Lincoln's Arrangement

[Omar414]

Hi! I'm new to AlternateHistory.com, but not new to alternate history.

I recently heard that shortly before he wrote the Emancipation Proclamation, Lincoln invited African American leaders to the White House and urged them to encourage the soon-to-be freed slaves to relocate away from the United States. Of course, they were offended and rejected the idea.

My question is: what if Lincoln and the African American leaders agreed to encourage the freed communities, not to relocate, but to migrate away from the South and to the developing Territories in the West (Colorado, Dakota, Washington perhaps)? Now I know that this might create tension with the White communities in the Territories, and even perhaps the Indigenous communities. But would the great distances found in the West have made it easier for all the communities in question to live together?

And how might this have changed the development of the West? And for that matter, the South? And even the North, now that the Great Migration has happened seventy years ahead of time and in a different direction?

 

[cerebropetrologist]

I recently heard that shortly before he wrote the Emancipation Proclamation, Lincoln invited African American leaders to the White House and urged them to encourage the soon-to-be freed slaves to relocate away from the United States. Of course, they were offended and rejected the idea.

It still made it into the Emancipation Proclamation, though: 'the effort to colonize persons of African descent, with their consent, upon this continent, or elsewhere, with the previously obtained consent of the Governments existing there, will be continued.'

would the great distances found in the West have made it easier for all the communities in question to live together?

Probably not: there weren't many black people in Oregon in 1857, but the constitutional provision to ban them from settling in the state still passed by 8,640 to 1,081. Colorado wasn't so bad: it banned miscegenation in 1864 and banned black people from voting in 1865, but it didn't ban them from settling. Of some of the other territories, Nevada disfranchised black people, as did Idaho, Dakota and Montana. Even after the passage of a 1867 law specifically abolishing these provisions, it was still an uphill battle: in the same year, one black citizen of Montana was reportedly lynched for trying to vote.

When you consider how small the white populations in the territories were at this stage and how many freed slaves there were to move, it seems unlikely that they would have been prepared to accept any substantial movement. Unfortunately, there seems to have been a general perception that these territories were for white people to settle in. It was fine to give black communities more rights in the South, where they already were, but changing the face of the nation in any real way proved to be too much to accept. And that's not even getting into the question of where the money comes from to pay for these moves.

EDIT: So rather than a flat 'this wouldn't happen,' it's probably best to say that if it does happen, the numbers are going to be small and the people being resettled are going to have an unpleasant time- probably up to and including the formation of something not unlike the Klan in the Territories.

 

[mrmandias]

the most likely place for this is Oklahoma.

 

[Omar414]

the most likely place for this is Oklahoma.

Yes. Black Wall Street was located in Tulsa, after all.

 

[Magnum]

Yes. Black Wall Street was located in Tulsa, after all.

Could Oklahoma maybe get to a majority-black population, given enough movement ?

 

[Dave Howery]

they didn't really need to go all the way out to the west... there were quite a few places in the south that were either thinly settled or completely unsettled. Is the goal here to get the black population relocated away from the southern white population? They wouldn't have to go all that far to do it.
The only problem with any of this is that it takes money and equipment to go settle/farm brand new lands, and the black population after the ACW didn't have either. Clearing timbered lands for farms/plowing virgin prairie is hard work and takes mules/oxen, tools, plows, etc. Unless they can get all that, moving is going to be pretty hard...

 

[Omar414]

they didn't really need to go all the way out to the west... there were quite a few places in the south that were either thinly settled or completely unsettled. Is the goal here to get the black population relocated away from the southern white population? They wouldn't have to go all that far to do it.
The only problem with any of this is that it takes money and equipment to go settle/farm brand new lands, and the black population after the ACW didn't have either. Clearing timbered lands for farms/plowing virgin prairie is hard work and takes mules/oxen, tools, plows, etc. Unless they can get all that, moving is going to be pretty hard...

What if somehow Congress and/or the President approved it? Unfortunately that moves the narrative away from self-determination, but what if it were somewhat of a fulfillment of "forty acres and a mule". Of course, it is difficult seeing Congress doing this. And of course there are further advances on the land rights of Native Americans. I guess there are a lot of issues with the plausibility of this, but isn't that usually the case with AH?