoted to each other, and their letters to each other were basically mostly just sexual double entendres. OTL!Libby Custer spent pretty much her entire widowhood defending George's legacy after he died at Little Bighorn (big part of her needing to defend his legacy was that despite being considered a cavalier hero by much of the public in the 19th century, even then there was substantial debate over how much of the Little Bighorn disaster was the fault of him and his hubris)
 
Democrats: "We lost a war, against Chile. And it's all this Administration's fault. Boooo!"

Liberals: "All right, all right. We are increasing the budget, we will have an even bigger and better Navy."

Democrats: "...Look at them. Spending a billion of dollars! And you the people will have to pay it with your taxes. Vote for us so that this never happens again!"

Liberals: "Oh for f- COME ON!"

Custer's populist prose clashed with the highbrow styles of Secretary of State Hay; that the two men hated one another not just politically but personally trickled down even to their narrative voices.
And possible future duels between Custer and Hay? That would be epic.
 
Democrats: "We lost a war, against Chile. And it's all this Administration's fault. Boooo!"

Liberals: "All right, all right. We are increasing the budget, we will have an even bigger and better Navy."

Democrats: "...Look at them. Spending a billion of dollars! And you the people will have to pay it with your taxes. Vote for us so that this never happens again!"

Liberals: "Oh for f- COME ON!"


And possible future duels between Custer and Hay? That would be epic.

Hehe!

Maybe not a LITERAL duel... ;)
 
Ireland Unfree
"...it was not just Parnell and Healy who were at loggerheads; so much of the Irish Question in London seemed adrift also because of the feuds amongst the Tories in Cabinet for now near two years. The matter of Ireland was not so much a question of policy; Northcote at Downing Street was after all the demagogue who had given the infamous "not a green blade of grass" speech on the floor of the Commons, and his younger upstart rivals were no friends of the Parnellites. But nevertheless, the constant fighting between the Old Guard who had helped trigger the Irish crisis under the evermore-hostile Cabinets of the 1870s and the new Fourth Party led by the boundlessly and nakedly ambitious Lord Churchill (though a member of the Commons, curiously) unmoored Tory policy everywhere but at the Foreign Office, where Salisbury kept the ship of state smoothly at sea, perhaps the only smooth sailing the five-year Tory government of the late 1880s would enjoy. Agitation was not just in Ireland; general strikes and actions roiled Britain, too.

Parnell's focus on action via Westminster - and to hear some patriots say it, his own vanity - had left him unprepared for Healy's Plan of Campaign. Many of his cannier supporters wanted a clearer marriage between the IPP and the growing boycott action on the estates, especially as Parnell's whipping for Land Reform had delivered nothing, in order to cut more radical elements off at the knees before Parnell's bloc was branded as ineffectual incrementalists. Michael Davitt re-emerged at this time as one of the Plan's most fervent evangelists and made one of the demands of some of the radicals the forced dissolution of the British Parliament via no-confidence, where the IPP held the balance of power and the Tories held one of the weakest minority governments in British history. It was to no avail - Parnell was sure of alliance with the Liberals if it could re-deliver them Cabinet, and his fears that Liberals would carry uncontroversial Tory measures in the face of a campaign by Irish nationalists to force elections were well-founded when Harcourt whipped his caucus and sustained a number of Tory motions that fall that drew Irish ire. Parnell, himself a hardened partisan of the Land War and tenancy battles, was discovering that there was indeed space between him and further extremes in dignified politics..."

- Ireland Unfree
 

Rivercat893

Banned
"...it was not just Parnell and Healy who were at loggerheads; so much of the Irish Question in London seemed adrift also because of the feuds amongst the Tories in Cabinet for now near two years. The matter of Ireland was not so much a question of policy; Northcote at Downing Street was after all the demagogue who had given the infamous "not a green blade of grass" speech on the floor of the Commons, and his younger upstart rivals were no friends of the Parnellites. But nevertheless, the constant fighting between the Old Guard who had helped trigger the Irish crisis under the evermore-hostile Cabinets of the 1870s and the new Fourth Party led by the boundlessly and nakedly ambitious Lord Churchill (though a member of the Commons, curiously) unmoored Tory policy everywhere but at the Foreign Office, where Salisbury kept the ship of state smoothly at sea, perhaps the only smooth sailing the five-year Tory government of the late 1880s would enjoy. Agitation was not just in Ireland; general strikes and actions roiled Britain, too.

