North Carolina as psudo-Unionist

Suppose that in the 1850s something changes the sentiment in North Carolina. Basically the people feel that "law and order" is important. This makes them less favorable to rebellion.

When South Carolina leaves the union, secessionist figures in North Carolina seize the federal armories for the state militia. However, to their horror, the convention votes in favor of staying with the union 75% to 10% (plus some abstains). In addition, the unionists outnumber the secessionists 3 to 1 (and I bet most people are "I don't care, just don't loot my farm").

The governor focuses on clamping down of secessionist groups inside his state. He issues a declaration that North Carolina stays with the union, like the convention said, but the state's railroads should not be used for offensive operations against "sister states" (OTL either Kentucky or Maryland made a "we're with the union but don't use our resources against the South, which Lincoln promptly overrode since it's a civil war and you need every mile of rail) and likewise only volunteers can go to the Northern Army (ie, no drafting allowed). He deploys his state militia in anticipation of an attack from Tennessee and South Carolina. The rank and file stay loyal to the state government. As an additional complication Jeb Stuart decides to go unionist and take a role in training northern cavalry units because he thinks his home state of Virginia is doomed to fall to the North even if the rest of the South splits and if it's going to fall anyways, he might as well further his career. He thinks his conscious can be clean if he doesn't actually lead any combat units against his home.

In OTL, North Carolina's state government wanted to be union but felt like it got dragged into the mess. On the lower levels, there were people in both camps. Despite that the common people were more split than their wannabee union government, NC had the highest rate of desertions in the Army of Northern Virginia. Also, unionist resisters there were a pain that the CSA never manage to snuff out, simply chase them away. With the state government firmly in a unionist position and the common sentiment being unionist, the CSA can't establish a rival rebel government.

What happens next? Does Lincoln give NC the Maryland treatment ("we need your rails") or simply wait for the rebels to force NC's hand? If Virginia units face off against Northern Units from DC and Bull run isn't butterflied away (it probably would be, but let's say the war starts off with a Northern fiasco), that leaves Tennessee and South Carolina in a position to invade NC, whose state militia is not very large.
 
You have to prevent Virginia from going Confederate.

If NC was tactically astute, they would see that Virginia going confederate basically sealed their fate.

If they aren't tactically astute, then strong enough unionist sentiment might allow them to commit tactical suicide like this. And we have plenty of OTL cases of tactical stupidity from military officers, much less politicians

Anyways, what do you think would be the opening moves if a Northern fiasco between Richmond and DC (Bull Run or something similar) isn't butterflied away?
 
Would a Kentucky-style neutrality be more workable?

Probably, but I'm going for them as more North-leaning. In other words tactical stupidity, although an invasion of NC gives plenty of room for Lincoln to intervene to save them. I wans't asking what was most feasible for them, but what if they did this.
 
Probably, but I'm going for them as more North-leaning. In other words tactical stupidity, although an invasion of NC gives plenty of room for Lincoln to intervene to save them. I wans't asking what was most feasible for them, but what if they did this.

I've been considering a scenario, so these are my thoughts. If North Carolina doesn't go Confederate, for whatever reason (the sentiment was split OTL, but as you pointed out, Virginia leaving forced their hand unless they wanted their state brought to ruin), then Tennessee will likely not go Confederate either. Or, at least, Union sentiment will be a lot stronger in Tennessee (a secession vote that fails in referendum while have knock-on effects for succeeding referendums).

Here's the principal matter: The main railroad lines to Virginia run through Greensboro, NC. There is one that runs through northwestern Tennessee, in Union-sympathetic territory, but the main line runs that way through North Carolina. So, to supply Virginia, the South has to move their troops through NC.

Combine that with Wilmington still being a major port and base for Confederate supplies and blockade runners during the war, and the loss of the port will definitely hamper the Confederacy. A smaller matter are troops supplied. If I am remembering correctly (as they harped on this point in grade school), North Carolina supplied the largest amount of troops of any of the various states. And, while there will certainly be sympathizers and those that would leave for other states, the number of troops that NC would supply to the south would be reduced. Of lesser importance, the Mosquito Fleet would be a small reduction to the South's naval projection, but it kept to the Sounds til its destruction in 1862. It won't have a greater effect.

