Looks like the British took two black eyes for Oregon and Crimea. Wait till India blows up.
Lone Star Republic
- Thread starter Kaiser Chris
- Start date
Took me a little longer than normal, but great update, and congrats on getting nominated for a Turtledove. Here's hoping you win.
*mutters something about trying to find a way to use this idea*
That wouldn't be pretty, but I'm sure during the coming Great War there will be talks in the allied capitols about trying to get India to rebel. Assuming it hasn't already of course.
Chapter 59 The Treaty of Coopenhagen
Chapter 59 The Treaty of Copenhagen
"Generation after generation, the noble swine of England have used the common men of Britannia as little more than mindless slaves by launching war after war across the seas for pointless conquests and colonial ventures. While our brave brothers have died gruesome deaths on the battlefield for the sake of the parasite that we call the monarchy, the nobles lounge in their mansions and castles, smoking cigars and drinking brandy while moving the British Army as mere pawns for their sick game of imperialist oppression. Serving as a man of the Royal Army taught me that the true righteous of Britannia are not the fat aristocrats who wave their birthright in the face of labor, but the brave few who put on a uniform and fight for the security and prosperity of our nation. One need to only look at the Crimean War, an war fought for the interests of barbaric Turks so that the fat whore Victoria could get rich off the resources of the middle east. Thousands of Britannians died on a bloody Russian peninsula several hundred miles away from home and for what? So that we could save a dying corpse that was the very bane of Christianity? Just like how tens of thousands of our men died for the Turk in the Great War, when they were killing Armenians by the droves?! The Only reason we lost the Crimean War anyways was because of the stupidity and arrogance of the noble officers who ordered the light brigade to charge into battle only rack up bodies and serve as target practice for the Russian. No more will our men die overseas for the sake of monarchy. Never again!"- Our Struggle: The Oppression of Fair Britannia by Oliver Mosley 1919
"While my father was a good man who raised me as best as he could and only wanted to do right for Russia, a great ruler he was not. Two wars we've gotten ourselves in the last decade with very little to show for it. While many consider Crimea to be a victory, it is only a matter of time before the consequences come to meet us fully and we are met with the widespread of revolutions in our empire. Nationalities who want their own self-rule, peasants that want bread and peace, or just greedy aristocrats who want to seize the Kremlin for themselves to protect their arcane rights. If Russia is to survive the next century then we will need to reform. I will see that the Romanov Dynasty gets it done."- Tsar Alexander II 1855
"So your telling me Stephen, that Crimea is just some Russian peninsula in the Black Sea that the Ruskis use for trade and the home of their Navy? Well why the hell are the British and Turks launching an invasion their if the war is supposed to be fought over Christians in the Danube, or whatever the hell the reason is? Seriously, Europeans are weird."- President Davy Crockett 1854
When the delegates began peace talks in the neutral country of Denmark on March 30th, 1855, the peace talks soon became dragged out into what could be called an intense diplomatic poker game. The reason it has been called that is due to the multiple bluffs and strategic plays by each diplomat in regards to the negotiations. While it may have appeared that Russia obtained the upper edge with the victories in Crimea and their virtual occupation of the Danube, their economy was on the verge of a depression with the cease of trade and many within the Winter Palace feared the possibility of a coup against the Tsar or the peasants and non-Russian nationalities revolting if the war dragged on. In addition Russia needed time to rebuild their Navy after its virtual destruction in the Black Sea, and to prepare for a possible invasion of Germany or Hungary if they decided for a ripe opportunity in expansion while Russia focused its attention in the middle east. For Britain it was a matter of securing its assets, limiting Russian gains, and looking towards the future in the next phase of the Great Game. What the British diplomats tried to convene towards Russia was that the Royal Navy was still in its ultimate state and that they could continue the trade blockade for years while possible German intervention may be on the horizon, with the continued fact that Silistria and Vidin had not fallen. While the homefront was a bit of a mess with the numerous peace protests and the potential for a second corn riots, it did not mean that the British Empire would succumb so low as to surrender in entirety to the Russians. They had already faced one deeply scarring humiliation when it came to Oregon, it would not happen with Russia of all nations. No matter which side got the better deal it was quite clear that the Ottomans would emerge the losers of this fight. Tens of thousands of Ottoman soldiers had died in the battle and they had lost virtually all naval presence in the Black Sea. Romania was forever beyond its grasp and the potential for other nationalities to rise up began. The only good part that the Ottomans got out of the peace at all was the fact that Anatolia had not been breached. Now Sultan Abulmecid needed to face the music and try and save as much of his empire at the moment so that they could rise back up in the future. With various political intrigues, backdoor deals, third party involvement, and ongoing domestic developments, it took a total of two months for the process to be done. At the end of it the Treaty of Copenhagen was signed on June 6th. All sides having been able to reach some form of compromise and peace being secured, for now.
The terms of the Treaty of Copenhagen are as follows:
Divisions of Greater Romania after the Treaty of Copenhagen. Romania (Blue) Russia (Red) Hungary (Green) Ottomans (Orange)
Inside Russia there were numerous celebrations across the empire over the apparent glorious victory that they had managed to achieve against the might of the British Empire. While the casualties had been vast and many Russian soldiers would not be able to return home, the objectives had been achieved and Romania was now an quasi-independent state under Russian rule, a victory for Russia and the cause of Slavic freedom all over Europe. The first measure to deal with was the running of the now protectorate of Romania by the Russians. The position of Prince of Romania would be retained in the Romanov family when the title was passed on to Nicholas Nikolaevich, Grand Duke of Russia and second younger brother to the new Tsar. While this was seen as a slight to the the second oldest brother Konstantin, the truth was that Konstantin was needed within Russia so that he could help his liberal minded brother implement new reforms that the Tsar planned in the coming years, especially since the heir Alexander was starting to develop reactionary views. Romania over the years began to become slowly integrated into Russia though it was given a high amount of autonomy compared to Poland and was even able to conduct its own foreign affairs with supervision from St. Petersburg. The full reason for the prevention of a total annexation into Russia being the hopeful action that more territory could be taken from Hungary or the Ottomans in a future war, even though Copenhagen forbid it for the time at least. Romania was also necessary to act as an independent satellite so that in any future invasions or war with the Ottoman Empire, Romania could take the brunt of the fighting and Ukraine emerge unscathed. Over the next two decades Romania would begin to prosper as it was able to develop its cultural identity without restrictions from Istanbul and began a path of modernization similar to the process in Poland and the Baltic states. In the rest of the empire, focus was directed back to the domestic affairs as most of the empire was still agricultural and Russia needed to begin modernization or else they would fall behind the other powers economically, and face defeat in an even larger war. Tsar Alexander made it his top priority to begin social and political reforms within Russia so that a possible revolution could not occur and Russia finally leave the dark ages. These plans included the eventual emancipation of the Serfs, lessening of the nobles power, toleration and acculturation of other nationalities, and development of the Pan-Slavic ideology which would unite all Slavic minorities into one banner under the Russians for the sake of the Slavic race. The military was also looked at as while they had won numerous victories, they were more due to numerical superiority and pure chance then superior fighting. The entire Russian Army began to transition to modern artillery and rifles for their infantry, placing large orders to Texas for premium quality guns to be shipped to Russia so that the Imperial forces would have equal arms to those of Germany or Britain. While mass conscription did still occur, training programs were reformed so that the average peasant soldier could think for themselves tactically and be able to fight of high standards instead of just blindly following orders. Lastly, the Russian Navy was given a total transformation as sail was abandoned and the transition to steam began with the rebuilding of the Black, Baltic, and Pacific fleets. New trade deals were created with various nations in the Americas so that Russia would not be so reliant on European goods for import or the export of their raw materials. Finally, a new colonial department was created in St. Petersburg as a sub-department of the Foreign ministry so that all further expansion and creation of new spheres of influence could be planned for the long term in the Great Game and the coming opening of China. With the end of the Crimean War came the end of the old Imperial Era, it would remain to be seen if these changes would be of benefit by the time the Great War came in fullness.
Coronation of Tsar Alexander II
Inside Great Britain the mood after the Crimean War was one of melancholy and depression. Oh sure Great Britain had limited Russian expansion and had received some minor victories such as creation of demilitarized zones and the opening of the Russian market, but these terms however were not enough for the British people as they had received nothing that would directly impact their lives besides the return of bodybags in the place of various loved ones. New movements were sprouting all over Britain with anti-war and social reform movements being the chief among them. The British people saw how the continent had been prospering with the new liberal reforms that stressed the extension of democracy and the distribution of rights to the average man. Many pointed out how their former colonies, the United States, were doing just fine under a Republican government and were now in a state of prosperity (a quite ironic statement considering the Civil War coming in 5 years). Many Brits were also sick of getting constantly involved in European affairs as there was never any direct threat to the island since the time of Napoleon, with his nephew not even looking to be anywhere near as an expansionist. The British people wanted change from the series of horrible events that had plagued their nation for the last ten years, and they would not stop until they asking until their demands were met or they would be forced to enforce them. The biggest immediate change was felt when Lord Aberdeen was given a vote of no confidence as Prime Minister shortly after Copenhagen for his failure at the conduct of the war. In the subsequent Parliamentary elections, the newly formed Liberal Party had won a subsequent supermajority in Parliament, electing Viscount Palmerston as the new Prime Minister. The general ideology of the Liberal Party was one that most of the British population had been desiring since the 1846 Revolutions by calling for greater social reform, personal liberty, limiting the powers of the monarchy, and free trade economics that supported the growth of the British domestic economy and feed the general population with food imports from the Americas. The Liberals were a group that Victoria had despised for wanting to limit her power as a monarch, though there was little she could do against the new government as her popularity was at an alltime low and the calls for a transition into a Republic had not gone down. On the issue of foreign affairs, Lord Palmerston was noted as a firm believer of British Nationalism and the policy of splendid isolation when it came to the affairs of Europe. Before and during the Crimean War, Palmerston was a vocal opponent of the entire affair as he criticized British involvement as a pointless endevour that would only result in dead Brits with little gain, something he was later proven correct in. Palmerston made it his mission to shift UK foreign policy from heavy intervention in other nations, and instead focus on direct colonial expansion into states or regions that were too underdeveloped to offer resistance. With the end goal being the prosperity of Great Britain with the return of raw materials and a vast market upon which to sell British goods, a sort of Neo-mercantilism. Finally, the Palmerston government is most noteworthy for its extensive reforms in the British military. The Crimean War revealed the vast shortocomings of the British army due to its reliance on Napoleonic style tactics and the large discrepancies currently revealed in the logistics of all British oversea campaigns. The officer corps was given a vast overhaul with German advisors coming to Britain in order to train their counterparts on the fine styles and tactics of the Prussian model, with British high command transforming into a mirror of the Prussian Staff. The entire Quartermaster corps was given a vast overhaul with another model similar to Prussian organization so that supplies could be delivered quickly and all expeditionary forces be deployed in a rapid and aggressive manner. Finally in the point of officers themselves, a new breed of officers emerged that would be called the Colonial Colonels, these were men of the Royal Army who had spent vast times in the colonial campaigns of India or Africa and were given high positions in the army. Leading to a more unorthodox approach and innovation in tactics and strategy applied to global warfare. Unfortunately, the nobles would still maintain a high class of control in the army and only soldiers of the highest merit could advance. Overtime with the new success of the colonial ventures in Asia and Africa, continuation of further reform was dropped and the Army switched back to its highly aristocratic manner of rule. The only true changes being the tactics that these noblemen in uniform would use for future reference, becoming outdated by the outbreak of the Great War. Domestic reforms while significant in the short term, proved to be unchanging in the long term situation as most of the liberal reforms were aimed at pleasing the people through greater economic prosperity, not greater political freedoms or equal social advancement. Leading to what Oliver Mosley termed as, "The Empire's Shadow", over the island of Great Britain. Splendid Isolation mixed with global domination and economic growth, all of it for the advancement of Queen and Country over the people.
Liberal Rally in London (Left) The Royal Army, from defenders of country to masters of conquest (Right)
When talking of the war's effects on the Ottoman Empire, it is rather surprising to see that the Ottomans were the least to change even though the war was one that caused them to suffer the most. Romania was forever taken away from the empire, another humiliating loss to the Russians, more potential for greater unrest of the non-Turks. So why is it that the Ottomans of all people would be the least to change? To do that it is necessary to look into Ottoman society and general Islamic culture of the 19th century. Since the fall of Constantinople in 1454, the Ottoman Empire had always portrayed itself as the sword and shield of Islam, a leading figure in the Muslim world that would spread the ideals of Mohammad while defending the faith from the infidel Christians or the plotting Jews. At first this mindset helped the Ottomans contribute to the Golden Age of the 16th century where its advance into Europe was unchallenged and the Empire was the pinnacle of scientific advancement and economic prosperity in the Western world. When the Christian powers of Europe began to turn back the tide after Vienna in 1683, the Ottomans refused to drop this mindset of apparent superiority. By then the faith had taken a large amount of control in the Empire and the Islamic clerics held an immense say in society in the government as they believed the actions of the Ottomans were a reflection of Islam. When Europe started to produce new liberal ideas such as representative democracy, unalienable rights, and capitalism in the Age of Revolutions, the clerics of the Ottoman Empire rejected these for being Christian ideals. Strengthening the reactionary policies of the Sultans and causing Islam to have the appearance of a vastly conservative and traditionalist mindset to that of Western Europe. With this psyche that was deeply implemented into the minds of its citizens, it was no wonder to see that even the Russian Empire by comparison could be considered a more liberal state at the start of the Crimean War. For Russia had at least kept up with nominal military advances while the Ottomans clung to the glory days of the Hungarian conquests. The Crimean War served as an immense wakeup call to Sultan Abulmecid by showing him that the Empire was vastly underdeveloped to the rest of Europe, and that if nothing was done then the Ottomans would cease to exist in the next century. After Crimea, Abulmecid started a series of reforms that centralized the government in a manner similar to the reforms of Napoleon. Some religious freedoms and social reforms were given to the non-Turks and non-Muslims of the Empire, though they had rights they were still treated as second class-citizens. Perhaps the area that saw the most degree of reformation was the military with the Ottomans upgrading their arms and receiving training from advisors to the British Army. Though these attempts at reform did strengthen the empire somewhat and start the beginning of its modernization, most reforms were chosen to benefit the military while the progressive social reforms were too few and too slow in being put into law. In the meantime the Ottoman Empire was slowly being reduced to a puppet of Great Britain in the Great Game against Russia. So even if the Osman Sultans succeeded at modernization, they would do nothing but play second fiddle to the whims of London.