Parnell's focus on action via Westminster - and to hear some patriots say it, his own vanity - had left him unprepared for Healy's Plan of Campaign. Many of his cannier supporters wanted a clearer marriage between the IPP and the growing boycott action on the estates, especially as Parnell's whipping for Land Reform had delivered nothing, in order to cut more radical elements off at the knees before Parnell's bloc was branded as ineffectual incrementalists. Michael Davitt re-emerged at this time as one of the Plan's most fervent evangelists and made one of the demands of some of the radicals the forced dissolution of the British Parliament via no-confidence, where the IPP held the balance of power and the Tories held one of the weakest minority governments in British history. It was to no avail - Parnell was sure of alliance with the Liberals if it could re-deliver them Cabinet, and his fears that Liberals would carry uncontroversial Tory measures in the face of a campaign by Irish nationalists to force elections were well-founded when Harcourt whipped his caucus and sustained a number of Tory motions that fall that drew Irish ire. Parnell, himself a hardened partisan of the Land War and tenancy battles, was discovering that there was indeed space between him and further extremes in dignified politics..."

- Ireland Unfree
Ireland might as well lead a revolt against Britain especially in TTL's World War I.
 
Maybe not a LITERAL duel...
Well, I was thinking more about a Custer vs Hay debate, or each one constantly insulting the other in the newspapers. But a fight with guns and/or swords would be awesome too!

Or maybe they get to decide who's the next POTUS... with a rap battle. Both of them are good writers, right?

[4] He [Hay] was a man prone to spells of severe depression and self-doubt IOTL
For some reason, now I'm picturing Custer trying to cheer him up during one of those spells.

"Come one! I won't fight against a broken man. I need you to be the best 'you' you could possibly be! Right before I beat you, of course."

EDIT - Ninja'd by the author! It's always funny, reading some totally-not-biased "Ireland Unfree".
 
Last edited:
1886 United States elections results
1886 Senate results

Despite the Liberal loss of the House, a status quo election for the most part in the Senate; some older Senators retired, only to be replaced by members of their own party. The first signal of backlash to Blainism occurs not in the Midwest, like it did in the House, but in the Northeast; one of the last Liberal western Senators loses in New Mexico to be replaced by Congressman Antonio Joseph; in New Jersey and New York, incumbent Senators are turfed out and replaced by Democrats as those legislatures flip in the lead-in to the elections. Liberals do consolidate their Ohio gains where they narrowly hold the legislature, taking some losses there but keeping a fragile majority, and elevate Benjamin Butterworth over George Hoadly.

CA: George Hearst (Democrat) Re-Elected
CT: Joseph Roswell Hawley (Liberal) Re-Elected
DE: Thomas F. Bayard (Democrat) Re-Elected
IN: Joseph E. McDonald (Democrat) Retired; David Turpie (Democrat) ELECTED
ME: Eugene Hale (Liberal) Re-Elected
MD: William Pinkney Whyte (Democrat) Re-Elected
MA: Henry Dawes (Liberal) Re-Elected
MI: George A. Custer (Democrat) Retired; William C. Maybury (Democrat) ELECTED
MN: Samuel J. R. McMillan (Liberal) Retired; Cushman Davis (Liberal) ELECTED
MO: Francis Cockrell (Democrat) Re-Elected
NE: Charles Van Wyck (Liberal) Re-Elected
NV: James Graham Fair (Democrat) Re-Elected
NJ: William Joyce Sewell (Liberal) DEFEATED; William McAdoo ELECTED (D+1)
NM: William Pile (Liberal) DEFEATED; Antonio Joseph (Democrat) ELECTED (D+1)
NY: Richard Crowley (Liberal) DEFEATED; Perry Belmont ELECTED [1] (D+1)
OH: George Hoadly (Democrat) DEFEATED; Benjamin Butterworth (Liberal) ELECTED (L+1)
PA: James I. Mitchell (Liberal) Re-Elected
RI: William Sprague (Liberal) Re-Elected
VT: Redfield Proctor (Liberal) Re-Elected
WV: Joseph Sprigg (Democrat) Re-Elected
WI: Philetus Sawyer (Liberal) Re-Elected

1886 House results

Liberals lose 34 seats in the House, all of them to Democrats, while Democrats shed three more urban/factory town House seats to United Labor. The Liberal House losses are primarily west of the Mississippi; after 1886, they hold zero House seats in California or Missouri. Some losses are felt in the industrial Midwest and Northeast as well, but not nearly to the same extent. Democrats only enjoy a majority of one seat, though, meaning any vacancy would make them a plurality House; United Labor attempts to take advantage of this by zeroing in on the divides within the Democratic caucus to act as kingmakers.