The biggest problem is long-term. Without NC, Virginia cannot be adequately defended. The Confederate capital (shouldn't) relocate north, and will stay in Montgomery. And, if the Union invades Virginia, the South will have to run reinforcements into NC. The problem here is that the main sources of Confederate support in the east, not near the rail lines (which are closer to the regions of Union support), and the Confederacy will be marching a hostile army in an invasion to secure a rail line. The NC government would likely resist, but without armed support from the Union, such attempts would likely fail. However, the invasion of NC would effectively serve the same purpose of an invasion of neutral Kentucky et al.

A smart Lincoln would, of course, offer to the governor of NC to increase garrisons once the vote is made. The NC governor would know that the South is going to have to invade if it comes to war, and if NC is going to plant its foot firmly in the northern camp, rather than remaining neutral, steps will have to be taken to support it.
 
You have to prevent Virginia from going Confederate.

This. Where Virginia goes, North Carolina will follow. If Virginia stayed in the Union then NC absolutely would as well.

But it also works the other way. With an (unlikely) POD that NC absolutely won't secede for some reason then Virginia probably won't either since their position is totally indefensible.
 

B-29_Bomber

Banned
This. Where Virginia goes, North Carolina will follow. If Virginia stayed in the Union then NC absolutely would as well.

But it also works the other way. With an (unlikely) POD that NC absolutely won't secede for some reason then Virginia probably won't either since their position is totally indefensible.

Indeed.
 
This. Where Virginia goes, North Carolina will follow. If Virginia stayed in the Union then NC absolutely would as well.

But it also works the other way. With an (unlikely) POD that NC absolutely won't secede for some reason then Virginia probably won't either since their position is totally indefensible.

To do otherwise essentially will guarantee that NC will become the center of the conflict that is the war. By voting for this, the citizens of NC would essentially be saying "Do you want your homes and businesses and places of worship to become the frontlines in a conflict among our states".

The other option, however, would for the South to do something so incredibly off-putting that it offends the citizens of NC to vote against the secession.
 
To do otherwise essentially will guarantee that NC will become the center of the conflict that is the war. By voting for this, the citizens of NC would essentially be saying "Do you want your homes and businesses and places of worship to become the frontlines in a conflict among our states".

The other option, however, would for the South to do something so incredibly off-putting that it offends the citizens of NC to vote against the secession.

Wait. Since my POD is at least 7 years before the civil war but doesn't butterfly away Lincolns' election, we could change sentiment in North Carolina but not Tennessee and Virginia. And the logic that if NC won't secede Virginia wouldn't either is faulty since NC was trying to make up its mind when Virginia left.

I was imagining the first few events go in this. States declare leaving, while NC stays. NC governor, like the Maryland governor, has the faulty logic that if both sides are not allowed to use his states railroads, then his state doesn't suffer form he conflict (seriously I have no idea what the OTL Maryland governor was thinking). Southern troops pour into Virginia by foot (it's early in the war and the tonnage of supplies isn't that big, so it's possible). We still have a Northern fiasco. However, Virginia's supply situation is difficult since they only have one rail connecting Richmond and the rest of the CSA. They can produce some food and gunpowder so they screwed any more than any Southern state hypothetically cut off.

Now they might look to occupying NC ass a solution to their problems. In OTL it was Secessionists > or = Unionists > "Don't loot my farm and I don't care" in NC (but not by big margins, that's why their elected government was divided). In TTL, it's "Don't loot my farm" > Unionists > Secessionists with Unionists outnumbering Secessionists 3 to 1. The South might try to encourage NC to join the south (they tried the same in OTL with Maryland and it didn't work), but any destruction of homes, businesses and places of worship by the Southerners might just push NC into the North camp even more. And they might go from the idiotic Maryland (which in the first 3 months was in effect was let's be allies but share rails or command structure) position to full cooperation.
 
Does this encourage Unionists in any other states? Florida, Texas ?

My POD doesn't create any more unionists in the other states, but it might embolden them. in OTL, there were unionists in all Southern states. NC had the most, but even Texas and Florida had them. The 1st Alabama Cavalry Regiment might get a lot of people supporting them and giving them logistical support. Heck, they might form a whole year ahead of schedule. Maybe. I don't know. That's why I asked what people were thinking what the next development might be after "Bull run" or its equivalent.
 
