Given their southern collapse, Whig viability as a major party may depend on selling itself as a sectional party. I see that James Buchanan has been sighted in the tall weeds, possibly as a Secretary of State under a Democratic administration given the clout he holds in the party.
Man of the Hour, A Franklin Pierce Story
- Thread starter CELTICEMPIRE
- Start date
Chapter IX, 1860
The Election of 1860 pitted Vice President Sam Houston against Steamship Financier George Law. While most analysts believed that the Democratic ticket would prevail, Houston was not going to be complacent. Law was a wealthy man and could thus raise considerable funds for his campaign. The Democratic Party would largely ignore the Northeast, putting their funds to better use in the Midwest. The Whigs would concentrate their efforts on five states won by Franklin Pierce in 1856; Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Indiana, Ohio, and Maryland. North Carolina, which was won by the Whig candidate four years earlier, was considered a lost cause, as were Louisiana and Georgia, two Southern states that had often elected Whigs in the past. The party would rely on the North and the Upper South. In the Deep South, many Whig politicians distanced themselves from the national party in order to win reelection. But Law’s supporters hoped to use the economy against the Democrats, believing they could convince the American public that Whig policies would take the country out of the recession.
Though the economy was in bad shape, Houston could point to some successes of the Pierce administration. First, America had won the war in Nicaragua. Second, the trans-continental railroad had been built. This was enough to virtually guarantee victory in New Mexico and California. Stephen Douglas could also secure Illinois for Houston. But even if Illinois and California voted for Houston, along with every slave state, he wouldn’t have enough electoral votes to win. He also couldn’t count on winning every slave state, Kentucky had a powerful Whig machine and had supported the party every time. States like Missouri, Maryland, and Delaware had a large number of people who were uninterested in the expansion of slavery. Democrats would need to win many states in the North. Houston’s Northern supporters ran a populist campaign, portraying Law as rich and out of touch. They also appealed to immigrant voters. This forced Whigs to spend money in places like New York which could be better spent elsewhere. Of particular importance were the states of Indiana and Ohio, which saw no shortage of surrogates for Houston and Law.
Law ran a nativist campaign. This appealed to people in the Northeast. Though this region had many immigrants, it also had many nativists. He also campaigned on protectionism. This was particularly popular in Pennsylvania and Ohio. Law realized the futility of contesting the Deep South, but did try to compete in the Upper South. After all, he had financial ties to the region. He contradicted the Whig platform by saying that he would be open to the possibility of the expansion of slavery, if Cuba was annexed (though he remained opposed to expansion of slavery above the 36°30′ parallel North). His supporters also tried to assuage fears of being outvoted in Congress by free states by claiming that when Kansas became a state it would vote like Missouri on slavery. The Free-Soil Party exploited these statements up North. Edward Wade hoped to prevent the party from collapsing now that the Whigs were moving in an anti-slavery direction. They called for the abolition of slavery in all territories and rallied against fugitive slave laws. But the party was in decline, with many of its members returning to the Whig Party.
(Edward Wade)
Though Houston didn’t have to worry about Law in the Deep South, he did have to contend with Edmund Ruffin of the Southern Rights Party. Democratic leaders did not how much of a threat the party would be. It had little effect on the 1852 or 1856 elections, but Houston would be proactive in combatting their influence. He convinced Jefferson Davis, his rival, to speak in favor of the Houston/Douglas ticket. Davis warned political leaders in Mississippi not to support Ruffin/Miles, “lest the election be thrown to the Whig-controlled Congress.” Davis also spoke against the minority of Southern leaders who advocated secession if Law won. Davis helped his rival to show that he was a team player and to get Democrats to support him in future campaigns of his. Douglas, ironically, was seen by some as more pro-slavery than Houston, as he supported popular sovereignty on slavery. This gave him the support of those who were still holding out hope for a slave state Kansas. Meanwhile, in the Upper South, Law was not giving up. He outspent Democrats in Delaware, Maryland, and Kentucky.