50th United States Congress

Senate: 31L-23D

President of the Senate: John A. Logan (L)
Senate President pro tempore: Aaron Cragin (L-NH)
Chairman of the Senate Liberal Conference: Henry B. Anthony (L-RI)
Chairman of the Senate Democratic Conference: Daniel Voorhees (D-IN)

California
1. George Hearst (D) (1881-)
3. William Rosecrans (D) (1885-)

Colorado

2. Henry M. Teller (L) (1876-)
3. Thomas M. Bowen (L) (1885-)

Connecticut
1. Joseph R. Hawley (L) (1881-)
3. Orville Platt (L) (1879-)

Delaware
1. Thomas Bayard (D) (1869-)
2. Eli Saulsbury (D) (1871-)

Illinois
2. Shelby Moore Collum (L) (1881-)
3. Richard J. Oglesby (L) (1873-)

Indiana
1. David Turpie (D) (1887-)
3. Daniel Voorhees (D) (1873-)

Iowa
2. Samuel Kirkwood (L) (1877-)
3. William Allison (L) (1873-)

Kansas
2. John St. John (L) (1883-)
3. John Ingalls (L) (1873-)

Maine
1. Eugene Hale (L) (1881-)
2. William P. Frye (L) (1881-) [7]

Maryland
1. William Pinkney Whyte (D) (1869-)
3. Ephraim Wilson (D) (1885-)

Massachusetts
1. Henry Dawes (L) (1875-)
2. George Frisbie Hoar (L) (1877-)

Michigan
1. William C. Maybury (D) (1887-)
2. Byron G. Stout (D) (1865-)

Minnesota
1. Cushman Davis (L) (1887-)
2. Dwight Sabin (L) (1883-)

Missouri
1. Francis Cockrell (D) (1875-)
3. David H. Armstrong (D) (1877-)

Nebraska
1. Charles Van Wyck (L) (1881-)
2. Charles Manderson (L) (1883-)

Nevada
1. James Graham Fair (D) (1881-)
3. John P. Jones (D) (1873-)

New Hampshire
2. Aaron Cragin (L) (1865-)
3. Henry Blair (L) (1873-)

New Jersey
1. William McAdoo (D) [2] (1887-)
2. John R. McPherson (D) (1871-)

New Mexico

1. Antonio Joseph (D) (1887-)
2. Samuel Beach Axtell (D) (1875-)

New York
1. Perry Belmont (D) (1887-)
3. Warner Miller (L) (1885-)

Ohio
1. Benjamin Butterworth (L) (1887-)
3. James A. Garfield (L) (1885-)

Oregon
2. La Fayette Grover (D) (1871-)
3. James H. Slater (D) (1879-)

Pennsylvania
1. John I. Mitchell (L) (1881-)
3. J. Donald Cameron (L) (1879-)

Rhode Island
1. William Sprague (L) (1863-)
2. Henry B. Anthony (L) (1859-)

Vermont
1. Redfield Procter (L) (1881-)
3. Justin Smith Morrill (L) (1867-)

West Virginia
1. Joseph Sprigg (D) (1869-)
2. John E. Kenna (D) (1883-)

Wisconsin
1. Philetus Sawyer (L) (1881-)
3. Thaddeus Pound (L) (1881-)

House: 163D-149L-17UL

Speaker of the House: Levi Lamborn (D-OH) [3]
Liberal Caucus Chair (Minority Leader): Thomas Brackett Reed (L-ME) [4]

[1] Perry Belmont was famous IOTL for cross-examining Blaine over his ties to a consortium of guano investors in Peru; figured he'd be the kind of man to pop up in a TL where Blaine and Hay's dealings in South America warrant more scrutiny
[2] No not THAT William McAdoo; this one was born in Ireland and immigrated with his parents.
[3] Obscure figure I'll get into in the next update; if you've never heard of him, its because he was a horticulturalist who was defeated in William McKinley's first run for Congress in 1874. IOTL, McKinley lost that challenge and never took a bite at the apple again; he and his wife are living peaceful and happy lives in Canton, Ohio, where he practices law
[4] My justification here is largely that Reed was in the social circle that included Hay, Adams, Henry Cabot Lodge, etc, and being from the same state as Blaine - and a protege of him - would power his bid for power even moreso than OTL. The old line New England Yankees continue their dominance!
 