My POD doesn't create any more unionists in the other states, but it might embolden them. in OTL, there were unionists in all Southern states. NC had the most, but even Texas and Florida had them. The 1st Alabama Cavalry Regiment might get a lot of people supporting them and giving them logistical support. Heck, they might form a whole year ahead of schedule. Maybe. I don't know. That's why I asked what people were thinking what the next development might be after "Bull run" or its equivalent.

But a referendum for secession failing in NC by a large enough margin to be undeniable would have its own knock-ons. If we consider that the states vote to secede in similar order, the only one whose referendum will be affected by this earlier one's failure will be Tennessee.

And, well, I can't really take your PoD into consideration when we just know that something happens. Without knowing what that something is, whatever the cause is will likely spread to other states. While SC might be resistant, Tennessee and Virginia might see some of their own leakages of Union support into each.

So, if we consider a situation where NC resoundedly puts themselves in such a bad situation that they stand against the South, there might be similar reactions throughout Tennessee, and the secession vote there might fail. Or, in a bid to ensure that the secession vote in TN wins, the vote is hamhandedly rigged in such a manner so that the South wins, and evidence of the corruption spreads and the formation of a split Pro-Union/Pro-Confederacy governments in Tennessee lead to that state being neutral as well. (or, even, the eastern part of the state seceding a la West Virginia). Or the state might just prefer to remain neutral in the meantime, seeing the results of what will happen. (a South separated from Virginia likely will be defeated piece by piece).

So, if North Carolina goes, and Unionist sentiment tends to be stronger, then I feel that Tennessee will remain neutral at least. Maybe pro-union, maybe internal civil war, maybe a State of Franklin, but but at least neutral.

And, if First Manassas turns into a Confederate victory, the South will be emboldened and try to force the issue. The victory buys Virginia time, but the South can't break the North's blockade so they have to go overland. In turn, they will have to force the route, somehow.
 
I keep hearing this, can I ask why exactly this is a statement of fact?

The strategic situation. If Virginia leaves, they are tethered to the Confederacy by two railroad lines. The main ones transits through North Carolina; the other, Tennessee.

So, if Virginia leaves, and North Carolina doesn't, and it comes to war, they will find themselves forced into it. They don't have the luxury of the other border states, where they can sit out and hopefully no armies will come marching. Either way, there will be one, either to occupy the rail lines to connect Montgomery to Richmond, or one to occupy Wilmington et al to prevent it from being used.

So, a vote against secession, when Virginia has voted to leave, is a vote to stand against Virginia and the armies that seek to resupply and defend her. Which, I think, is a doable action; it will just take a lot more to rile the citizens of the state against the South to that point.
 

B-29_Bomber

Banned
I keep hearing this, can I ask why exactly this is a statement of fact?

SA_map_index.png


Boom. My whole argument.
 

B-29_Bomber

Banned
More pertinent (I had forgotten about the line that ran through Goldsboro, however):

Rail-Roads-of-the-Confederacy.gif

I mean rail lines don't even have to enter the equation. Once Virginia and Tennessee secede, North Carolina would be completely cut off and surrounded on three sides!

Ah mean, it doesn't take Stonewall Jackson to know when you're cut off and boned beyond belief!
 
The strategic situation. If Virginia leaves, they are tethered to the Confederacy by two railroad lines. The main ones transits through North Carolina; the other, Tennessee.

So, if Virginia leaves, and North Carolina doesn't, and it comes to war, they will find themselves forced into it. They don't have the luxury of the other border states, where they can sit out and hopefully no armies will come marching. Either way, there will be one, either to occupy the rail lines to connect Montgomery to Richmond, or one to occupy Wilmington et al to prevent it from being used.

So, a vote against secession, when Virginia has voted to leave, is a vote to stand against Virginia and the armies that seek to resupply and defend her. Which, I think, is a doable action; it will just take a lot more to rile the citizens of the state against the South to that point.

SA_map_index.png


Boom. My whole argument.

I mean rail lines don't even have to enter the equation. Once Virginia and Tennessee secede, North Carolina would be completely cut off and surrounded on three sides!

Ah mean, it doesn't take Stonewall Jackson to know when you're cut off and boned beyond belief!

ok, I'll ask in chat instead, probably more of a political question to be honest......
 
Top