Istanbul, an increasing relic of the past
In contemporary viewpoints, the Crimean War was viewed as a senseless conflict that accomplished much and only generally achieved the creation of a new state in the Balkans, nothing permanent having been done. Quite the opposite could said to be true in its entirety. The Crimean War was the last nail in the coffin of the Old Order that dominated the Post-Napoleonic Era, its end results giving away to the rise of the Second Age of Imperialism. Both Great Britain and the Russian Empire became mortal enemies that would fight for control over the destiny and territory of Eurasia. The Great Game signifying their relationship as one of careful chess moves against both nations with grand geopolitical games over the smallest strips of territory. Russia's foreign policy switched from being a reactionary protector of Conservatism in Eastern Europe to the role of leader of the Slavs and Overlord of Asia. In order to decapitate the Ottomans and meet the rising British menace, Russia would soon set its main foreign policy goals towards alignment with the one other great power that could stand up to London, France. Crimea changed much of British foreign policy and society for the next half century with the rise of splendid Isolation and the pursuit of Imperialism as the ticket to Britain's salvation. The push away from continental affairs would strengthen Britain's alliance with Germany, the United Kingdom acting as the ruler of the ocean and the supreme colonial empire while Germany remained the top nation in continental Europe. Though attempts were made at reform of British soceity, the social gap widened in greater bounds and revolution on the home island only being prevented by foreign success in the colonies and the rise of British manufacturing. All of it being factors that would result in the rise of Britannia. The Ottomans were now revealed as the Sick Man of Europe, with the question not being if the Ottomans will fall, but when. The Great Game in itself was only the beginning of the many Imperial moves taking place for the rest of the century such as the Rome Conference, the Opium Wars, or the subjugation of Southeast Asia. With the Serbs, Greeks, and now the Romanians showing that independnece was indeed possible, the multiple nationalites lying in the Ottoman Empire were no longer dormant and were starting to demand for independence, with Russia leading the charge. France and Italy later joining in the anti-Ottoman camp due to geopolitical and religous reasons respectively. Finally with the political means aside, it is important to remember the advancements in warfare that Crimea brought. While the American Civil War is generally seen as the template for modern warfare, Crimea was the war that would truly start the path of modernization. Railways and telegraphs were used for the first time in the respective fields of transportation and communication. Artillery and trench warfare were beginning to be used all across the battlefield. Steamships proved that they were generally superior to the usage of sail (though some countries would continue to use it like Spain in the Spanish-American War). Logistics proved to be the key to winning wars and battles fought of the field of war such as field hospitals were given greater notice. While Crimea may not have been of immediate importance with its emphasis on modern warfare being originated further in the Mexican War or the American Civil War, it began the Imperialist Age and showed the world the beginning of the horrors of modern war.
"Generation after generation, the noble swine of England have used the common men of Britannia as little more than mindless slaves by launching war after war across the seas for pointless conquests and colonial ventures. While our brave brothers have died gruesome deaths on the battlefield for the sake of the parasite that we call the monarchy, the nobles lounge in their mansions and castles, smoking cigars and drinking brandy while moving the British Army as mere pawns for their sick game of imperialist oppression. Serving as a man of the Royal Army taught me that the true righteous of Britannia are not the fat aristocrats who wave their birthright in the face of labor, but the brave few who put on a uniform and fight for the security and prosperity of our nation. One need to only look at the Crimean War, an war fought for the interests of barbaric Turks so that the fat whore Victoria could get rich off the resources of the middle east. Thousands of Britannians died on a bloody Russian peninsula several hundred miles away from home and for what? So that we could save a dying corpse that was the very bane of Christianity? Just like how tens of thousands of our men died for the Turk in the Great War, when they were killing Armenians by the droves?! The Only reason we lost the Crimean War anyways was because of the stupidity and arrogance of the noble officers who ordered the light brigade to charge into battle only rack up bodies and serve as target practice for the Russian. No more will our men die overseas for the sake of monarchy. Never again!"- Our Struggle: The Oppression of Fair Britannia by Oliver Mosley 1919
"While my father was a good man who raised me as best as he could and only wanted to do right for Russia, a great ruler he was not. Two wars we've gotten ourselves in the last decade with very little to show for it. While many consider Crimea to be a victory, it is only a matter of time before the consequences come to meet us fully and we are met with the widespread of revolutions in our empire. Nationalities who want their own self-rule, peasants that want bread and peace, or just greedy aristocrats who want to seize the Kremlin for themselves to protect their arcane rights. If Russia is to survive the next century then we will need to reform. I will see that the Romanov Dynasty gets it done."- Tsar Alexander II 1855
"So your telling me Stephen, that Crimea is just some Russian peninsula in the Black Sea that the Ruskis use for trade and the home of their Navy? Well why the hell are the British and Turks launching an invasion their if the war is supposed to be fought over Christians in the Danube, or whatever the hell the reason is? Seriously, Europeans are weird."- President Davy Crockett 1854
When the delegates began peace talks in the neutral country of Denmark on March 30th, 1855, the peace talks soon became dragged out into what could be called an intense diplomatic poker game. The reason it has been called that is due to the multiple bluffs and strategic plays by each diplomat in regards to the negotiations. While it may have appeared that Russia obtained the upper edge with the victories in Crimea and their virtual occupation of the Danube, their economy was on the verge of a depression with the cease of trade and many within the Winter Palace feared the possibility of a coup against the Tsar or the peasants and non-Russian nationalities revolting if the war dragged on. In addition Russia needed time to rebuild their Navy after its virtual destruction in the Black Sea, and to prepare for a possible invasion of Germany or Hungary if they decided for a ripe opportunity in expansion while Russia focused its attention in the middle east. For Britain it was a matter of securing its assets, limiting Russian gains, and looking towards the future in the next phase of the Great Game. What the British diplomats tried to convene towards Russia was that the Royal Navy was still in its ultimate state and that they could continue the trade blockade for years while possible German intervention may be on the horizon, with the continued fact that Silistria and Vidin had not fallen. While the homefront was a bit of a mess with the numerous peace protests and the potential for a second corn riots, it did not mean that the British Empire would succumb so low as to surrender in entirety to the Russians. They had already faced one deeply scarring humiliation when it came to Oregon, it would not happen with Russia of all nations. No matter which side got the better deal it was quite clear that the Ottomans would emerge the losers of this fight. Tens of thousands of Ottoman soldiers had died in the battle and they had lost virtually all naval presence in the Black Sea. Romania was forever beyond its grasp and the potential for other nationalities to rise up began. The only good part that the Ottomans got out of the peace at all was the fact that Anatolia had not been breached. Now Sultan Abulmecid needed to face the music and try and save as much of his empire at the moment so that they could rise back up in the future. With various political intrigues, backdoor deals, third party involvement, and ongoing domestic developments, it took a total of two months for the process to be done. At the end of it the Treaty of Copenhagen was signed on June 6th. All sides having been able to reach some form of compromise and peace being secured, for now.
The terms of the Treaty of Copenhagen are as follows:
- The Principalities of Moldavia and Wallachia are to be united as the Principality of Romania and shall be transferred to Russia as a formal protectorate, but one that shall exist as a seperate state from the administration of the Russian Empire with their own self-rule. Russia is to give up all claims of territory south of the Danube, and Bessarabia shall be returned in its entirety to Russian rule.
- The Russian Empire shall give up its claim as Protector of the Orthodox Christians in the Ottoman Empire. The title Protector of Christians shall be instead transferred in its entirety to the Italian Federation under Pope Pius IX. The Orthodox Church shall maintain equal management of Christian sites in the Holy Land with the Catholic Church. Though they shall be under the jurisdiction of the Patriarch of Constantinople.
- Russia shall be allowed to rebuild a fleet in the Baltic. Any ships in the Baltic Sea must be kept to a maximum of 20 ships, any further additions shall be immediate casus belli for a renewed war.
- British warships may have free entrance in Ottoman Ports and shall travel within the Black Sea in all areas with the exception of Russian territorial waters.
- British goods shall enter into Russian ports and cities free of tariff.
- Both the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland and the Ottoman Empire shall not pay monetary reparations to the Russian Empire.
- The Principality of Romania shall relinquish any claims to the Hungarian territory of Transylvania.
- The Alaskan/Canadian border shall be demilitarized.
- The Aland islands shall become demilitarized.
- All prisoners on both sides shall be transferred to their respective nations by July 6th, 1856. Failure to comply will result in monetary reparations each month until the men are returned home.
Divisions of Greater Romania after the Treaty of Copenhagen. Romania (Blue) Russia (Red) Hungary (Green) Ottomans (Orange)
Inside Russia there were numerous celebrations across the empire over the apparent glorious victory that they had managed to achieve against the might of the British Empire. While the casualties had been vast and many Russian soldiers would not be able to return home, the objectives had been achieved and Romania was now an quasi-independent state under Russian rule, a victory for Russia and the cause of Slavic freedom all over Europe. The first measure to deal with was the running of the now protectorate of Romania by the Russians. The position of Prince of Romania would be retained in the Romanov family when the title was passed on to Nicholas Nikolaevich, Grand Duke of Russia and second younger brother to the new Tsar. While this was seen as a slight to the the second oldest brother Konstantin, the truth was that Konstantin was needed within Russia so that he could help his liberal minded brother implement new reforms that the Tsar planned in the coming years, especially since the heir Alexander was starting to develop reactionary views. Romania over the years began to become slowly integrated into Russia though it was given a high amount of autonomy compared to Poland and was even able to conduct its own foreign affairs with supervision from St. Petersburg. The full reason for the prevention of a total annexation into Russia being the hopeful action that more territory could be taken from Hungary or the Ottomans in a future war, even though Copenhagen forbid it for the time at least. Romania was also necessary to act as an independent satellite so that in any future invasions or war with the Ottoman Empire, Romania could take the brunt of the fighting and Ukraine emerge unscathed. Over the next two decades Romania would begin to prosper as it was able to develop its cultural identity without restrictions from Istanbul and began a path of modernization similar to the process in Poland and the Baltic states. In the rest of the empire, focus was directed back to the domestic affairs as most of the empire was still agricultural and Russia needed to begin modernization or else they would fall behind the other powers economically, and face defeat in an even larger war. Tsar Alexander made it his top priority to begin social and political reforms within Russia so that a possible revolution could not occur and Russia finally leave the dark ages. These plans included the eventual emancipation of the Serfs, lessening of the nobles power, toleration and acculturation of other nationalities, and development of the Pan-Slavic ideology which would unite all Slavic minorities into one banner under the Russians for the sake of the Slavic race. The military was also looked at as while they had won numerous victories, they were more due to numerical superiority and pure chance then superior fighting. The entire Russian Army began to transition to modern artillery and rifles for their infantry, placing large orders to Texas for premium quality guns to be shipped to Russia so that the Imperial forces would have equal arms to those of Germany or Britain. While mass conscription did still occur, training programs were reformed so that the average peasant soldier could think for themselves tactically and be able to fight of high standards instead of just blindly following orders. Lastly, the Russian Navy was given a total transformation as sail was abandoned and the transition to steam began with the rebuilding of the Black, Baltic, and Pacific fleets. New trade deals were created with various nations in the Americas so that Russia would not be so reliant on European goods for import or the export of their raw materials. Finally, a new colonial department was created in St. Petersburg as a sub-department of the Foreign ministry so that all further expansion and creation of new spheres of influence could be planned for the long term in the Great Game and the coming opening of China. With the end of the Crimean War came the end of the old Imperial Era, it would remain to be seen if these changes would be of benefit by the time the Great War came in fullness.
Coronation of Tsar Alexander II
Inside Great Britain the mood after the Crimean War was one of melancholy and depression. Oh sure Great Britain had limited Russian expansion and had received some minor victories such as creation of demilitarized zones and the opening of the Russian market, but these terms however were not enough for the British people as they had received nothing that would directly impact their lives besides the return of bodybags in the place of various loved ones. New movements were sprouting all over Britain with anti-war and social reform movements being the chief among them. The British people saw how the continent had been prospering with the new liberal reforms that stressed the extension of democracy and the distribution of rights to the average man. Many pointed out how their former colonies, the United States, were doing just fine under a Republican government and were now in a state of prosperity (a quite ironic statement considering the Civil War coming in 5 years). Many Brits were also sick of getting constantly involved in European affairs as there was never any direct threat to the island since the time of Napoleon, with his nephew not even looking to be anywhere near as an expansionist. The British people wanted change from the series of horrible events that had plagued their nation for the last ten years, and they would not stop until they asking until their demands were met or they would be forced to enforce them. The biggest immediate change was felt when Lord Aberdeen was given a vote of no confidence as Prime Minister shortly after Copenhagen for his failure at the conduct of the war. In the subsequent Parliamentary elections, the newly formed Liberal Party had won a subsequent supermajority in Parliament, electing Viscount Palmerston as the new Prime Minister. The general ideology of the Liberal Party was one that most of the British population had been desiring since the 1846 Revolutions by calling for greater social reform, personal liberty, limiting the powers of the monarchy, and free trade economics that supported the growth of the British domestic economy and feed the general population with food imports from the Americas. The Liberals were a group that Victoria had despised for wanting to limit her power as a monarch, though there was little she could do against the new government as her popularity was at an alltime low and the calls for a transition into a Republic had not gone down. On the issue of foreign affairs, Lord Palmerston was noted as a firm believer of British Nationalism and the policy of splendid isolation when it came to the affairs of Europe. Before and during the Crimean War, Palmerston was a vocal opponent of the entire affair as he criticized British involvement as a pointless endevour that would only result in dead Brits with little gain, something he was later proven correct in. Palmerston made it his mission to shift UK foreign policy from heavy intervention in other nations, and instead focus on direct colonial expansion into states or regions that were too underdeveloped to offer resistance. With the end goal being the prosperity of Great Britain with the return of raw materials and a vast market upon which to sell British goods, a sort of Neo-mercantilism. Finally, the Palmerston government is most noteworthy for its extensive reforms in the British military. The Crimean War revealed the vast shortocomings of the British army due to its reliance on Napoleonic style tactics and the large discrepancies currently revealed in the logistics of all British oversea campaigns. The officer corps was given a vast overhaul with German advisors coming to Britain in order to train their counterparts on the fine styles and tactics of the Prussian model, with British high command transforming into a mirror of the Prussian Staff. The entire Quartermaster corps was given a vast overhaul with another model similar to Prussian organization so that supplies could be delivered quickly and all expeditionary forces be deployed in a rapid and aggressive manner. Finally in the point of officers themselves, a new breed of officers emerged that would be called the Colonial Colonels, these were men of the Royal Army who had spent vast times in the colonial campaigns of India or Africa and were given high positions in the army. Leading to a more unorthodox approach and innovation in tactics and strategy applied to global warfare. Unfortunately, the nobles would still maintain a high class of control in the army and only soldiers of the highest merit could advance. Overtime with the new success of the colonial ventures in Asia and Africa, continuation of further reform was dropped and the Army switched back to its highly aristocratic manner of rule. The only true changes being the tactics that these noblemen in uniform would use for future reference, becoming outdated by the outbreak of the Great War. Domestic reforms while significant in the short term, proved to be unchanging in the long term situation as most of the liberal reforms were aimed at pleasing the people through greater economic prosperity, not greater political freedoms or equal social advancement. Leading to what Oliver Mosley termed as, "The Empire's Shadow", over the island of Great Britain. Splendid Isolation mixed with global domination and economic growth, all of it for the advancement of Queen and Country over the people.