(Edmund Ruffin)
Ultimately, Law’s money was unable to carry the day. He lost the popular vote by less than 2.5% and lost the electoral college by 1 vote. The Whig Party delegates had made the decision to become an essentially pro-Northern party, but did not go all the way to become an anti-slavery party. The party did enough to alienate most of the South, but did not do enough to win over the majority of Free-Soil voters. The Free-Soil Party received less votes than in 1856, but still had a respectable showing. The Southern Rights Party did reasonably well, though failed to crack 20% in any state. For every vote they got from Democrats, they got three votes from Whigs. The election results showed regional polarization. The last two elections had seen Pierce outperform his Whig opponents in the North and the South. In 1860, Houston would win a majority in the South while Law would win a majority in the North. The slave states Law was able to win were decided by close margins and several southern Whigs were ready to defect to the Democratic Party. The Democrats were able to effectively appeal to people across a wider geographical area, but they too were experiences sectional tensions, even if less pronounced.
1: mostly write-ins and the radical anti-slavery Liberty Party.
Though the economy was in bad shape, Houston could point to some successes of the Pierce administration. First, America had won the war in Nicaragua. Second, the trans-continental railroad had been built. This was enough to virtually guarantee victory in New Mexico and California. Stephen Douglas could also secure Illinois for Houston. But even if Illinois and California voted for Houston, along with every slave state, he wouldn’t have enough electoral votes to win. He also couldn’t count on winning every slave state, Kentucky had a powerful Whig machine and had supported the party every time. States like Missouri, Maryland, and Delaware had a large number of people who were uninterested in the expansion of slavery. Democrats would need to win many states in the North. Houston’s Northern supporters ran a populist campaign, portraying Law as rich and out of touch. They also appealed to immigrant voters. This forced Whigs to spend money in places like New York which could be better spent elsewhere. Of particular importance were the states of Indiana and Ohio, which saw no shortage of surrogates for Houston and Law.
Law ran a nativist campaign. This appealed to people in the Northeast. Though this region had many immigrants, it also had many nativists. He also campaigned on protectionism. This was particularly popular in Pennsylvania and Ohio. Law realized the futility of contesting the Deep South, but did try to compete in the Upper South. After all, he had financial ties to the region. He contradicted the Whig platform by saying that he would be open to the possibility of the expansion of slavery, if Cuba was annexed (though he remained opposed to expansion of slavery above the 36°30′ parallel North). His supporters also tried to assuage fears of being outvoted in Congress by free states by claiming that when Kansas became a state it would vote like Missouri on slavery. The Free-Soil Party exploited these statements up North. Edward Wade hoped to prevent the party from collapsing now that the Whigs were moving in an anti-slavery direction. They called for the abolition of slavery in all territories and rallied against fugitive slave laws. But the party was in decline, with many of its members returning to the Whig Party.
(Edward Wade)
Though Houston didn’t have to worry about Law in the Deep South, he did have to contend with Edmund Ruffin of the Southern Rights Party. Democratic leaders did not how much of a threat the party would be. It had little effect on the 1852 or 1856 elections, but Houston would be proactive in combatting their influence. He convinced Jefferson Davis, his rival, to speak in favor of the Houston/Douglas ticket. Davis warned political leaders in Mississippi not to support Ruffin/Miles, “lest the election be thrown to the Whig-controlled Congress.” Davis also spoke against the minority of Southern leaders who advocated secession if Law won. Davis helped his rival to show that he was a team player and to get Democrats to support him in future campaigns of his. Douglas, ironically, was seen by some as more pro-slavery than Houston, as he supported popular sovereignty on slavery. This gave him the support of those who were still holding out hope for a slave state Kansas. Meanwhile, in the Upper South, Law was not giving up. He outspent Democrats in Delaware, Maryland, and Kentucky.