Well, I was thinking more about a Custer vs Hay debate, or each one constantly insulting the other in the newspapers. But a fight with guns and/or swords would be awesome too!

Or maybe they get to decide who's the next POTUS... with a rap battle. Both of them are good writers, right?


For some reason, now I'm picturing Custer trying to cheer him up during one of those spells.

"Come one! I won't fight against a broken man. I need you to be the best 'you' you could possibly be! Right before I beat you, of course."

EDIT - Ninja'd by the author! It's always funny, reading some totally-not-biased "Ireland Unfree".

TOTALLY unbiased textbook
 
Brothers in Arms: Trade Unionism in the United States
"...though the mass action of 1886 was unpopular enough to lead to moderate laborists to form the AFL that winter, it did not harm the labor movement in many cities; quite the opposite. United Labor succeeded in winning mayoralties in several smaller industrial towns in Ohio and Pennsylvania, and had its greatest coup in the three-way race for New York City, where by the barest of margins Henry George squeaked into office over the Tammany candidate Peter F. Meyer and Liberal congressman Abram Stevens Hewitt. That the largest city in the country, and the home of its capitalist class, had elected a socialist-adjacent progressive reformer. More than any other election, 1886's mayoral race would mark one of the pivot points from the Gilded Age to the Progressive Era; it can even be seen as the candle being lit in the dark. Their successes on the street did not translate to the ballot box, and despite picking up two more seats in New York and a third in Ohio, United Labor soon included as one of its planks the secret ballot, believing that social pressure caused too many working men to conform to the "old machines of capital." The watershed and upset election of George spurred on both the more radical Knights, due to George's friendship with Powderly, and buffeted calls for reform across the political system, even amongst the bourgeoise Liberals. As the Democrats had a narrow majority of one seat in the House after the 1886 midterm, and caucus dissatisfaction was high with their leader Samuel Randall, United Labor took its first major political victory by declaring it would support a Democratic speaker candidate on the floor other than Randall. United Labor at this point was thoroughly Georgist and more aligned with the free trade philosophy of the Liberals, and opposed to the small government ethos of Democrats; to this point, an obscure congressman from Ohio named Levi Lamborn who was generally a moderate free trader and a sympathizer of organized labor, but who had caused nobody any offense and was good friends with George Custer, viewed as the likeliest candidate for the Presidency in two years, was elevated out of political anonymity to the Speakership with all seventeen Democratic votes after a bizarre election on the House floor when Congress convened that March..."

- Brothers in Arms: Trade Unionism in the United States
 
Last edited:
Titan: The Life and Presidency of James G. Blaine
"...Blaine elected to convalesce in New Mexico for the winter rather than Augusta after the disappointing election results were announced. The Democrats had the House, and a laborist was Mayor of New York; the times were indeed very different than they had been just two years ago when the Blaine Train had run roughshod over all opposition in its path. His poor cough and weight loss left him flummoxed and his colleagues concerned; nevertheless, he and Harriet made the trek west by train, stopping in Chicago to dine with former President Lincoln and to see off Vice President Logan, who just as they were leaving complained of stiffness and pain in his legs.

Blaine had not been able to enjoy his time in Santa Fe very long before he received an urgent telegram from Hay in Washington; Vice President Logan had died two days after Christmas, having swelled up terribly and barely conscious for days. The ailment was unknown, but fatal. Though Blaine and Logan were never close they had enjoyed a courteous working relationship and Blaine admired Logan's gusto in presiding over the Senate and his talent as an orator on the campaign trail. He would travel thereafter to Chicago, cutting his relaxation in New Mexico short, for Logan's funeral along with much of Congressional leadership and several Justices of the Supreme Court, lamenting yet another grim occurrence in what he had expected to be a much more illustrious second term [1]..."