Liberal Rally in London (Left) The Royal Army, from defenders of country to masters of conquest (Right)
When talking of the war's effects on the Ottoman Empire, it is rather surprising to see that the Ottomans were the least to change even though the war was one that caused them to suffer the most. Romania was forever taken away from the empire, another humiliating loss to the Russians, more potential for greater unrest of the non-Turks. So why is it that the Ottomans of all people would be the least to change? To do that it is necessary to look into Ottoman society and general Islamic culture of the 19th century. Since the fall of Constantinople in 1454, the Ottoman Empire had always portrayed itself as the sword and shield of Islam, a leading figure in the Muslim world that would spread the ideals of Mohammad while defending the faith from the infidel Christians or the plotting Jews. At first this mindset helped the Ottomans contribute to the Golden Age of the 16th century where its advance into Europe was unchallenged and the Empire was the pinnacle of scientific advancement and economic prosperity in the Western world. When the Christian powers of Europe began to turn back the tide after Vienna in 1683, the Ottomans refused to drop this mindset of apparent superiority. By then the faith had taken a large amount of control in the Empire and the Islamic clerics held an immense say in society in the government as they believed the actions of the Ottomans were a reflection of Islam. When Europe started to produce new liberal ideas such as representative democracy, unalienable rights, and capitalism in the Age of Revolutions, the clerics of the Ottoman Empire rejected these for being Christian ideals. Strengthening the reactionary policies of the Sultans and causing Islam to have the appearance of a vastly conservative and traditionalist mindset to that of Western Europe. With this psyche that was deeply implemented into the minds of its citizens, it was no wonder to see that even the Russian Empire by comparison could be considered a more liberal state at the start of the Crimean War. For Russia had at least kept up with nominal military advances while the Ottomans clung to the glory days of the Hungarian conquests. The Crimean War served as an immense wakeup call to Sultan Abulmecid by showing him that the Empire was vastly underdeveloped to the rest of Europe, and that if nothing was done then the Ottomans would cease to exist in the next century. After Crimea, Abulmecid started a series of reforms that centralized the government in a manner similar to the reforms of Napoleon. Some religious freedoms and social reforms were given to the non-Turks and non-Muslims of the Empire, though they had rights they were still treated as second class-citizens. Perhaps the area that saw the most degree of reformation was the military with the Ottomans upgrading their arms and receiving training from advisors to the British Army. Though these attempts at reform did strengthen the empire somewhat and start the beginning of its modernization, most reforms were chosen to benefit the military while the progressive social reforms were too few and too slow in being put into law. In the meantime the Ottoman Empire was slowly being reduced to a puppet of Great Britain in the Great Game against Russia. So even if the Osman Sultans succeeded at modernization, they would do nothing but play second fiddle to the whims of London.
Istanbul, an increasing relic of the past
In contemporary viewpoints, the Crimean War was viewed as a senseless conflict that accomplished much and only generally achieved the creation of a new state in the Balkans, nothing permanent having been done. Quite the opposite could said to be true in its entirety. The Crimean War was the last nail in the coffin of the Old Order that dominated the Post-Napoleonic Era, its end results giving away to the rise of the Second Age of Imperialism. Both Great Britain and the Russian Empire became mortal enemies that would fight for control over the destiny and territory of Eurasia. The Great Game signifying their relationship as one of careful chess moves against both nations with grand geopolitical games over the smallest strips of territory. Russia's foreign policy switched from being a reactionary protector of Conservatism in Eastern Europe to the role of leader of the Slavs and Overlord of Asia. In order to decapitate the Ottomans and meet the rising British menace, Russia would soon set its main foreign policy goals towards alignment with the one other great power that could stand up to London, France. Crimea changed much of British foreign policy and society for the next half century with the rise of splendid Isolation and the pursuit of Imperialism as the ticket to Britain's salvation. The push away from continental affairs would strengthen Britain's alliance with Germany, the United Kingdom acting as the ruler of the ocean and the supreme colonial empire while Germany remained the top nation in continental Europe. Though attempts were made at reform of British soceity, the social gap widened in greater bounds and revolution on the home island only being prevented by foreign success in the colonies and the rise of British manufacturing. All of it being factors that would result in the rise of Britannia. The Ottomans were now revealed as the Sick Man of Europe, with the question not being if the Ottomans will fall, but when. The Great Game in itself was only the beginning of the many Imperial moves taking place for the rest of the century such as the Rome Conference, the Opium Wars, or the subjugation of Southeast Asia. With the Serbs, Greeks, and now the Romanians showing that independnece was indeed possible, the multiple nationalites lying in the Ottoman Empire were no longer dormant and were starting to demand for independence, with Russia leading the charge. France and Italy later joining in the anti-Ottoman camp due to geopolitical and religous reasons respectively. Finally with the political means aside, it is important to remember the advancements in warfare that Crimea brought. While the American Civil War is generally seen as the template for modern warfare, Crimea was the war that would truly start the path of modernization. Railways and telegraphs were used for the first time in the respective fields of transportation and communication. Artillery and trench warfare were beginning to be used all across the battlefield. Steamships proved that they were generally superior to the usage of sail (though some countries would continue to use it like Spain in the Spanish-American War). Logistics proved to be the key to winning wars and battles fought of the field of war such as field hospitals were given greater notice. While Crimea may not have been of immediate importance with its emphasis on modern warfare being originated further in the Mexican War or the American Civil War, it began the Imperialist Age and showed the world the beginning of the horrors of modern war.
I will cover the position of India in a future update that talks about ongoing events in Asia. Not much will change overall from OTL with some slight differences due to the 1846 Revolutions. India will come into global prominence during and after the Great War.
We shall have more Davy Crockett quotes when his Presidency comes.
Flag of the Principality of Romania. 1856
The current Prince of Romania is Nicholas Romanov, it's stated that in the paragraph about Russia after the peace terms.
Next chapter will be about Stephen Douglas' Presidency.
Just wondering but are all of Davy Crokett's quotes paraphrased references, because they sound familiar.
Unless my subconcious is forcing my brain to reference something, no they're not. All of Davy's quotes are just sentences I came up with. When I want to reference something in the quotes then they will be fairly obvious as to their origin.
Chapter 60 Douglas the Divider
Chapter 60 Douglas The Divider
"You know in my opinion, President Douglas gets too much of a bad rep. People say that his actions were a direct cause of the Civil War, but in reality all the man tried to do was find a compromise on slavery and state's rights so that we wouldn't have a civil war in the first place. Not that I'm condoning slavery mind you, even if I am from Louisiana. It's just that if we had no civil war then its my firm belief that slavery would've ended by the end of the century anyways. Just look at Texas for example."- President Huey Long 1961
"Slavery is a tool of the devil and Stephen Douglas is his servant.!"- John Brown 1853
"I fear that if we sit back and do nothing now, then Kansas shall only be the precursor to an even greater calamity that awaits the United States."- Senator Abraham Lincoln 1854
In regards to opinions concerning President Stephen Douglas today, many Americans and historians on conflicted on whether to call the man one of the worst Presidents in history, or a decent one that was unfortunate enough to have been in the wrong place at the wrong time. The man certainly did show promise in his congressional career as he was a major party leader, proponent of heavy modernization, and key compromiser behind several bills in the Webster administration. Had Douglas been President in the Era of Good Feelings or even the Jacksonian Era then he would've probably been regarded as one of the all-time greats in American history. Yet he had the misfortune to come at the height of the slavery debate and had to oversee the continued disunity and reaping of chaos in America. Many common people like to think of Douglas as a horrible President due to his actions that promoted the spread of slavery through popular sovereignty, an opinion highly popular among many African-Americans. Some, especially in the south, see Douglas as a champion of states rights and one of the first Presidents to actively move America into an industrial economy. Some historians criticize Douglas for being too much of a centrist and not taking an active side in order to bring a resolute solution to the slavery question. Others say that the road to the Civil War officially began with the Oregon Compromise and that Stephen Douglas was just one of the many paths that America took. Whatever the case, Stephen Douglas is a major case of an American President who has never before been so controversial yet so impactful upon American history.
Stephen Arnold Douglas, 12th President of the United States
Before discussing the problem of Slavery that had plagued Douglas' term, it is necessary to look at his domestic and foreign accomplishments outside of the leadup to the Civil War, for not everything in the Douglas administration had to due with the matter. When on the campaign trail in 1852, Douglas tried desperately to differentiate himself between his opponents on his domestic policies that would promote traditional Democrat ideology versus the actions of the Whigs who had just been in power for the last twelve years. Douglas advocated for a compromise line in his economic policies where while he would support the continued agrarian growth of the United States with federal subsidies and low taxes for the farmers, extensive efforts would also be made to continue the strengthening of America's current industrial power. Douglas's key solution to the idea of industry was simple, support the railroads. By building railroads Douglas explained that the whole of the United States of America could be connected from the Pacific to the Atlantic, increasing economic growth with the spread of interstate trade and the fast moving of raw materials to factories in the north and finished products to the south. While exports and imports could be quickly moved from ports to the interior of America. Douglas worked towards consolidating support from the south and the common class by dropping tax rates all across the board, including the upper-class in order to gain support and help the growth of large southern plantations. Alongside the future Kansas-Nebraska Act, the federal government encouraged the cheap selling of federal lands out west so that farmers east of the Mississippi with little lands left to cultivate could grow crops and livestock on acres of cheap prairie land. This policy would continue to be supported in various ways after the Civil War and would result in the Indian Wars of the last third of the century. The overall federal budget was also cut substantially so that the United States could pay off the war debts under the Harrison administration and the power of the federal government lessened so that it could return back to the states. The one area that Douglas did increase federal power was oversight of commerce and the national transportation system. In his contemporary days many Americans liked to call Douglas "The Conductor" due to his enthusiastic support for the railroads and development of the modern rail system. Which while it had been growing under Harrison and Webster, was given new powers under Douglas. Following the actions of his Texan neighbors, Douglas founded the Department of Transportation, a new federal department that would be given the responsibility of building roads, canals, and railroads. The first post of Secretary of Transportation was given to Franklin Pierce and under his watch spending on transportation infrastructure increased around 350% and led to millions of dollars being poured into the American economy due to growth of national trade. Railroad growth became so extensive that by 1860 there would be 35,000 miles of track within the United States. An unforeseen side effect of this policy was the Civil War where the North had used its extensive railroad infrastructure to quickly ship troops and supplies to the front line in a rapid manner alnogside the large quantities of its armies. Meanwhile the south also used its early rail system to send state regiments across the Confederacy and defend the borders with much success in the early stages of the war. Lastly, President Douglas sought to reverse the Whig policy on foreign trade and cut back tariffs on imports. While many Whigs and some early Republicans criticized this as a foolish move which would severely hurt American industry, it actually helped to grow it far more than under Harrison and Webster due to the large increase in trade and opening of new markets for many European countries that were still recovering from the effects of the Revolutions, or were in the midst of their own wars such as the Sardinian Heresy or Crimean War. Douglas was able to get all of this done under his administration thanks to the Democratic control of both the House and the Senate in 1853, a move that was done thanks to the Whigs implosion over Slavery and the gaining of many Whig defectors while the Republican Party was being created. This large domestic and legislative success has often been compared to some of Douglas' Democratic successor such as Presidents William Jennings Bryan or Huey Long. It is rather unfortunate in all aspects that the high American economic boom of the 1850's is often ignored in U.S History in favor of the Civil War buildup.
Map of Rail Development in the United States by 1860
On the issue of foreign affairs, much of Douglas' Presidency is essentially a repeat of the actions of Webster. During the Crimean War, America was staunchly neutral as they saw Crimea as little more than a petty fight for territory in the middle east. Though during the war large private contributions were given to the Russian Empire along with official support in terms of supplies and gun sales, stemming from the large anti-Anglo sentiment of America after the Oregon War. One huge area of success was American-Texan-Quebecois relations with the laying of the foundation of the Transcontinental Railroad. In accordance with his rail policies, Douglas wanted to create a continental railroad that would span from the Atlantic to the Pacific and include trade with multiple nations in North America. Many early Imperialists and Young Americans also saw this as key of building up American influence in the Western hemisphere, with some dreaming of an extension of this policy to Latin America. Douglas also needed the Transcontinental Railroad with Texas most importantly since Pierce had submitted a report to the President saying that it could take decades until a full link to the ports of Boston, Seattle, and Vancouver would be achieved. What America needed most desperately was a railroad with Texas so that American goods could be sold in California to Asian nations in the Pacific. To solve the issue, Douglas invited both President Crockett of Texas and President Robert Nelson of Quebec to a conference in the city of St. Louis in 1855 to settle the issue. The St. Louis Conference was a huge success as both Presidents Crockett and Nelson were fundamental supporters of closer American relations and the idea of increased trade with railroads was very popular in their nations. The St. Louis agreement was drafted at the Conference and was a resolution that affirmed all three nations commitment to further ties in trade in North America and the development of a continental transport system to freely transport goods and people across borders. Key provisions of the agreement in relation to railroads were the goals of a building of a two railroads within Quebec based around the Maritimes and St. Laurence regions that would connect to New York and New England; while Texas and America would share a trans-national railroad stretching from California, across Arizona and the Rio Grande, to central Texas and the Louisiana border. The Agreement was passed unanimously in both Austin and Quebec City and work began immediately. The agreement also managed to pass in Washington with an overwhelming majority in the Senate thanks to the support of Davy Crockett who was still a very popular folk hero within America. Sadly work would not finish until 1867 due to the Mexican War and the Civil War stopping construction. Though by the end of the 19th century North America would be further united in trade than ever before. Outside of this landmark cooperation, relations with the rest of North America were quite tense at the time. William Walker's expeditions increased with attempts to gain control of Mexico and his successful takeover of Nicaragua ( which will be covered in full detail under Crockett's foreign policy) leading to increased animosity with Latin America over the United States apparent imperialism. Fortunately by 1857, Walker's attempts at filibusters failed with intervention from the Texan-Yucatan alliance, though his temporary success in Mexico had led to the near drop in Mexican-American relations, along with Mexico's movement towards the British camp. Cuba was still an issue as rebellions were beginning to grow on the island and southern congressmen increasingly vouched for annexation. Unfortunately for Douglas, a group of American ministers to Europe under the leadership of James Buchanan met in Ostend Belgium and created the Ostend Manifesto, a document stating reasons why America should annex Cuba and declare war on Spain if they did not reach a deal. The publish of this manifesto lead to severe backlash with Europe due to American's apparent hypocritical support of Democracy when they seeked to subjugate Cuba. Spain nearly declared war with the United States at several points in 1854, only backing out due to the fact that British support could not come with Crimea. In the end President Douglas had to disavow the document and seek to mend the expansion of slavery in the Bahamas and Kansas-Nebraska, leading to somewhat of a splinter in the Democratic party and support for Cuban Annexation to drop until the Spanish-American War. Outside of North America, the United States two key areas of interest were Liberia and East Asia. President Douglas promoted the extensive development and possible expansion of Liberia in order to appease the abolitionists and imperialists with the growth of a colony for freed slaves. An additional Marine Battalion was sent in 1854 and funding was poured in to map out the Area and to try and negotiate local chiefs to seed sovereignty over to the United States, while Liberia's economy began to develop with the extraction of lumber and rubber. Trade agreements with Pacific nations also began under Douglas with new agreements being reached with the European colonies. Japan was also opened up to America in the Perry expedition which was created in the aftermath of Britain's opening of Shogunate Japan with the Seymour expedition, the Japanese far more willing to trade with the Americans who held little power in the region unlike the British.