(Edmund Ruffin)
Ultimately, Law’s money was unable to carry the day. He lost the popular vote by less than 2.5% and lost the electoral college by 1 vote. The Whig Party delegates had made the decision to become an essentially pro-Northern party, but did not go all the way to become an anti-slavery party. The party did enough to alienate most of the South, but did not do enough to win over the majority of Free-Soil voters. The Free-Soil Party received less votes than in 1856, but still had a respectable showing. The Southern Rights Party did reasonably well, though failed to crack 20% in any state. For every vote they got from Democrats, they got three votes from Whigs. The election results showed regional polarization. The last two elections had seen Pierce outperform his Whig opponents in the North and the South. In 1860, Houston would win a majority in the South while Law would win a majority in the North. The slave states Law was able to win were decided by close margins and several southern Whigs were ready to defect to the Democratic Party. The Democrats were able to effectively appeal to people across a wider geographical area, but they too were experiences sectional tensions, even if less pronounced.
Sam Houston (D-TX)/Stephen Douglas (D-IL): 1,912,782 Votes (46.48%), 152 Electoral Votes
George Law (W-NY)/Nathaniel Green Taylor (W-TN): 1,814,264 Votes (44.09%), 151 Electoral Votes
Edward Wade (FS-OH)/Richard Henry Dana Jr. (FS:-WI): 255,334 Votes (6.21%), 0 Electoral Votes
Edmund Ruffin (SR-VA)/ William Porcher Miles (SR-SC): 124,975 Votes (3.04%), 0 Electoral Votes
Others [1]: 7,560 Votes (0.18%), 0 Electoral Votes
George Law (W-NY)/Nathaniel Green Taylor (W-TN): 1,814,264 Votes (44.09%), 151 Electoral Votes
Edward Wade (FS-OH)/Richard Henry Dana Jr. (FS:-WI): 255,334 Votes (6.21%), 0 Electoral Votes
Edmund Ruffin (SR-VA)/ William Porcher Miles (SR-SC): 124,975 Votes (3.04%), 0 Electoral Votes
Others [1]: 7,560 Votes (0.18%), 0 Electoral Votes
1: mostly write-ins and the radical anti-slavery Liberty Party.
Last edited:
My god, was Edmund Ruffin a member of the Malfoy family!?
Also, congratulations - you just found a way for me to support a pre-1890s Democratic ticket. Having the Whigs being taken over by Nativists is just .... Ugh.
Also, congratulations - you just found a way for me to support a pre-1890s Democratic ticket. Having the Whigs being taken over by Nativists is just .... Ugh.
Ultimately, Law’s money was unable to carry the day. He lost the popular vote by less than 2.5% and lost the electoral college by 1 vote. The Whig Party delegates had made the decision to become an essentially pro-Northern party, but did not go all the way to become an anti-slavery party. The party did enough to alienate most of the South, but did not do enough to win over the majority of Free-Soil voters. The Free-Soil Party received less votes than in 1856, but still had a respectable showing. The Southern Rights Party did reasonably well, though failed to crack 20% in any state. For every vote they got from Democrats, they got three votes from Whigs. The election results showed regional polarization. The last two elections had seen Pierce outperform his Whig opponents in the North and the South. In 1860, Houston would win a majority in the South while Law would win a majority in the North. The slave states Law was able to win were decided by close margins and several southern Whigs were ready to defect to the Democratic Party. The Democrats were able to effectively appeal to people across a wider geographical area, but they too were experiences sectional tensions, even if less pronounced.
Sam Houston (D-TX)/Stephen Douglas (D-IL): 1,912,782 Votes (46.48%), 152 Electoral Votes
John Bell (W-TN)/Robert Winthrop (W-MA): 1,814,264 Votes (44.09%), 151 Electoral Votes
Edward Wade (FS-OH)/Richard Henry Dana Jr. (FS:-WI): 255,334 Votes (6.21%), 0 Electoral Votes
Edmund Ruffin (SR-VA)/ William Porcher Miles (SR-SC): 124,975 Votes (3.04%), 0 Electoral Votes
Others [1]: 7,560 Votes (0.18%), 0 Electoral Votes
Did you have a different plan with Different candidates??
I mean, you have John Bell, who didn't even run, in place of George Law, who did run......your ELection results do not match your text.