- Titan: The Life and Presidency of James G. Blaine


[1] Though Jim is being a bit hard on himself here; he's gotten civil service reform, education funding, an expanded Navy, three Supreme Court appointments, a party dominant east of the Mississippi besides the former slave states, trade agreements, diplomatic successes in the hemisphere and abroad
 
And that's it for 1886! I've got 1887 mostly mapped out but a few pieces may be missing here and there, as we aim to close out the 1880s (and Part IV of Cinco de Mayo, which will have as its last update the final chapter covering 1889)
 
The Lion of Edinburgh: Prince Arthur, the Empire and the Twilight of the Victorian Age
"...Arthur as always admired his mother's ability to guide politics without intervening directly, perhaps most notably when the Cabinet was thrown into sudden crisis by the unexpected death of Northcote on January 12, 1887. The Prime Minister and Chancellor died in his sleep at 10 Downing Street, shocking Britain, though he was 68 and long in fragile health. Immediately, the minority Tory government was reeling over the question of who was next to lead the Cabinet; to many, Lord Salisbury from the Foreign Office seemed the ideal choice. He was a statesman held in high regard, already the longest-serving Foreign Secretary in British history (a record as of yet unbroken, with his streak extending to fifteen years by the time he relinquished the office) and the Conservative leader in the House of Lords for nearly a decade, since Carnarvon's retirement from active politics. In Salisbury, the Queen seemed to have the clearest candidate to lead a government in decades. Arthur was thus surprised when his mother expressed skepticism of inviting Salisbury to form a government, though he quickly understood her reasoning.

For being cloistered within her palaces and contemptuous of the day's leading Liberals, Victoria was astute in understanding public opinion and well aware that appointing a member of the Lords to head the Cabinet would be thoroughly unpopular not just with the public at large but even within the increasingly Commons-driven Conservative Party; Victoria was perfectly suited to appoint a member of the aristocracy, but even she could read the tea leaves on the small-l liberal currents bubbling up in her country as she neared the end of her life. In the year of her Golden Jubilee, Victoria decided to instead appoint a man groomed by Northcote as his protege - William Henry Smith, a wealthy publisher and financier who hailed from the Tory old guard but who was still responsible to the public (though he represented perhaps one of the safest Conservative constituencies in London). Smith kissed hands on January 17th, after Northcote's funeral had been held, his appointment a genuine shock to the public and the establishment. Even Arthur was surprised, rather expecting a man in the vein of RA Cross to take the ring instead. Smith elected to pursue a thoroughly "Northcotian" Cabinet; his one change was that he took no ministerial portfolio for himself, taking the view of himself as a managerial type for the Cabinet, much like at his own publishing house, a first among equals rather than the more consolidated top-down Ministries of his four predecessors at Downing Street. To replace Northcote at the Exchequer was Michael Hicks Beach, to many suggesting that it was Beach who held the track to one day lead the Tories in the Commons. Smith's only other major change was to appoint the former Prime Minister Earl of Derby's younger son, Lord Stanley, to be governor-general of Canada; it was seen as a particular snub at the current Earl of Derby, Edward Stanley, who had been a Tory Prime Minister as well and now sat on the crossbench in the Lords with the Liberals due to disputes with Salisbury and others.

The little-changed Cabinet satisfied most, including most Liberals who strongly disliked Salisbury's reputation for aristocratic autocracy and inflexibility. The one figure whom it did not was Lord Randolph Churchill, who had expected to be rewarded for his taking of Burma while at the Colonial Office and for his development of the National Union. To be undercut by Smith, who had hardly made much of an illustrious figure either at Dublin Castle or at the War Office, outraged the ever ambitious Churchill, who at minimum had assumed he would receive the Exchequer, and who despite anticipating that Salisbury or Cross would lead the Cabinet had held out an outside, thin hope that he could be headed to Number 10. Wounded and dismayed, Churchill's snub would be the beginning of the turning point in his career's trajectory..."

- The Lion of Edinburgh: Prince Arthur, the Empire and the Twilight of the Victorian Age
 

Rivercat893

Banned
And that's it for 1886! I've got 1887 mostly mapped out but a few pieces may be missing here and there, as we aim to close out the 1880s (and Part IV of Cinco de Mayo, which will have as its last update the final chapter covering 1889)
Considering what we've seen throughout this timeline, I hope you can do a sequel to the original Cinco De Mayo covering the 1890s and the early to mid 20th century.
 
Considering what we've seen throughout this timeline, I hope you can do a sequel to the original Cinco De Mayo covering the 1890s and the early to mid 20th century.

What's the general consensus on how long a thread should run before a new one gets started? I've thought it might not be the worst idea to make this thread a five-parter (Part V will cover 1890-1899 give or take) and then start a "Cinco de Mayo Vol. II" with Part VI to kick off the 20th century. After covering the POD and then the mid-1860s wars, each Part has roughly covered a decade (Part III: The Age of Questions ran from 1868-1878, Part IV: The Liberal Ascendancy is currently set to run to 1889, and then Part V, etc.)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top