Perry Expedition (Left) Rubber Plantation in Liberia (Right)
Of course paradise could not continue in Douglas' America without the issue of slavery popping up. What used to be a private moral dilemma erupted into a full blown national divide with the South seeking expansion according to states rights and the need to preserve their economy, while the North rejected it for moral reasons under the watch of many Evangelical Protestant ministers within the Northern states, in addition to materials that relayed the harsh conditions of slavery such as Uncle Tom's Cabin. The Oregon Compromise was already starting to show immense signs of failure with the virtual Northern ignorance of the Fugitive Slave law with escaped slaves being accepted as freedmen in arrival of the North. This system of escapism being supported by the growth of the Underground Railroad and the actions of many conductors such as Harriet Tubman. Abolitionist sentiment was growing rapidly in the North with Fredrick Douglas emerging as the first civil rights leader for the abolition of slaves, while the infamous John Brown lead violent attacks against slave owners in the name of God. The aforementioned Ostend Manifesto was just one of the many frustrations from southerners due to what seemed to be like a boxing and attack on slavery, southern lawmakers becoming even more increasingly frustrated with the soon to be addition of Minnesota to the Union. Even in Kansas where slavery was supposed to now be legal, attacks were frequently made with abolitionist settlers targeting slave settlers and vice versa. Many Americans expected the President just to solve the issue of slavery within his term, a monumentous task that very few back in the day could do. Personally Douglas was a centrist on the issue of slavery as his wife's family owned slaves whereas he grew up in a family without them and was largely indifferent to the practice. To President Douglas, it did not matter if slavery was legal or illegal, only that the will of the American people supported said action. This attitude was not entirely popular among the Democratic Party as they were staring to become split like the Democrats with the popular sovereignty supporters and those who wished for total expansion of slavery. Vice President Toombs could be said to be a great example of this divide as he regularly called Douglas out on this pragmatism and pleaded for Slavery to be preserved as an amendment or spread out to the rest of the Union. With the Oregon Compromise already looking to have died a few years after passing, Douglas saw it his mission to unite America and permanently solve the question of slavery once and for all, by letting the people decide. In his State of the Union Address for 1854, Douglas called for the issue of slavery to be permanently settled with the creation of a bill that would pass popular sovereignty throughout all the territories of the U.S, and let the territories residents upon statehood decide whether or not they could become a free state or a slave state. When the contents of the speech spread many Americans became polarized on the subject as Douglas' solution could go both ways. Either slavery could be passed throughout all of America thanks to popular support, or restriction of the practice in the South thanks to the North's greater numbers. In cooperation with Missouri Senator David Atchison, the Kansas-Nebraska Act was introduced in the U.S Senate as a bill that would formally allow slavery in all U.S territories. When the territory entered statehood, a referendum would be enacted with the territories inhabitants deciding whether or not to go the route of slavery or abolition. The result would then be included as an amendment to the new state constitution when added to the Union. The law would also split the current Kansas territory into the Nebraska territory and what would become the modern state of Kansas. Kansas would be decided in the bill to be the first one to implement popular sovereignty, abandoning the previous total support of slavery in the Oregon Compromise. Other parts of the bill included sections that would support the admission of Minnesota and the Bahamas to support the balance, and the nonpartisan clause supporting opening of lands for farms and railroads. When the act was introduced into congress there were large amounts of infighting in both parties over the status of its passing. The Southern Wing was in full support, the Northern Democrats split over the pragmatists and abolitionists, and the Northern Whigs entirely against it. Then Senator Abraham Lincoln led the charge among the Whigs in blocking the passing of the act in order to limit slavery to the south and to prevent chaos rising in the west due to mob rule over the issue of slavery. Unfortunately for the abolitionists and limiters of slavery, the Act was able to pass in both houses with a slim majority and was passed into law by Stephen Douglas on May 30th. The effects of the law were immediate as the Whigs became disbanded in a matter of weeks, 1/3rd drifting towards the Democrats while the rest supported the new Republican Party. Popular opinion in the nation was firmly split as half rejoiced while half cried out in agony. Though this would pale in comparison to the horrors of Bleeding Kansas.
Map of the Kansas-Nebraska split (Left) Political Cartoon of Douglas and Southern Senators forcing slavery down an abolitionists mouth (Right)
A/N: Huey Long is a former U.S President by 1961, not the acting President.
"You know in my opinion, President Douglas gets too much of a bad rep. People say that his actions were a direct cause of the Civil War, but in reality all the man tried to do was find a compromise on slavery and state's rights so that we wouldn't have a civil war in the first place. Not that I'm condoning slavery mind you, even if I am from Louisiana. It's just that if we had no civil war then its my firm belief that slavery would've ended by the end of the century anyways. Just look at Texas for example."- President Huey Long 1961
"Slavery is a tool of the devil and Stephen Douglas is his servant.!"- John Brown 1853
"I fear that if we sit back and do nothing now, then Kansas shall only be the precursor to an even greater calamity that awaits the United States."- Senator Abraham Lincoln 1854
In regards to opinions concerning President Stephen Douglas today, many Americans and historians on conflicted on whether to call the man one of the worst Presidents in history, or a decent one that was unfortunate enough to have been in the wrong place at the wrong time. The man certainly did show promise in his congressional career as he was a major party leader, proponent of heavy modernization, and key compromiser behind several bills in the Webster administration. Had Douglas been President in the Era of Good Feelings or even the Jacksonian Era then he would've probably been regarded as one of the all-time greats in American history. Yet he had the misfortune to come at the height of the slavery debate and had to oversee the continued disunity and reaping of chaos in America. Many common people like to think of Douglas as a horrible President due to his actions that promoted the spread of slavery through popular sovereignty, an opinion highly popular among many African-Americans. Some, especially in the south, see Douglas as a champion of states rights and one of the first Presidents to actively move America into an industrial economy. Some historians criticize Douglas for being too much of a centrist and not taking an active side in order to bring a resolute solution to the slavery question. Others say that the road to the Civil War officially began with the Oregon Compromise and that Stephen Douglas was just one of the many paths that America took. Whatever the case, Stephen Douglas is a major case of an American President who has never before been so controversial yet so impactful upon American history.
Stephen Arnold Douglas, 12th President of the United States
Before discussing the problem of Slavery that had plagued Douglas' term, it is necessary to look at his domestic and foreign accomplishments outside of the leadup to the Civil War, for not everything in the Douglas administration had to due with the matter. When on the campaign trail in 1852, Douglas tried desperately to differentiate himself between his opponents on his domestic policies that would promote traditional Democrat ideology versus the actions of the Whigs who had just been in power for the last twelve years. Douglas advocated for a compromise line in his economic policies where while he would support the continued agrarian growth of the United States with federal subsidies and low taxes for the farmers, extensive efforts would also be made to continue the strengthening of America's current industrial power. Douglas's key solution to the idea of industry was simple, support the railroads. By building railroads Douglas explained that the whole of the United States of America could be connected from the Pacific to the Atlantic, increasing economic growth with the spread of interstate trade and the fast moving of raw materials to factories in the north and finished products to the south. While exports and imports could be quickly moved from ports to the interior of America. Douglas worked towards consolidating support from the south and the common class by dropping tax rates all across the board, including the upper-class in order to gain support and help the growth of large southern plantations. Alongside the future Kansas-Nebraska Act, the federal government encouraged the cheap selling of federal lands out west so that farmers east of the Mississippi with little lands left to cultivate could grow crops and livestock on acres of cheap prairie land. This policy would continue to be supported in various ways after the Civil War and would result in the Indian Wars of the last third of the century. The overall federal budget was also cut substantially so that the United States could pay off the war debts under the Harrison administration and the power of the federal government lessened so that it could return back to the states. The one area that Douglas did increase federal power was oversight of commerce and the national transportation system. In his contemporary days many Americans liked to call Douglas "The Conductor" due to his enthusiastic support for the railroads and development of the modern rail system. Which while it had been growing under Harrison and Webster, was given new powers under Douglas. Following the actions of his Texan neighbors, Douglas founded the Department of Transportation, a new federal department that would be given the responsibility of building roads, canals, and railroads. The first post of Secretary of Transportation was given to Franklin Pierce and under his watch spending on transportation infrastructure increased around 350% and led to millions of dollars being poured into the American economy due to growth of national trade. Railroad growth became so extensive that by 1860 there would be 35,000 miles of track within the United States. An unforeseen side effect of this policy was the Civil War where the North had used its extensive railroad infrastructure to quickly ship troops and supplies to the front line in a rapid manner alnogside the large quantities of its armies. Meanwhile the south also used its early rail system to send state regiments across the Confederacy and defend the borders with much success in the early stages of the war. Lastly, President Douglas sought to reverse the Whig policy on foreign trade and cut back tariffs on imports. While many Whigs and some early Republicans criticized this as a foolish move which would severely hurt American industry, it actually helped to grow it far more than under Harrison and Webster due to the large increase in trade and opening of new markets for many European countries that were still recovering from the effects of the Revolutions, or were in the midst of their own wars such as the Sardinian Heresy or Crimean War. Douglas was able to get all of this done under his administration thanks to the Democratic control of both the House and the Senate in 1853, a move that was done thanks to the Whigs implosion over Slavery and the gaining of many Whig defectors while the Republican Party was being created. This large domestic and legislative success has often been compared to some of Douglas' Democratic successor such as Presidents William Jennings Bryan or Huey Long. It is rather unfortunate in all aspects that the high American economic boom of the 1850's is often ignored in U.S History in favor of the Civil War buildup.
Map of Rail Development in the United States by 1860
On the issue of foreign affairs, much of Douglas' Presidency is essentially a repeat of the actions of Webster. During the Crimean War, America was staunchly neutral as they saw Crimea as little more than a petty fight for territory in the middle east. Though during the war large private contributions were given to the Russian Empire along with official support in terms of supplies and gun sales, stemming from the large anti-Anglo sentiment of America after the Oregon War. One huge area of success was American-Texan-Quebecois relations with the laying of the foundation of the Transcontinental Railroad. In accordance with his rail policies, Douglas wanted to create a continental railroad that would span from the Atlantic to the Pacific and include trade with multiple nations in North America. Many early Imperialists and Young Americans also saw this as key of building up American influence in the Western hemisphere, with some dreaming of an extension of this policy to Latin America. Douglas also needed the Transcontinental Railroad with Texas most importantly since Pierce had submitted a report to the President saying that it could take decades until a full link to the ports of Boston, Seattle, and Vancouver would be achieved. What America needed most desperately was a railroad with Texas so that American goods could be sold in California to Asian nations in the Pacific. To solve the issue, Douglas invited both President Crockett of Texas and President Robert Nelson of Quebec to a conference in the city of St. Louis in 1855 to settle the issue. The St. Louis Conference was a huge success as both Presidents Crockett and Nelson were fundamental supporters of closer American relations and the idea of increased trade with railroads was very popular in their nations. The St. Louis agreement was drafted at the Conference and was a resolution that affirmed all three nations commitment to further ties in trade in North America and the development of a continental transport system to freely transport goods and people across borders. Key provisions of the agreement in relation to railroads were the goals of a building of a two railroads within Quebec based around the Maritimes and St. Laurence regions that would connect to New York and New England; while Texas and America would share a trans-national railroad stretching from California, across Arizona and the Rio Grande, to central Texas and the Louisiana border. The Agreement was passed unanimously in both Austin and Quebec City and work began immediately. The agreement also managed to pass in Washington with an overwhelming majority in the Senate thanks to the support of Davy Crockett who was still a very popular folk hero within America. Sadly work would not finish until 1867 due to the Mexican War and the Civil War stopping construction. Though by the end of the 19th century North America would be further united in trade than ever before. Outside of this landmark cooperation, relations with the rest of North America were quite tense at the time. William Walker's expeditions increased with attempts to gain control of Mexico and his successful takeover of Nicaragua ( which will be covered in full detail under Crockett's foreign policy) leading to increased animosity with Latin America over the United States apparent imperialism. Fortunately by 1857, Walker's attempts at filibusters failed with intervention from the Texan-Yucatan alliance, though his temporary success in Mexico had led to the near drop in Mexican-American relations, along with Mexico's movement towards the British camp. Cuba was still an issue as rebellions were beginning to grow on the island and southern congressmen increasingly vouched for annexation. Unfortunately for Douglas, a group of American ministers to Europe under the leadership of James Buchanan met in Ostend Belgium and created the Ostend Manifesto, a document stating reasons why America should annex Cuba and declare war on Spain if they did not reach a deal. The publish of this manifesto lead to severe backlash with Europe due to American's apparent hypocritical support of Democracy when they seeked to subjugate Cuba. Spain nearly declared war with the United States at several points in 1854, only backing out due to the fact that British support could not come with Crimea. In the end President Douglas had to disavow the document and seek to mend the expansion of slavery in the Bahamas and Kansas-Nebraska, leading to somewhat of a splinter in the Democratic party and support for Cuban Annexation to drop until the Spanish-American War. Outside of North America, the United States two key areas of interest were Liberia and East Asia. President Douglas promoted the extensive development and possible expansion of Liberia in order to appease the abolitionists and imperialists with the growth of a colony for freed slaves. An additional Marine Battalion was sent in 1854 and funding was poured in to map out the Area and to try and negotiate local chiefs to seed sovereignty over to the United States, while Liberia's economy began to develop with the extraction of lumber and rubber. Trade agreements with Pacific nations also began under Douglas with new agreements being reached with the European colonies. Japan was also opened up to America in the Perry expedition which was created in the aftermath of Britain's opening of Shogunate Japan with the Seymour expedition, the Japanese far more willing to trade with the Americans who held little power in the region unlike the British.