Thanks for pointing that out! I had copied and pasted the format for the 1856 results and forgot to change the names of the Whig candidates.
No Probs....
You know, this makes things a bit interesting (If I can have some speculation
. I mean, Houston technically dies in 1863 in the OTL, so depending on the stress of the Presidency, that may still be possible here in the ATL. Whereas Douglas died in 1861, but I don't think he has been drinking hard so much this ATL so he may actually live longer and succeed Houston.
Makes me wonder if you have 1864 kinda be like a 1824 situation except it leads to Civil War....
....
Or given Hickory's curse, an assassination.
Dang! Sam Houston will be the first President of two countries (first Texas later the US)
No Probs....
You know, this makes things a bit interesting (If I can have some speculation
I mean, Houston technically dies in 1863 in the OTL, so depending on the stress of the Presidency, that may still be possible here in the ATL. Whereas Douglas died in 1861, but I don't think he has been drinking hard so much this ATL so he may actually live longer and succeed Houston.
Makes me wonder if you have 1864 kinda be like a 1824 situation except it leads to Civil War....
....
Or given Hickory's curse, an assassination.
I've got the next few presidents planned out already. Some of what you said might happen, though maybe the names and years might be a little bit different. I can't give any more away...
Yeah! In this the next chapter you'll see why this makes someone very excited.
Damn, close election. And can't wait to see what comes of President Houston's administration.
Election 1860 Statistics
By Region:
North [1]:
Law: 1,410,777 Votes (46.95%)
Houston: 1,334,566 Votes (44.42%)
Wade: 251,797 Votes (8.38%)
Others: 7,486 Votes (0.25)
South [2]:
Houston: 578,216 Votes (52.08%)
Law: 403,487 Votes (36.34%)
Ruffin: 124,975 Votes (11.26%)
Hale: 3,537 Votes (0.32%)
Others: 74 Votes (0.01%)
By State:
Closest States:
Best States:
Worst States:
1: Free States, includes free states in the west, like California.
2: Slave States, includes Delaware and New Mexico.
North [1]:
Law: 1,410,777 Votes (46.95%)
Houston: 1,334,566 Votes (44.42%)
Wade: 251,797 Votes (8.38%)
Others: 7,486 Votes (0.25)
South [2]:
Houston: 578,216 Votes (52.08%)
Law: 403,487 Votes (36.34%)
Ruffin: 124,975 Votes (11.26%)
Hale: 3,537 Votes (0.32%)
Others: 74 Votes (0.01%)
By State:
Closest States:
Michigan: 0.3%
Maryland: 0.7%
Kentucky: 1.2%
Wisconsin: 1.9%
New Jersey: 2.1%
Maryland: 0.7%
Kentucky: 1.2%
Wisconsin: 1.9%
New Jersey: 2.1%
Best States:
Best Houston States:
Texas: 69.3%
Arkansas: 58.2%
Alabama: 56.5%
Florida: 56.5%
Georgia: 55.3%
Best Law States:
Delaware: 51.8%
Pennsylvania: 50.5%
Vermont: 50.3%
New Jersey: 50.1%
Rhode Island: 50.0%
Best Wade States:
Vermont: 23.7%
Massachusetts: 22.2%
Wisconsin: 18.1%
New Hampshire: 14.3%
Maine: 12.1%
Best Ruffin States:
Mississippi: 19.4%
Alabama: 17.5%
Georgia: 17.3%
Louisiana: 16.8%
Virginia: 15.1%
Texas: 69.3%
Arkansas: 58.2%
Alabama: 56.5%
Florida: 56.5%
Georgia: 55.3%
Best Law States:
Delaware: 51.8%
Pennsylvania: 50.5%
Vermont: 50.3%
New Jersey: 50.1%
Rhode Island: 50.0%
Best Wade States:
Vermont: 23.7%
Massachusetts: 22.2%
Wisconsin: 18.1%
New Hampshire: 14.3%
Maine: 12.1%
Best Ruffin States:
Mississippi: 19.4%
Alabama: 17.5%
Georgia: 17.3%
Louisiana: 16.8%
Virginia: 15.1%
Worst States:
Worst Houston States:
Vermont: 26
Massachusetts: 30.9%
Maine: 41.6%
Wisconsin: 41.9
Ohio: 41.9%
Worst Law States:
Texas: 18.8%
Alabama: 36.0%
Mississippi: 26.9%
Georgia: 27.4%
Florida: 28.5%
Vermont: 26
Massachusetts: 30.9%
Maine: 41.6%
Wisconsin: 41.9
Ohio: 41.9%
Worst Law States:
Texas: 18.8%
Alabama: 36.0%
Mississippi: 26.9%
Georgia: 27.4%
Florida: 28.5%
1: Free States, includes free states in the west, like California.
2: Slave States, includes Delaware and New Mexico.
And now Sam Houston is going to have the neat distinction of having been the President of an independent country before becoming the American President.
So, maybe I'm just ignorant. But what's up with the pink states and dark red Texas? Why is there color variations?
Percentages of the vote. Houston wins the pink states with thirty or so percent of votes cast, and carries Texas overwhelmingly.
Chapter X, Sam Houston
On March 4, 1861, Sam Houston became America’s 15th President. He was notable for being president of the Republic of Texas before he became President of the United States. His inaugural speech had two major themes. The first theme was a call for unity and loyalty to the ideals of the founding fathers. The second was about maintaining friendly relations with foreign nations. His Vice President was Senator Stephen Douglas of Illinois. His Secretary of State was former ambassador James Buchanan of Pennsylvania. The new Secretary of the Treasury would be former House Speaker Howell Cobb of Georgia. His Secretary of War was former New Hampshire Representative George Washington Kittredge of New Hampshire. Representative John Breckinridge of Kentucky became Attorney General. The new Postmaster General would be former Governor Horatio Seymour of New York. Senator Benjamin Fitzpatrick of Alabama was chosen as Secretary of the Navy. The new Secretary of the Interior would be James W. Bradbury of Maine, who was influential in Franklin Pierce winning the Democratic nomination in 1852. Buchanan influenced Houston to appoint Nathan Clifford of Maine to the Supreme Court seat vacated by the death of Peter Vivian Daniel.
Democrats had not only won the presidential election, they also took back both Houses of Congress. The President pro tempore of the Senate was Robert M. T. Hunter of Virginia. The Democrats had 35 Senators, while Whigs had 30, and the Free-Soil Party had 1. The House was led by William H. English of Indiana. There were 126 Democrats, 105 Whigs, and 2 Free-Soil Representatives. Franklin Pierce was criticized by many Northerners as a “doughface,” a Northerner with Southern sympathies. Sam Houston would be criticized by many Southerners for being the opposite. He received criticism for appointing anti-slavery Kittredge as Secretary of War. He also called for the admission of Kansas and Oregon, despite the fact that both would be free states. Both states would be admitted in 1861, over the objections of some Southern politicians. There were also calls to admit Utah as a slave state, but this was opposed by both Houston and the majority of Congress. Slave state politicians became more and more anxious that they would soon be outvoted by free states. Robert Hunter grew increasingly hostile to Houston. Hunter increased his power over the Senate and used his position to block any tariff or homestead bills from coming up for a vote.
(Left: Robert M. T. Hunter, Right: William H. English)
Shortly after his inauguration, Houston received a letter of congratulations from none other than William Walker. Walker was overjoyed at the news that Houston had won the election. He saw in Texas parallels to Nicaragua. Americans came to Texas and created a new country. That country was eventually annexed by the United States. And now, one of the Presidents of Texas was the President of the United States. Walker envisioned himself in that position within 30 years. He began to use money from the Nicaraguan treasury to pay American journalists to report positively on Nicaragua. Soon, American Newspapers were reporting that Nicaragua was “becoming more and more like America.” Houston continued to support the Walker regime, but opposed annexation. In 1862 he sent General Beauregard to Japan, and sent General John C. Fremont to Nicaragua. He did these because he wanted to be absolutely certain that the American military forces in the country would be led by someone who was against annexation. Fremont and Walker actually got along well, though Fremont unsuccessfully tried to convince Walker to outlaw slavery.