Perry Expedition (Left) Rubber Plantation in Liberia (Right)
Of course paradise could not continue in Douglas' America without the issue of slavery popping up. What used to be a private moral dilemma erupted into a full blown national divide with the South seeking expansion according to states rights and the need to preserve their economy, while the North rejected it for moral reasons under the watch of many Evangelical Protestant ministers within the Northern states, in addition to materials that relayed the harsh conditions of slavery such as Uncle Tom's Cabin. The Oregon Compromise was already starting to show immense signs of failure with the virtual Northern ignorance of the Fugitive Slave law with escaped slaves being accepted as freedmen in arrival of the North. This system of escapism being supported by the growth of the Underground Railroad and the actions of many conductors such as Harriet Tubman. Abolitionist sentiment was growing rapidly in the North with Fredrick Douglas emerging as the first civil rights leader for the abolition of slaves, while the infamous John Brown lead violent attacks against slave owners in the name of God. The aforementioned Ostend Manifesto was just one of the many frustrations from southerners due to what seemed to be like a boxing and attack on slavery, southern lawmakers becoming even more increasingly frustrated with the soon to be addition of Minnesota to the Union. Even in Kansas where slavery was supposed to now be legal, attacks were frequently made with abolitionist settlers targeting slave settlers and vice versa. Many Americans expected the President just to solve the issue of slavery within his term, a monumentous task that very few back in the day could do. Personally Douglas was a centrist on the issue of slavery as his wife's family owned slaves whereas he grew up in a family without them and was largely indifferent to the practice. To President Douglas, it did not matter if slavery was legal or illegal, only that the will of the American people supported said action. This attitude was not entirely popular among the Democratic Party as they were staring to become split like the Democrats with the popular sovereignty supporters and those who wished for total expansion of slavery. Vice President Toombs could be said to be a great example of this divide as he regularly called Douglas out on this pragmatism and pleaded for Slavery to be preserved as an amendment or spread out to the rest of the Union. With the Oregon Compromise already looking to have died a few years after passing, Douglas saw it his mission to unite America and permanently solve the question of slavery once and for all, by letting the people decide. In his State of the Union Address for 1854, Douglas called for the issue of slavery to be permanently settled with the creation of a bill that would pass popular sovereignty throughout all the territories of the U.S, and let the territories residents upon statehood decide whether or not they could become a free state or a slave state. When the contents of the speech spread many Americans became polarized on the subject as Douglas' solution could go both ways. Either slavery could be passed throughout all of America thanks to popular support, or restriction of the practice in the South thanks to the North's greater numbers. In cooperation with Missouri Senator David Atchison, the Kansas-Nebraska Act was introduced in the U.S Senate as a bill that would formally allow slavery in all U.S territories. When the territory entered statehood, a referendum would be enacted with the territories inhabitants deciding whether or not to go the route of slavery or abolition. The result would then be included as an amendment to the new state constitution when added to the Union. The law would also split the current Kansas territory into the Nebraska territory and what would become the modern state of Kansas. Kansas would be decided in the bill to be the first one to implement popular sovereignty, abandoning the previous total support of slavery in the Oregon Compromise. Other parts of the bill included sections that would support the admission of Minnesota and the Bahamas to support the balance, and the nonpartisan clause supporting opening of lands for farms and railroads. When the act was introduced into congress there were large amounts of infighting in both parties over the status of its passing. The Southern Wing was in full support, the Northern Democrats split over the pragmatists and abolitionists, and the Northern Whigs entirely against it. Then Senator Abraham Lincoln led the charge among the Whigs in blocking the passing of the act in order to limit slavery to the south and to prevent chaos rising in the west due to mob rule over the issue of slavery. Unfortunately for the abolitionists and limiters of slavery, the Act was able to pass in both houses with a slim majority and was passed into law by Stephen Douglas on May 30th. The effects of the law were immediate as the Whigs became disbanded in a matter of weeks, 1/3rd drifting towards the Democrats while the rest supported the new Republican Party. Popular opinion in the nation was firmly split as half rejoiced while half cried out in agony. Though this would pale in comparison to the horrors of Bleeding Kansas.
Map of the Kansas-Nebraska split (Left) Political Cartoon of Douglas and Southern Senators forcing slavery down an abolitionists mouth (Right)
A/N: Huey Long is a former U.S President by 1961, not the acting President.
Last edited:
Doesn't quite change the knee jerk reaction to seeing it. Now I don't think Huey is going to be an American dictator. The man in real life was far more complex than his caricature, and I remember you saying up thread something to the effect that a person may share the name and face of their OTL counterpart, but they might not be them. Putting that aside though and saying this Huey Long is a carbon copy of OTL I doubt his bully boy tactics he used down in Louisiana are going to work large scale. Regardless, a Long administration should be interesting if done right, and I have faith you'll do the Kingfish proud.
President Bryan too. If Nevada was in US hands in this timeline you would have probably made a lot of silver miners happy. With it being in Texas' hands who can say?
Not to call Pierce a liar, but lies! Would have been a pain, but the line could have been built by 1870. I'm thinking Franklin had a few to many southerners on his staff who wanted that lower rail link. Moving on though I do really like the idea of the US, Texas, and Quebec getting together to not only see a transcontinental railroad gets built, but that north America gets a truly international rail system. It'll be good for all three, and as much as stubborn pride in the US demands I say otherwise, San Fransisco is a far better port to have at the Pacific end than Portland/Boston.
Anywho, great update, and look forward to the coming train wreck that is the tail end of the pre-civil war era.
Oh, one strange question, but does the US control all of OTL British Columbia, or just up to the old 54 40 line? History and your map on page 17 contradict and I'm trying to keep the worlda up to date so I can post it again at some point.
It was referencing Guldo from 'The Ginyu Force' in Dragon Ball Z Abridged.
TTL's Huey Long is in my opinion FDR with the personality of Donald Trump. In that he's a very progressive man who's not afraid to get into a fight or stand up to his enemies and not use political correctness in his speeches, using his support of the people to get jobs done. He's actually been a person I've been wanting to do an alternatehistory story on for quite a long time as I've always found Long to be one of the more interesting American politicians since I first learned of him in Kaiserreich. He's esentially an authoritarian man that for the most part used his powers for the welfare of the people of his state. Sure he may be a tad bit corrupt and power hungry, but at least there was never any wide racial rhetoric like Hitler. I actually plan to one day do a novel "Long live the Kingfish" where FDR gets assassinated in 1933 and Garner takes over, becoming a shit President. With this Long runs for President in '36 and after surviving his own assassination wins in a landslide. Rest assured that TTL's Long is not going to become a dictator since he is an actual former President by 1961 and isn't in jail for his crimes. Meaning there was a somewhat peaceful transition of power. Him coming to office is going to be very interesting as it's going to turn Washington upside down and bring in the Long Era. Incidentally becoming one of the most important Presidents in American history due to an important concurrent event, at least if I continue my timeline along this plan. Overall the man is much like his OTL self though he is much smarter and willing to compromise in Washington. You'll see.
Bryan is one of my planned Presidents due to the fact that he and Long will be key in creating the modern democratic party, one vastly different than OTL. It's a shame that Nevada is in Texas, though that's not to say there won't be other deposits of silver when he's in office.
Well he did submit the report in 1853 and 1870 is 17 years, nearly two decades. It's also important to note that a Chicago-Boston route would have to cross hundreds of miles of Indian territory, cut down numerous trees and go over hilly terrain, go through the Rocky Mountains, and passed in some rather undeveloped territories. Texas is by far the better option since they have better ports anyways. Also Portland doesn't exist, it's just Boston. I just mistyped and meant to type Seattle.
Columbia is esentially all of the Oregon Territory north of the 49 to the 54'40. I just made it look like OTL British Columbia since all articles I find on the Oregon territory aren't clear on the Canadian territory that they received. I also can't find a good map showing the territory that Canada received. So TTL is meant to be British Columbia but slightly bigger. If you could find where the actual territorial boundaries lie that would be great.
I couldn't agree more upon recounting clips of Huey long on the web because he has the FDR wit and intellect to inspire people alongside the passionate bluntness that of Trump(Without the mind boggling stupidity)
If you are doing Huey that way and continue to hold to the same standard of quality you have thus far I have nothing to fear out of a Long administration. I'm sure he'll probably have a bit more controversy around him than FDR does OTL, but that'll just make things more fun. On the subject of a novel about the Kingfish, be sure to tell us on this site when you take up the challenge. I wouldn't mind reading it, and I'm sure many other here share the sentiment.
Trees would actually be a plus not a minus. You can sell the timber back east (along with the land they're on to settlers), and with a sawmill on wheels (doable) or built near site you can make your own railroad ties, beams for trestles, housing, fuel for the wood burning locomotives, fuel for wood stoves, fencing, etc. The Rocky mountains aren't an issue as OTL the Central Pacific went through the Sierra Nevada's, and some of those tunnels were carved at the agonizing pace of as little as inches a day. No matter what though keep the grade to 2-3% or have a Shay locomotive and you should be able to go anywhere. Now getting into under developed....
...welcome to nowhere! Seriously, it's nowhere in the 1860's. OTL Nevada had a population of 30,000ish in the 1860's, Utah somewhere in the 50,000's Wyoming less than 10,000. Sure it's a little better than Idaho, and Eastern Oregon, but if we are taking the far south route the Southern Pacific built in OTL for your railroad, it's about the same. All of this said, I'm really just debating this point for the sake of debate. Texas wins because of its port, decent relations with the Native Americans mean less crew attacks, because the US can now stick them with part of the bill, and, most importantly, it is your timeline.
Should look something like this....
Not much for electoral maps, but it should give you some idea of what the US would have got had Polk not backed down from 54'40.
If you are doing Huey that way and continue to hold to the same standard of quality you have thus far I have nothing to fear out of a Long administration. I'm sure he'll probably have a bit more controversy around him than FDR does OTL, but that'll just make things more fun. On the subject of a novel about the Kingfish, be sure to tell us on this site when you take up the challenge. I wouldn't mind reading it, and I'm sure many other here share the sentiment.
Trees would actually be a plus not a minus. You can sell the timber back east (along with the land they're on to settlers), and with a sawmill on wheels (doable) or built near site you can make your own railroad ties, beams for trestles, housing, fuel for the wood burning locomotives, fuel for wood stoves, fencing, etc. The Rocky mountains aren't an issue as OTL the Central Pacific went through the Sierra Nevada's, and some of those tunnels were carved at the agonizing pace of as little as inches a day. No matter what though keep the grade to 2-3% or have a Shay locomotive and you should be able to go anywhere. Now getting into under developed....
...welcome to nowhere! Seriously, it's nowhere in the 1860's. OTL Nevada had a population of 30,000ish in the 1860's, Utah somewhere in the 50,000's Wyoming less than 10,000. Sure it's a little better than Idaho, and Eastern Oregon, but if we are taking the far south route the Southern Pacific built in OTL for your railroad, it's about the same. All of this said, I'm really just debating this point for the sake of debate. Texas wins because of its port, decent relations with the Native Americans mean less crew attacks, because the US can now stick them with part of the bill, and, most importantly, it is your timeline.
Should look something like this....
View attachment 305501
Not much for electoral maps, but it should give you some idea of what the US would have got had Polk not backed down from 54'40.
I'll have a special narrative chapter in the future dedicated to the completion of the Continental Railraod when it comes to that, which will be an actual continental railraod this time mind you. Don't worry about Oregon missing out, it will get plenty of railroads in the future, they'll just come after Texas. I think the main railroad boom for the region will be when the Alaskan Gold Rush commences, which will take place earlier than OTL.
Very impressed with the map, extremely high quality. Looking forward to the finished product!
Next chapter is Rise of the Republicans. Will come out today or tomorrow.
President Long on the campaign trail for reelection.
Chapter 61 Rise of the Republicans
Chapter 61 Rise of the Republicans
"We of the GOP have always made it our fundamental policy to be a party that would support the prosperity of the average American through common sense and protection of constitutional rights. From the Civil War, Reconstruction, the Great War, Civil Rights movement, and the role of past Republican Presidents in leading the mission of OAS, it has been the party's mission to lead America to greatness under the path of righteousness that American exceptionalism has guided our manifest destiny since the Deceleration of Independence. As your newly elected President I will work for the welfare of all Americans so that we may maintain the American dream and show the world why the United States is the number one superpower that will become a thousand year Republic to guide the world on the path of freedom and liberty."- President Douglas Freeman 1981
"I accept this nomination with the highest of honor and gratitude to the delegates here in choosing myself to lead our great Republican party to victory against the Democratic hegemony that makes up Washington. While the Whigs may have been a failure for their bickering on platform and national agenda, we will show the nation come November that the Republican Party is the right path to chose in order to heal the divisions that has torn apart this union so great under the tyranny of Douglas. May God bless our country so that in the event of victory we will not have to experience further discord and can instead work towards the continued prosperity of our great republic."- Republican Presidential nominee Abraham Lincoln 1860
"Son of a bitch! Those damn Americans decided to steal the party name that I had spent days mulling over in late 1840. Stealing my legacy. I'll show them how it is to steal one's intellectual property when we sue their asses in court. Call the Attorney General!"- President Mirabeau Lamar 1854
When William Henry Harrison was elected as President many Americans thought that the two party system had finally stabilized and that for the rest of the century it would be a competition of Democrats versus Whigs. The feeling was quite understandable as the Whigs were the primary opposition in the Jackson Era and enjoyed much success during this time by taking control of the legislature and managing to influence President Johnson in passing many bills created by Whig Senators and Representatives in the '37 Recession. Harrison's Presidency only confirmed that idea as the man managed to recover the American economy to above pre-recession levels and had personally lead the country into its third war against Great Britain and won an immense victory with the addition of Oregon and liberation of Quebec. When President Webster was elected to office it was the start of what many Whigs hoped to be a potential dynasty. Then slavery came in and tore the party apart. While the Whigs could be said to be united by a common set of ideals based on big government and a protectionist form of economics, they were far from united when it came to the matter of whether or not slavery should be abolished. When it came to the issue of slavery the Democrats were united in continuing it not because all members held a universal value over is existence, but more so due to the fact that the party's entire base was centered around the southern states where the idea of abolishing slavery was treated as sheer ludicrous. On the Whigs side was a division between those who wanted abolishment, those who seeked to merely limit it in its current borders, the people who didn't care, and the small minority who supported the practice. In addition to this was increased factionalism in other areas such as social class, regionalism, conservatives and liberals, imperialists and isolationists, etc. Another main divide that rose up in 1854 was the issue of nativism and immigration. Since the end of the 1846 Revolutions, the United States experienced a huge surge of immigrants from Europe, primarily those that came from Ireland, Germany, Hungary, Austria, Russia, and Scandinavia. All of these immigrants were men and women who wanted to seek a new life in the United States and achieve the American Dream where their children would live a better life then the one that laid in the home country. Unlike Texas who welcomed the new surge of immigration, the United States became polarized on the issue as many Anglo-Saxon Protestant Americans feared losing the nations homogeneity and having to play second fiddle to the Catholics, Slavs, Germans, Irish, Italians, Hispanics, etc. While most of the Whigs could be said to be pro immigration as the founding fathers intended, a significant faction within the party turned to Nativism in order to drive the immigrants out and protect their jobs from the newcomers. This in turn allowed the Democratic Party to monopolize on Irish, German, and Catholic votes until the change in party policy under the Lincoln and Lee Presidencies. Meanwhile a good number of immigrants who were being snubbed by their new nation decided to head to Texas instead when word reached from their brethren of better conditions. With all of these conditions the Whig Party unofficially disintegrated in the summer of 1854, almost all members switching their party allegiance to either Democrat or Independent. The Douglas Administration looked on in glee as while President Douglas faced significant controversy and opposition to his current slavery policy, the collapse of the Whigs all but signified his reelection and the possibility of a Democrat monopoly on elections for the next generation. Unfortunately for the Democrats, a new party would rise and soon become their eternal rivals for control of America. The Republicans.
After the passing of the Kansas-Nebraska Act came a small period of uncertainty for many of the former Whigs in Washington. One by one a congressmen left the party each day and the few remaining loyalists of the party who wanted to see a revival gradually gave up trying to go against the current tide. Past Presidents Harrison and Webster were both invited to Washington early that Summer in order to try and unite the party together and find a united stance upon slavery. Both men came on June 5th and gave impassioned speeches on why the Whigs need to maintain unity in order to move forward the agenda that they had been so successful at promoting during their presidencies. Harrison spoke of the good work that they did in the Oregon War and how the Whig Party was needed in the future for America, Webster rebuked many of the congressmen present for flipping out over the Oregon Compromise when it was a sound deal and the reason the Democrats were able to gain in power again. Both men while not fundamental supporters of slavery like the south, both didn't see the need for active abolishment and tried shift party agenda to limit the spread of slavery at the most. At the end of the day a faction of men who were of Nativist origins decided to leave the meeting and set about to create their own political party, since both Harrison and Webster were pro immigration. Those who remained were a mix of men from different walks of life. However, unlike the previous makeup of the Whigs they had several things in common; many of them were from the North, most of Anglo Protestant or Scandinavian origin, fundamental supporters of modernization, and all of whom relative agreed in the ideology of "Free Soil, Free Labor, Free Land". While it wasn't the results that Harrison and Webster were looking for in order to save the Whigs, it was an active start for what could be a new party. A later meeting was called at July 6th in Jackson, Michigan so that they could fully discuss any potential plans for what the new third party would be. Word spread out of the meeting and many were invited to participate so that they could have a place in the new party. Among the newcomeers were members of the Free Soil Party who felt that they would not be able to abolish slavery on their own, and Northern Democrats who were tired of Douglas' policies and the control that the Southern Wing had over the party. Many prominent future Republican leaders would be in attendance including John Fremont, Abraham Lincoln, William Seward, James G. Blaine, Charles Sumner, and many more. When the convention started all the delegates were in agreement that the Democratic Party had taken matters too far with their radical shift of the slavery balance and the potential to overturn most of the Whig laws that had been passed. Many still remembered the tyranny of Jackson and they were afraid what would happen if a man like Toombs would become President (later being justified). When it came to ideology there was a swift agreement in retaining the Whig platforms of protectionist economics and the continued pursuit of industrialization and building of infrastructure. On foreign policy there was a gradual want to maintain continental affairs but back off from the imperialist attitudes that was present in many Democrats. Finally on the issue of slavery, it was agreed upon after much debate that the new party's course would be to limit slavery within the current boundaries and make all the western territories free, with the problem of abolishment postponed for a later date. With party mindset being handled all that was left was a name. Many ideas were thrown such as the Neo-Federalist, New Whigs, Constitutionals, American Union, Progressives, or the Reform Party. The issue of the matter was finally resolved when a Texan reporter for the Austin Chronicle was present for the debate and remarked "Well I'll be, you guys look like a bunch of Republicans." The reporter then explained the Republican Party of Texas and how it shared many similar traits to the group gathered in political ideology and stance on slavery, with many members of the electorate and supporters of the Texan Republicans being more anti-slavery then the Western Union. The name sounded good to many of those present and when an official vote came the delegates chose the name Republican Party (ironically affirming Lamar's claims that they stole his idea). With a few more days spent on party structure and new mission for the upcoming midterms, the party became an official organization and soon moved into Washington in the old Whig headquarters. Its new members were given the mission of becoming elected to as many offices as possible with the upcoming midterms while campaigns were created to try and convert many of the Northern politicians to the party.
Logo of the Republican Party in 2016
When the 1854 Midterm elections were completed the Republicans managed to win and impressive 20 Senate seats and 84 House seats within Congress. This was able to be achieved due to the near assimilation of the Whigs into the new Republican party and a mix of defections and elections of new original candidates taking place. Unfortunately for the Republicans, this was still not enough as the Democrats held an a majority in both houses with 37 Senators and 132 Representatives, the rest belonging to the American party or Independents. The only benefit of the Democratic majority is that it could be said that with distrust starting to grow against Douglas that the Democrats were far from unified like previously before. While the Republicans tried to establish an identity and grow their movement within the American electorate, their new congressmen were active within Washington. After Kansas-Nebraska the members of the Republican Party all became firmly anti-slavery in one way or another and soon set up to block any pro slavery bills from passing in congress. While they weren't able to meet the task in the Senate most of the time due to the firm Southern control, they had managed to solidify an opposition in the House by allying with Northern Democrats who were either anti-Douglas or anti-slavery. Among the legislation for the 34th Congress that the Republicans did support were measures of modernization and federal funds to help further the creation of industry in New England and the Ohio river region, leading to a huge part in Douglas' success with the railroads. While economics could mostly be agreed upon through debate, all bills related to slavery and western settlement became deadlocked within congress. The only major action that received bipartisan support in relation to slavery was the admittance of Minnesota and the Bahamas into the Union. In the past couple of years both territories had been getting extensive colonization by both the North and the South respectively so that another free/slave state would be admitted into the union and strengthen the balance. There were of course other reasons besides the settlement for slavery such as Minnesota's rich farmland and the Bahamas excellent position as a producer of rum and trade point entering into the Gulf of Mexico. In order to settle the divide and insure equality before the admittance of Kansas though, both states would have to be admitted at the same time, which was achieved on February 4th, 1856. Two more states joining just in time for the election.
While the congressmen in Washington actively debated over the future of the nation, the position of national stability in order was getting worse every day. With the divide on both sides of the political spectrum getting nastier as a result. On March 30th, 1855, the first elections were underway in Kansas in order to settle the issue of a territorial legislature. In the aftermath of the vote the slave camp won an overwhelming 26-3 majority in the new legislature, giving them a monopoly on the political process. The Abolitionists cried foul and demanded a recount take place due to voter fraud, the federal authorities acquiesced and a recount was done that proved that the divide was actually 19-10 in slave to free voters. With the new majority the pro-slavery camp made its way to Pawnee to conduct the first legislative session and pass laws favorable to slavery. Outraged by the results of the election, a national campaign was underway in order to encourage New England Yankees to migrate to Kansas in order to push the legislature towards abolition. Thousands traveled across the country and soon the free settlers became equal to the slave setters. In response settlers from Missouri and Arkansas migrated to Kansas in order to push it back into their favor. The situation escalated in mid-1855 when the infamous abolitionist John Brown arrived in Kansas and declared that he would create a righteous revolution to free Kansas of the evils of slavery. Brown along with other radicals set up a rival legislature in Topeka and claimed themselves as the legitimate government of Kansas. The Pawnee government declared them to be nothing more than rebels and asked for federal intervention to quell this apparent insurrection. Unfortunately for them Washington would not be able to do anything as a gridlock in congress and threats of impeachment upon the sending of the army held Douglas' hands tied behind his back. As time went on the debates turned into bloodshed when slave and free settlers started to attack each other in the streets and took to vandalizing each others property to try and strike feat into the others hearts. The situation is felt to have been perfectly described by Texas Ranger Jessie Simmons who was traveling through the territory in order to extradite a murderer back to Houston in 1856, "Traveling through Kansas is like going to hell and back. Americans over here like to mock us Texas and call us savages due to the claims of large gunfights, Indian attacks, ranch wars, and other matters of the frontier. In truth while these events have taken place, there is usually a code of honor among the participants and disputes are settled relatively quickly through the decisions of the community before Rangers or the local sheriff needs to get involved. Even the Indians will sometimes take it to court instead of the old ways of settlement raiding. Here in Kansas though, you can't walk a single mile without some American pointing a gun at you and demanding your viewpoint on slavery. If a free settler were to walk into a slave town then that man would be beaten, stripped, robbed, and sometimes killed just for believing that a man of dark skin should not be enslaved, with the same holding true for the other side. Traveling through the territory I needed to have my colt and badge with me at all times to protect myself, even then I'd get shot at a few times just for being different then their community. There is an intense divide with hate on both sides enough to make our disputes with the Mexicans seem like a petty squabble. All of this for the life of a fucking slave. You'd never see this sort of shit happening in Texas. No sir."
"The Tragic Prelude" by John Stewart Curry. A Painting showing how the actions of John Brown and Bleeding Kansas led to the Civil War.
While Bleeding Kansas was getting more intense with each passing day the general mood of the nation remained at a nervous calm as these events were only happening in the backwards western frontier that was Kansas and only involved Radicals of both sides. What happened there couldn't possibly happen east of the Mississippi where civilized folks lived, right? It turned out that the hopes by Americans back east would soon come falling down as the intense radicalism of the slave fight soon made its way back into the halls of Washington, where the nation's leaders where supposed to be discussing the matter in a civilized form. On May 20th, 1856, Senator Charles Sumner of Massachusetts (R) gave a speech on the floor Senate attacking the actions of South Carolina Senator Andrew Bulter for his role in creating Kansas-Nebraska, which Sumner believed to be the cause of the current crises in bleeding Kansas. The criticism soon became personal when Sumner attacked Butler's moral character and speech while Butler made sexual allegations of Sumner and possible relations with black women, which were entirely false. After the affair Representative Preston Brooks of South Carolina became infuriated at Sumner due to the fact that Butler was the man's brother in-law. Brooks planned to challenge Sumner to a duel for his brother's honor when Sumner refused due to his belief that duels were a barbaric and ancient practice that had taken the lives of greats like Alexander Hamilton pointlessly. Brooks became enraged at the outcome and wanted vengance for what he now felt was a direct slight to his southern honor. Brooks' friend Laurence M. Keitt, another South Carolina representative, conspired with Brooks and planted the idea that since Sumner was a dishonourable low life that it would be better to directly take revenge by openly attacking the man for all to see as justice, something Brooks madly agreed with. On May 22nd, 1856, just as Charles Sumner was collecting his papers in the Senate floor to head for a lunch recess, Brooks launched a surprise attack and began beating the senator intensely with a gutta-percha cane along with its gold head. The sheer force of the blows caused Sumner to temporarily lose his sight and suffer multiple head trauma while undergoing massive bleeding. Multiple Senators and Representatives gathered around the men and tried to intervene when Keitt whipped out his own cane and pistol and demanded that the congressmen step back and let the two "Settle their affairs like proper gentlemen." Many stood back in horror and stared as Brooks savagely beat Sumner to a pulp, with the Senator looking on the verge of death if nothing was done. While Vice President Toombs tried to calm down the men and get them to release Sumner, another Senator decided to take action. Standing on a balcony overlooking the fight, Oregon Senator Nathaniel Smith (R) was disgusted with the actions of Brooks and felt that he had to take action or his friend and colleague would die. Senator Smith decided to bring out his own Colt .45 that he kept on his person at all times, and shot both Brooks and Keitt in the from the balcony, both dying instantly due to the first blows being headshots while Smith dispensed the remaining four rounds into both bodies for insurance. When the rest of the floor looked on in shock and horror, Senator Smith shouted "What are you all looking at? What I did was shoot a rabid dog and his lackey who were both attempting to murder our colleague for the shit reason of southern chivalry and honor. What I did was save Charles' life by eliminating his would-be killers before they struck the finishing blow. Let it be known that I, Nathaniel Edwards Smith, dispensed justice. You are welcome." Upon finishing his speech the Southern Wing of congress attempted to strike out at Smith for killing their allies. Thankfully no further bloodshed took place as Capitol police and men of the Presidential Guard rushed in and extracted Sumner from the scene while arresting Smith, all the while installing order on the congressional floor, the men having been alerted by Senator Lincoln during the attack. When news of the Caning of Sumner, or the Murder of Brooks and Keitt as it was known in the south, spread the next day the nation erupted in a plethora of emotions. The North generally held an attitude that hailed Sumner as a martyr for the cause of abolition while Smith was treated as a hero for dispensing the two villains. In the South the viewpoint was the exact opposite as the populace held Brooks and Keitt as martyrs and Sumner the instigator and Smith a murderer. The situation became worse when on May 26th all charges against Smith were dropped by the Justice Department due to their finding that Smith acted in self-defense of Sumner, the mans severe head and spinal injuries and eyewitness accounts of the affair confirming that Brooks launched the attack with killing intent. When news of that ruling spread riots started to grow in the south while the North celebrated Smith as their hero. Wanting to prevent a bad situation from getting worse, Douglas passed an executive order that banned firearms in the floors of congress and extended the powers of the Presidential Guard to reside over general sessions and protect Smith's life. While federal troops were sent in across the country to restore order. The need for troops getting highly intense in Kansas where the Caning had prompted John Brown to go on a terror spree against the slave settlers for justice, resulting in dozens of casualties on both sides. While the Civil War would not start for five more years, the Caning of Sumner marked a point in American politics when the divide over slavery became an uncompromising affair which would result in chaos in blood at the current rate.
A Northern cartoon of the Caning of Sumner showing the Massachusetts Senator as a victim to the savage Brooks.