(John C. Fremont)
Houston pursued good relations with the French, who had been his friendly to him during his time as President of Texas. The two countries became closer during this time. Houston was also friendly towards Belgium, the Netherlands, Lübeck, Bremen, and Hamburg, as these states had been friendly towards Texas. Many Mexicans were unhappy that Houston was president, and Houston was criticized by many for turning a blind eye to increasing French involvement in Mexico. In Japan, attacks on foreigners increased and opposition to the Shogunate intensified. Pro-Imperial extremists clashed with police in the Southern part of the country, resulting in dozens of deaths. Minister Ii Naosuke began making accusations against several prominent clans, claiming that they were behind the unrest. In late 1862 soldiers of the Aizu clan were sent to restore order. They clashed with the Ishin-Shishi at Akamagaseki [1], and routed them due to their technological superiority. This led to temporary peace, and more foreigners came to the country. The Ishin-Shishi would use this time to regroup and reassess their strategy.
The 1862 midterm elections saw Democrat losses in the North and Whig losses in the South, though not to the degree that many had anticipated. Many Southern Whigs had successfully distanced themselves from the national party. In parts of the North, Free-Soil men joined the Whigs, but the gains made against Democrats were underwhelming. The recession was ending and the American people seemed to have confidence in the administration. The nativist rhetoric from many Whigs also hurt them in the Northeast, especially in New York. The Midwest mostly stayed under Democratic control as well. Democrats won almost all of the elections in the new states of Kansas and Oregon. The Whigs had some successes in the West, notably in California where they used nativist sentiment to win many local elections and nearly won the governor’s race. In the South, Whig leaders came together to formulate a plot to prevent the anti-slavery wing of the party from taking the nomination in 1864.
There were increasing tensions in the Utah Territory. The vast majority of the Territory’s inhabitants were Mormons or Indians, but newcomers were arriving. A small number of planters came to the territory trying to get southern-style plantations to make a profit there. Settlers rushed to the territory when silver was discovered in the Comstock Lode [2] on the border with California in 1862. Thousands of people from all over the country (as well as some immigrants) flooded in the Utah Territory. The newcomers came into conflict with both the Paiute and Shoshone Indians and the Mormons. Before long, non-Mormons outnumbered Mormons in parts of Western Utah. Sometimes interactions between the two groups were violent, and some people were killed. President Houston was considering sending the military into the territory to maintain order. However, before he could do anything about the situation, he died suddenly on June 1, 1863 at the age of 70. The nation mourned the loss of its third president to die in office. Former President Franklin Pierce was invited to give a eulogy for him. Meanwhile, Stephen Douglas was sworn in as the next president.
(Sam Houston, 1793-1863)1: Modern day Shimonoseki
2: Today in Nevada, which was part of the Utah Territory at the time.
Democrats had not only won the presidential election, they also took back both Houses of Congress. The President pro tempore of the Senate was Robert M. T. Hunter of Virginia. The Democrats had 35 Senators, while Whigs had 30, and the Free-Soil Party had 1. The House was led by William H. English of Indiana. There were 126 Democrats, 105 Whigs, and 2 Free-Soil Representatives. Franklin Pierce was criticized by many Northerners as a “doughface,” a Northerner with Southern sympathies. Sam Houston would be criticized by many Southerners for being the opposite. He received criticism for appointing anti-slavery Kittredge as Secretary of War. He also called for the admission of Kansas and Oregon, despite the fact that both would be free states. Both states would be admitted in 1861, over the objections of some Southern politicians. There were also calls to admit Utah as a slave state, but this was opposed by both Houston and the majority of Congress. Slave state politicians became more and more anxious that they would soon be outvoted by free states. Robert Hunter grew increasingly hostile to Houston. Hunter increased his power over the Senate and used his position to block any tariff or homestead bills from coming up for a vote.