When the 1856 Presidential Elections came around it looked to possibly be the most divisive one to date, overshadowing even the 1832 and 1852 Presidential Elections. With the Caning of Sumner both sides became firmly divided with little hope of reconciliation or compromise on the issue of slavery. The situation having been worsened after the Caning with the violence in Bleeding Kansas reaching an all-time high and Douglas having to use Federal troops for an intervention in the territory. The Democrats felt the need to win in order to save the Union and prevent the supposed tyranny of the Republicans. While the Republicans felt they needed to win in order to end the barbaric continuance of slavery and protect the nation from being controlled by the Southern Aristocracy. In the middle was the American or Know-Nothing Party who while they felt that slavery was immoral, focused on a ban of immigration in order to fix the nations problems, something that both Democrats and Republicans thought went against the principles of the founding fathers. At the Republican Convention General John C. Fremont, Conquerer of Oregon, was chosen as the nominee after a few rounds of voting due to the need for the Republicans to establish a high profile candidate to entice voters to chose the brand new party, Fremont having the perfect fit due to his war hero status. In addition Fremont was a diehard abolitionist and if put in office would've relied on the consensus of the Party in Congress, something that members of the early establishment looked forward to. For the Republican Vice President William L. Dayton the Senator from New Jersey was chosen in order to draw the eastern seaboard in, Abraham Lincoln being passed over in a close majority. IN the DNC the Democrats chose to continue with the Douglas-Toombs ticket for reelection. While there had been high opposition on both sides due to some Southerners feeling that Douglas didn't do enough on the Caning and Bleeding Kansas, while other Northerners thought he was a liability against the Republicans, most agreed that it would be the right choice to stick with their current President and felt that the direction he was going was enough, everyone waiting to see the final results on Kansas to give a verdict on whether or not popular sovereignty was a good idea. Within the American Convention in Philadelphia there was a high sense of urgency as the Americans needed to win this election or at least do well enough so that they could establish themselves as the primary opposition to the Democrats. Many felt threatened by the Republicans and while the Americans held a substantial minority in congress, many of its members considered switching to the Republicans. For their presidential candidate former vice president Millard Fillmore was selected as the party's candidate. Ironically the man did not believe in the party's anti-immigration policies and his name was chosen while he was on a trip to Europe, Fillmore only realizing that he was nominated once he returned to America. The man accepted the nomination nonetheless as he felt Fremont was too much of a radical and his election would've led to Civil War. When Fillmore was nominated his candidacy came under harsh attack from his former boss President Webster who decried Fillmore to be a "Betrayal be my great friend who chose to abandon the Whig ideal and instead pursued a path of bigotry and tyranny." Fillmore's nomination came under heavy scrutiny by other Republicans and former Whigs, leading to any hopes of a potential alliance between the two parties. Not only that but Fillmore's nomination itself was attacked by both Presidents Crockett and Nelson who stated that if the man was elected then all agreements between Texas and Quebec, and the United States would be null and void due to the party's anti-Catholic stance, leading to Fillmore's support being dropped in much of the nation. The election campaign was a very polarized one as all three candidates chose to forgo a potential debate and instead directed their energies to attacking each others policies, all three saying that the other two would lead to the downfall of the Union when elected. All of the candidates also took to campaigning exclusively in the Northern states as the South was seen as a waste of effort due to their solid support of the Democrats. Still the election turned to an dark note when supporters of all three parties would regularly get into brawls and sometimes riot over their conflict of their respective parties. The worse case being the St. Paul Street War when both Fremont and Douglas were in the capitol of the newly admitted State of Minnesota to try and campaign for votes in the new state. Their campaign events were poorly planned by being a block away from each other and supporters from both sides attack the other during speaking events, drawing 61 casualties but fortunately no deaths. When election day came on November 4th the whole nation waited in anticipation for the result and whether or not the Union would truly collapse due to it. The result was decided weeks later where Douglas won on a very slim margin with 159 electoral votes compared to Fremont's 133 and Fillmore's measly 8. Along with that while Douglas did not win a majority of the popular vote again, he won a plurality at 44.47% compared to Fremont's 36.74% and Fillmore's 18.79%. While the Democrats relaxed that they had their first reelection since Jackson in 1832, not everything looked good for the party. The Republicans results proved to be the best performance of an opposition party in American history and many agreed that if Fremont had received Indianna and Illinois, or solely Pennsylvania, then the man would've won the Presidency. In addition the Republicans had closed the gap in Congress with now 25 Senators and 111 Representatives. While the Democrats did well at the same time with 39 Senators and 125 Representatives (The American party and other independents defecting to either side while the Democrats lost seats in the House). If the elections were to go at the current rate then the Republicans could easily win a majority in both houses and the presidency in 1860. With these results the Democrats hoped for a very successful second term for Douglas so that they could maintain their dominance in politics. This would not be the case as Douglas's second term would prove to be the point where the line had passed and the country on a ticking time bomb to Fort Sumter.
1856 United States Presidential Election
Douglas/Toombs (D): 159 EV 1,803,072 Votes 44.74%
Fremont/Dayton (R): 133 EV 1,351,433 Votes 36.74%
Fillmore/Donelson (A): 8 EV 761,366 Votes 18.79%
A/N: Sorry for the wait but I'm finally done with Douglas' first term. Next time we talk about America you'll see Dred Scott, more Bleeding Kansas, and other things that led to the 1860 Election and the American Civil War. Just as a reminder while the Civil War will start the same with Fort Sumter, the issues leading up to it, generals on both sides, and some of the states allegiances will be different this time around. Next American chapter will be a special narrative one that will be a prequel to an important event that did not take place OTL. Also for those of you curious of Doug Freemen, the man is meant to be a different version of Reagan since Ronald will be a Texan TTL. I chose the date 1981 for his inauguration since that's when Reagan was sworn in, though the year can change Freemen will become a President in the late 20th century no matter what. Next official story chapter we will be looking at the Crockett Presidency, before that is a little skit post in advance. Also as one final PSA, I just found out that there was a Turtledove category for best quote. If any of you guys like my quotes and feel they are worthy for the award, please head on over to the Non-Political Chat forum and submit a nomination. Looking forward to what you guys think is Turtledove worthy if you chose to do so. Thanks once again for reading and stay tuned for more!
"We of the GOP have always made it our fundamental policy to be a party that would support the prosperity of the average American through common sense and protection of constitutional rights. From the Civil War, Reconstruction, the Great War, Civil Rights movement, and the role of past Republican Presidents in leading the mission of OAS, it has been the party's mission to lead America to greatness under the path of righteousness that American exceptionalism has guided our manifest destiny since the Deceleration of Independence. As your newly elected President I will work for the welfare of all Americans so that we may maintain the American dream and show the world why the United States is the number one superpower that will become a thousand year Republic to guide the world on the path of freedom and liberty."- President Douglas Freeman 1981
"I accept this nomination with the highest of honor and gratitude to the delegates here in choosing myself to lead our great Republican party to victory against the Democratic hegemony that makes up Washington. While the Whigs may have been a failure for their bickering on platform and national agenda, we will show the nation come November that the Republican Party is the right path to chose in order to heal the divisions that has torn apart this union so great under the tyranny of Douglas. May God bless our country so that in the event of victory we will not have to experience further discord and can instead work towards the continued prosperity of our great republic."- Republican Presidential nominee Abraham Lincoln 1860
"Son of a bitch! Those damn Americans decided to steal the party name that I had spent days mulling over in late 1840. Stealing my legacy. I'll show them how it is to steal one's intellectual property when we sue their asses in court. Call the Attorney General!"- President Mirabeau Lamar 1854
When William Henry Harrison was elected as President many Americans thought that the two party system had finally stabilized and that for the rest of the century it would be a competition of Democrats versus Whigs. The feeling was quite understandable as the Whigs were the primary opposition in the Jackson Era and enjoyed much success during this time by taking control of the legislature and managing to influence President Johnson in passing many bills created by Whig Senators and Representatives in the '37 Recession. Harrison's Presidency only confirmed that idea as the man managed to recover the American economy to above pre-recession levels and had personally lead the country into its third war against Great Britain and won an immense victory with the addition of Oregon and liberation of Quebec. When President Webster was elected to office it was the start of what many Whigs hoped to be a potential dynasty. Then slavery came in and tore the party apart. While the Whigs could be said to be united by a common set of ideals based on big government and a protectionist form of economics, they were far from united when it came to the matter of whether or not slavery should be abolished. When it came to the issue of slavery the Democrats were united in continuing it not because all members held a universal value over is existence, but more so due to the fact that the party's entire base was centered around the southern states where the idea of abolishing slavery was treated as sheer ludicrous. On the Whigs side was a division between those who wanted abolishment, those who seeked to merely limit it in its current borders, the people who didn't care, and the small minority who supported the practice. In addition to this was increased factionalism in other areas such as social class, regionalism, conservatives and liberals, imperialists and isolationists, etc. Another main divide that rose up in 1854 was the issue of nativism and immigration. Since the end of the 1846 Revolutions, the United States experienced a huge surge of immigrants from Europe, primarily those that came from Ireland, Germany, Hungary, Austria, Russia, and Scandinavia. All of these immigrants were men and women who wanted to seek a new life in the United States and achieve the American Dream where their children would live a better life then the one that laid in the home country. Unlike Texas who welcomed the new surge of immigration, the United States became polarized on the issue as many Anglo-Saxon Protestant Americans feared losing the nations homogeneity and having to play second fiddle to the Catholics, Slavs, Germans, Irish, Italians, Hispanics, etc. While most of the Whigs could be said to be pro immigration as the founding fathers intended, a significant faction within the party turned to Nativism in order to drive the immigrants out and protect their jobs from the newcomers. This in turn allowed the Democratic Party to monopolize on Irish, German, and Catholic votes until the change in party policy under the Lincoln and Lee Presidencies. Meanwhile a good number of immigrants who were being snubbed by their new nation decided to head to Texas instead when word reached from their brethren of better conditions. With all of these conditions the Whig Party unofficially disintegrated in the summer of 1854, almost all members switching their party allegiance to either Democrat or Independent. The Douglas Administration looked on in glee as while President Douglas faced significant controversy and opposition to his current slavery policy, the collapse of the Whigs all but signified his reelection and the possibility of a Democrat monopoly on elections for the next generation. Unfortunately for the Democrats, a new party would rise and soon become their eternal rivals for control of America. The Republicans.
After the passing of the Kansas-Nebraska Act came a small period of uncertainty for many of the former Whigs in Washington. One by one a congressmen left the party each day and the few remaining loyalists of the party who wanted to see a revival gradually gave up trying to go against the current tide. Past Presidents Harrison and Webster were both invited to Washington early that Summer in order to try and unite the party together and find a united stance upon slavery. Both men came on June 5th and gave impassioned speeches on why the Whigs need to maintain unity in order to move forward the agenda that they had been so successful at promoting during their presidencies. Harrison spoke of the good work that they did in the Oregon War and how the Whig Party was needed in the future for America, Webster rebuked many of the congressmen present for flipping out over the Oregon Compromise when it was a sound deal and the reason the Democrats were able to gain in power again. Both men while not fundamental supporters of slavery like the south, both didn't see the need for active abolishment and tried shift party agenda to limit the spread of slavery at the most. At the end of the day a faction of men who were of Nativist origins decided to leave the meeting and set about to create their own political party, since both Harrison and Webster were pro immigration. Those who remained were a mix of men from different walks of life. However, unlike the previous makeup of the Whigs they had several things in common; many of them were from the North, most of Anglo Protestant or Scandinavian origin, fundamental supporters of modernization, and all of whom relative agreed in the ideology of "Free Soil, Free Labor, Free Land". While it wasn't the results that Harrison and Webster were looking for in order to save the Whigs, it was an active start for what could be a new party. A later meeting was called at July 6th in Jackson, Michigan so that they could fully discuss any potential plans for what the new third party would be. Word spread out of the meeting and many were invited to participate so that they could have a place in the new party. Among the newcomeers were members of the Free Soil Party who felt that they would not be able to abolish slavery on their own, and Northern Democrats who were tired of Douglas' policies and the control that the Southern Wing had over the party. Many prominent future Republican leaders would be in attendance including John Fremont, Abraham Lincoln, William Seward, James G. Blaine, Charles Sumner, and many more. When the convention started all the delegates were in agreement that the Democratic Party had taken matters too far with their radical shift of the slavery balance and the potential to overturn most of the Whig laws that had been passed. Many still remembered the tyranny of Jackson and they were afraid what would happen if a man like Toombs would become President (later being justified). When it came to ideology there was a swift agreement in retaining the Whig platforms of protectionist economics and the continued pursuit of industrialization and building of infrastructure. On foreign policy there was a gradual want to maintain continental affairs but back off from the imperialist attitudes that was present in many Democrats. Finally on the issue of slavery, it was agreed upon after much debate that the new party's course would be to limit slavery within the current boundaries and make all the western territories free, with the problem of abolishment postponed for a later date. With party mindset being handled all that was left was a name. Many ideas were thrown such as the Neo-Federalist, New Whigs, Constitutionals, American Union, Progressives, or the Reform Party. The issue of the matter was finally resolved when a Texan reporter for the Austin Chronicle was present for the debate and remarked "Well I'll be, you guys look like a bunch of Republicans." The reporter then explained the Republican Party of Texas and how it shared many similar traits to the group gathered in political ideology and stance on slavery, with many members of the electorate and supporters of the Texan Republicans being more anti-slavery then the Western Union. The name sounded good to many of those present and when an official vote came the delegates chose the name Republican Party (ironically affirming Lamar's claims that they stole his idea). With a few more days spent on party structure and new mission for the upcoming midterms, the party became an official organization and soon moved into Washington in the old Whig headquarters. Its new members were given the mission of becoming elected to as many offices as possible with the upcoming midterms while campaigns were created to try and convert many of the Northern politicians to the party.
Logo of the Republican Party in 2016
When the 1854 Midterm elections were completed the Republicans managed to win and impressive 20 Senate seats and 84 House seats within Congress. This was able to be achieved due to the near assimilation of the Whigs into the new Republican party and a mix of defections and elections of new original candidates taking place. Unfortunately for the Republicans, this was still not enough as the Democrats held an a majority in both houses with 37 Senators and 132 Representatives, the rest belonging to the American party or Independents. The only benefit of the Democratic majority is that it could be said that with distrust starting to grow against Douglas that the Democrats were far from unified like previously before. While the Republicans tried to establish an identity and grow their movement within the American electorate, their new congressmen were active within Washington. After Kansas-Nebraska the members of the Republican Party all became firmly anti-slavery in one way or another and soon set up to block any pro slavery bills from passing in congress. While they weren't able to meet the task in the Senate most of the time due to the firm Southern control, they had managed to solidify an opposition in the House by allying with Northern Democrats who were either anti-Douglas or anti-slavery. Among the legislation for the 34th Congress that the Republicans did support were measures of modernization and federal funds to help further the creation of industry in New England and the Ohio river region, leading to a huge part in Douglas' success with the railroads. While economics could mostly be agreed upon through debate, all bills related to slavery and western settlement became deadlocked within congress. The only major action that received bipartisan support in relation to slavery was the admittance of Minnesota and the Bahamas into the Union. In the past couple of years both territories had been getting extensive colonization by both the North and the South respectively so that another free/slave state would be admitted into the union and strengthen the balance. There were of course other reasons besides the settlement for slavery such as Minnesota's rich farmland and the Bahamas excellent position as a producer of rum and trade point entering into the Gulf of Mexico. In order to settle the divide and insure equality before the admittance of Kansas though, both states would have to be admitted at the same time, which was achieved on February 4th, 1856. Two more states joining just in time for the election.
While the congressmen in Washington actively debated over the future of the nation, the position of national stability in order was getting worse every day. With the divide on both sides of the political spectrum getting nastier as a result. On March 30th, 1855, the first elections were underway in Kansas in order to settle the issue of a territorial legislature. In the aftermath of the vote the slave camp won an overwhelming 26-3 majority in the new legislature, giving them a monopoly on the political process. The Abolitionists cried foul and demanded a recount take place due to voter fraud, the federal authorities acquiesced and a recount was done that proved that the divide was actually 19-10 in slave to free voters. With the new majority the pro-slavery camp made its way to Pawnee to conduct the first legislative session and pass laws favorable to slavery. Outraged by the results of the election, a national campaign was underway in order to encourage New England Yankees to migrate to Kansas in order to push the legislature towards abolition. Thousands traveled across the country and soon the free settlers became equal to the slave setters. In response settlers from Missouri and Arkansas migrated to Kansas in order to push it back into their favor. The situation escalated in mid-1855 when the infamous abolitionist John Brown arrived in Kansas and declared that he would create a righteous revolution to free Kansas of the evils of slavery. Brown along with other radicals set up a rival legislature in Topeka and claimed themselves as the legitimate government of Kansas. The Pawnee government declared them to be nothing more than rebels and asked for federal intervention to quell this apparent insurrection. Unfortunately for them Washington would not be able to do anything as a gridlock in congress and threats of impeachment upon the sending of the army held Douglas' hands tied behind his back. As time went on the debates turned into bloodshed when slave and free settlers started to attack each other in the streets and took to vandalizing each others property to try and strike feat into the others hearts. The situation is felt to have been perfectly described by Texas Ranger Jessie Simmons who was traveling through the territory in order to extradite a murderer back to Houston in 1856, "Traveling through Kansas is like going to hell and back. Americans over here like to mock us Texas and call us savages due to the claims of large gunfights, Indian attacks, ranch wars, and other matters of the frontier. In truth while these events have taken place, there is usually a code of honor among the participants and disputes are settled relatively quickly through the decisions of the community before Rangers or the local sheriff needs to get involved. Even the Indians will sometimes take it to court instead of the old ways of settlement raiding. Here in Kansas though, you can't walk a single mile without some American pointing a gun at you and demanding your viewpoint on slavery. If a free settler were to walk into a slave town then that man would be beaten, stripped, robbed, and sometimes killed just for believing that a man of dark skin should not be enslaved, with the same holding true for the other side. Traveling through the territory I needed to have my colt and badge with me at all times to protect myself, even then I'd get shot at a few times just for being different then their community. There is an intense divide with hate on both sides enough to make our disputes with the Mexicans seem like a petty squabble. All of this for the life of a fucking slave. You'd never see this sort of shit happening in Texas. No sir."
"The Tragic Prelude" by John Stewart Curry. A Painting showing how the actions of John Brown and Bleeding Kansas led to the Civil War.
While Bleeding Kansas was getting more intense with each passing day the general mood of the nation remained at a nervous calm as these events were only happening in the backwards western frontier that was Kansas and only involved Radicals of both sides. What happened there couldn't possibly happen east of the Mississippi where civilized folks lived, right? It turned out that the hopes by Americans back east would soon come falling down as the intense radicalism of the slave fight soon made its way back into the halls of Washington, where the nation's leaders where supposed to be discussing the matter in a civilized form. On May 20th, 1856, Senator Charles Sumner of Massachusetts (R) gave a speech on the floor Senate attacking the actions of South Carolina Senator Andrew Bulter for his role in creating Kansas-Nebraska, which Sumner believed to be the cause of the current crises in bleeding Kansas. The criticism soon became personal when Sumner attacked Butler's moral character and speech while Butler made sexual allegations of Sumner and possible relations with black women, which were entirely false. After the affair Representative Preston Brooks of South Carolina became infuriated at Sumner due to the fact that Butler was the man's brother in-law. Brooks planned to challenge Sumner to a duel for his brother's honor when Sumner refused due to his belief that duels were a barbaric and ancient practice that had taken the lives of greats like Alexander Hamilton pointlessly. Brooks became enraged at the outcome and wanted vengance for what he now felt was a direct slight to his southern honor. Brooks' friend Laurence M. Keitt, another South Carolina representative, conspired with Brooks and planted the idea that since Sumner was a dishonourable low life that it would be better to directly take revenge by openly attacking the man for all to see as justice, something Brooks madly agreed with. On May 22nd, 1856, just as Charles Sumner was collecting his papers in the Senate floor to head for a lunch recess, Brooks launched a surprise attack and began beating the senator intensely with a gutta-percha cane along with its gold head. The sheer force of the blows caused Sumner to temporarily lose his sight and suffer multiple head trauma while undergoing massive bleeding. Multiple Senators and Representatives gathered around the men and tried to intervene when Keitt whipped out his own cane and pistol and demanded that the congressmen step back and let the two "Settle their affairs like proper gentlemen." Many stood back in horror and stared as Brooks savagely beat Sumner to a pulp, with the Senator looking on the verge of death if nothing was done. While Vice President Toombs tried to calm down the men and get them to release Sumner, another Senator decided to take action. Standing on a balcony overlooking the fight, Oregon Senator Nathaniel Smith (R) was disgusted with the actions of Brooks and felt that he had to take action or his friend and colleague would die. Senator Smith decided to bring out his own Colt .45 that he kept on his person at all times, and shot both Brooks and Keitt in the from the balcony, both dying instantly due to the first blows being headshots while Smith dispensed the remaining four rounds into both bodies for insurance. When the rest of the floor looked on in shock and horror, Senator Smith shouted "What are you all looking at? What I did was shoot a rabid dog and his lackey who were both attempting to murder our colleague for the shit reason of southern chivalry and honor. What I did was save Charles' life by eliminating his would-be killers before they struck the finishing blow. Let it be known that I, Nathaniel Edwards Smith, dispensed justice. You are welcome." Upon finishing his speech the Southern Wing of congress attempted to strike out at Smith for killing their allies. Thankfully no further bloodshed took place as Capitol police and men of the Presidential Guard rushed in and extracted Sumner from the scene while arresting Smith, all the while installing order on the congressional floor, the men having been alerted by Senator Lincoln during the attack. When news of the Caning of Sumner, or the Murder of Brooks and Keitt as it was known in the south, spread the next day the nation erupted in a plethora of emotions. The North generally held an attitude that hailed Sumner as a martyr for the cause of abolition while Smith was treated as a hero for dispensing the two villains. In the South the viewpoint was the exact opposite as the populace held Brooks and Keitt as martyrs and Sumner the instigator and Smith a murderer. The situation became worse when on May 26th all charges against Smith were dropped by the Justice Department due to their finding that Smith acted in self-defense of Sumner, the mans severe head and spinal injuries and eyewitness accounts of the affair confirming that Brooks launched the attack with killing intent. When news of that ruling spread riots started to grow in the south while the North celebrated Smith as their hero. Wanting to prevent a bad situation from getting worse, Douglas passed an executive order that banned firearms in the floors of congress and extended the powers of the Presidential Guard to reside over general sessions and protect Smith's life. While federal troops were sent in across the country to restore order. The need for troops getting highly intense in Kansas where the Caning had prompted John Brown to go on a terror spree against the slave settlers for justice, resulting in dozens of casualties on both sides. While the Civil War would not start for five more years, the Caning of Sumner marked a point in American politics when the divide over slavery became an uncompromising affair which would result in chaos in blood at the current rate.
A Northern cartoon of the Caning of Sumner showing the Massachusetts Senator as a victim to the savage Brooks.
When the 1856 Presidential Elections came around it looked to possibly be the most divisive one to date, overshadowing even the 1832 and 1852 Presidential Elections. With the Caning of Sumner both sides became firmly divided with little hope of reconciliation or compromise on the issue of slavery. The situation having been worsened after the Caning with the violence in Bleeding Kansas reaching an all-time high and Douglas having to use Federal troops for an intervention in the territory. The Democrats felt the need to win in order to save the Union and prevent the supposed tyranny of the Republicans. While the Republicans felt they needed to win in order to end the barbaric continuance of slavery and protect the nation from being controlled by the Southern Aristocracy. In the middle was the American or Know-Nothing Party who while they felt that slavery was immoral, focused on a ban of immigration in order to fix the nations problems, something that both Democrats and Republicans thought went against the principles of the founding fathers. At the Republican Convention General John C. Fremont, Conquerer of Oregon, was chosen as the nominee after a few rounds of voting due to the need for the Republicans to establish a high profile candidate to entice voters to chose the brand new party, Fremont having the perfect fit due to his war hero status. In addition Fremont was a diehard abolitionist and if put in office would've relied on the consensus of the Party in Congress, something that members of the early establishment looked forward to. For the Republican Vice President William L. Dayton the Senator from New Jersey was chosen in order to draw the eastern seaboard in, Abraham Lincoln being passed over in a close majority. IN the DNC the Democrats chose to continue with the Douglas-Toombs ticket for reelection. While there had been high opposition on both sides due to some Southerners feeling that Douglas didn't do enough on the Caning and Bleeding Kansas, while other Northerners thought he was a liability against the Republicans, most agreed that it would be the right choice to stick with their current President and felt that the direction he was going was enough, everyone waiting to see the final results on Kansas to give a verdict on whether or not popular sovereignty was a good idea. Within the American Convention in Philadelphia there was a high sense of urgency as the Americans needed to win this election or at least do well enough so that they could establish themselves as the primary opposition to the Democrats. Many felt threatened by the Republicans and while the Americans held a substantial minority in congress, many of its members considered switching to the Republicans. For their presidential candidate former vice president Millard Fillmore was selected as the party's candidate. Ironically the man did not believe in the party's anti-immigration policies and his name was chosen while he was on a trip to Europe, Fillmore only realizing that he was nominated once he returned to America. The man accepted the nomination nonetheless as he felt Fremont was too much of a radical and his election would've led to Civil War. When Fillmore was nominated his candidacy came under harsh attack from his former boss President Webster who decried Fillmore to be a "Betrayal be my great friend who chose to abandon the Whig ideal and instead pursued a path of bigotry and tyranny." Fillmore's nomination came under heavy scrutiny by other Republicans and former Whigs, leading to any hopes of a potential alliance between the two parties. Not only that but Fillmore's nomination itself was attacked by both Presidents Crockett and Nelson who stated that if the man was elected then all agreements between Texas and Quebec, and the United States would be null and void due to the party's anti-Catholic stance, leading to Fillmore's support being dropped in much of the nation. The election campaign was a very polarized one as all three candidates chose to forgo a potential debate and instead directed their energies to attacking each others policies, all three saying that the other two would lead to the downfall of the Union when elected. All of the candidates also took to campaigning exclusively in the Northern states as the South was seen as a waste of effort due to their solid support of the Democrats. Still the election turned to an dark note when supporters of all three parties would regularly get into brawls and sometimes riot over their conflict of their respective parties. The worse case being the St. Paul Street War when both Fremont and Douglas were in the capitol of the newly admitted State of Minnesota to try and campaign for votes in the new state. Their campaign events were poorly planned by being a block away from each other and supporters from both sides attack the other during speaking events, drawing 61 casualties but fortunately no deaths. When election day came on November 4th the whole nation waited in anticipation for the result and whether or not the Union would truly collapse due to it. The result was decided weeks later where Douglas won on a very slim margin with 159 electoral votes compared to Fremont's 133 and Fillmore's measly 8. Along with that while Douglas did not win a majority of the popular vote again, he won a plurality at 44.47% compared to Fremont's 36.74% and Fillmore's 18.79%. While the Democrats relaxed that they had their first reelection since Jackson in 1832, not everything looked good for the party. The Republicans results proved to be the best performance of an opposition party in American history and many agreed that if Fremont had received Indianna and Illinois, or solely Pennsylvania, then the man would've won the Presidency. In addition the Republicans had closed the gap in Congress with now 25 Senators and 111 Representatives. While the Democrats did well at the same time with 39 Senators and 125 Representatives (The American party and other independents defecting to either side while the Democrats lost seats in the House). If the elections were to go at the current rate then the Republicans could easily win a majority in both houses and the presidency in 1860. With these results the Democrats hoped for a very successful second term for Douglas so that they could maintain their dominance in politics. This would not be the case as Douglas's second term would prove to be the point where the line had passed and the country on a ticking time bomb to Fort Sumter.
1856 United States Presidential Election
Douglas/Toombs (D): 159 EV 1,803,072 Votes 44.74%
Fremont/Dayton (R): 133 EV 1,351,433 Votes 36.74%
Fillmore/Donelson (A): 8 EV 761,366 Votes 18.79%
A/N: Sorry for the wait but I'm finally done with Douglas' first term. Next time we talk about America you'll see Dred Scott, more Bleeding Kansas, and other things that led to the 1860 Election and the American Civil War. Just as a reminder while the Civil War will start the same with Fort Sumter, the issues leading up to it, generals on both sides, and some of the states allegiances will be different this time around. Next American chapter will be a special narrative one that will be a prequel to an important event that did not take place OTL. Also for those of you curious of Doug Freemen, the man is meant to be a different version of Reagan since Ronald will be a Texan TTL. I chose the date 1981 for his inauguration since that's when Reagan was sworn in, though the year can change Freemen will become a President in the late 20th century no matter what. Next official story chapter we will be looking at the Crockett Presidency, before that is a little skit post in advance. Also as one final PSA, I just found out that there was a Turtledove category for best quote. If any of you guys like my quotes and feel they are worthy for the award, please head on over to the Non-Political Chat forum and submit a nomination. Looking forward to what you guys think is Turtledove worthy if you chose to do so. Thanks once again for reading and stay tuned for more!
Last edited:
Pretty amazing update and I can't wait for the Civil war, especially since you hinted at someone in the Lee family taking up the title of POTUS in the future. I won't assume Robert E. Lee since that would be to easy and would out of character for the man.