(Left: Robert M. T. Hunter, Right: William H. English)
Shortly after his inauguration, Houston received a letter of congratulations from none other than William Walker. Walker was overjoyed at the news that Houston had won the election. He saw in Texas parallels to Nicaragua. Americans came to Texas and created a new country. That country was eventually annexed by the United States. And now, one of the Presidents of Texas was the President of the United States. Walker envisioned himself in that position within 30 years. He began to use money from the Nicaraguan treasury to pay American journalists to report positively on Nicaragua. Soon, American Newspapers were reporting that Nicaragua was “becoming more and more like America.” Houston continued to support the Walker regime, but opposed annexation. In 1862 he sent General Beauregard to Japan, and sent General John C. Fremont to Nicaragua. He did these because he wanted to be absolutely certain that the American military forces in the country would be led by someone who was against annexation. Fremont and Walker actually got along well, though Fremont unsuccessfully tried to convince Walker to outlaw slavery.
(John C. Fremont)
Houston pursued good relations with the French, who had been his friendly to him during his time as President of Texas. The two countries became closer during this time. Houston was also friendly towards Belgium, the Netherlands, Lübeck, Bremen, and Hamburg, as these states had been friendly towards Texas. Many Mexicans were unhappy that Houston was president, and Houston was criticized by many for turning a blind eye to increasing French involvement in Mexico. In Japan, attacks on foreigners increased and opposition to the Shogunate intensified. Pro-Imperial extremists clashed with police in the Southern part of the country, resulting in dozens of deaths. Minister Ii Naosuke began making accusations against several prominent clans, claiming that they were behind the unrest. In late 1862 soldiers of the Aizu clan were sent to restore order. They clashed with the Ishin-Shishi at Akamagaseki [1], and routed them due to their technological superiority. This led to temporary peace, and more foreigners came to the country. The Ishin-Shishi would use this time to regroup and reassess their strategy.
The 1862 midterm elections saw Democrat losses in the North and Whig losses in the South, though not to the degree that many had anticipated. Many Southern Whigs had successfully distanced themselves from the national party. In parts of the North, Free-Soil men joined the Whigs, but the gains made against Democrats were underwhelming. The recession was ending and the American people seemed to have confidence in the administration. The nativist rhetoric from many Whigs also hurt them in the Northeast, especially in New York. The Midwest mostly stayed under Democratic control as well. Democrats won almost all of the elections in the new states of Kansas and Oregon. The Whigs had some successes in the West, notably in California where they used nativist sentiment to win many local elections and nearly won the governor’s race. In the South, Whig leaders came together to formulate a plot to prevent the anti-slavery wing of the party from taking the nomination in 1864.
There were increasing tensions in the Utah Territory. The vast majority of the Territory’s inhabitants were Mormons or Indians, but newcomers were arriving. A small number of planters came to the territory trying to get southern-style plantations to make a profit there. Settlers rushed to the territory when silver was discovered in the Comstock Lode [2] on the border with California in 1862. Thousands of people from all over the country (as well as some immigrants) flooded in the Utah Territory. The newcomers came into conflict with both the Paiute and Shoshone Indians and the Mormons. Before long, non-Mormons outnumbered Mormons in parts of Western Utah. Sometimes interactions between the two groups were violent, and some people were killed. President Houston was considering sending the military into the territory to maintain order. However, before he could do anything about the situation, he died suddenly on June 1, 1863 at the age of 70. The nation mourned the loss of its third president to die in office. Former President Franklin Pierce was invited to give a eulogy for him. Meanwhile, Stephen Douglas was sworn in as the next president.
(Sam Houston, 1793-1863)
2: Today in Nevada, which was part of the Utah Territory at the time.
So, are we going to get a "Bleeding Utah" that serves as impetus for the civil war somehow? Cause that'd be interesting.
I'm also continuing to be fascinated by Walker's Nicaragua and its relationship with America.
I'm also continuing to be fascinated by Walker's Nicaragua and its relationship with America.