Presidency of a surviving Zachary Taylor?

While Taylor didn't support the Clay "Omnibus" bill, it seems he would not have vetoed the Compromise in its final form. However, my question is: what would the Compromise have looked like in the event of a surviving President Taylor? Was the original suggestion of extending the Missouri Compromise officially dead in the water by this point, or could it have been revived, or possibly combined with a free California?

As just a minor question: what would be some possible consequences of John J. Crittenden becoming Taylor's Secretary of State?
 
What if President Zachary Taylor didn't get food poisoning on the Fourth of July in 1850? (previous times discussed)

CONSOLIDATION: Points of interest -- Taylor was planning on letting New Mexico, at the time a spanish speaking territory, into the US as a state (60 years before OTL); Texas was planning on defending their claims to New Mexican territory by force, and Taylor was prepared to "hang the traitors" if it came to that; and the Compromise of 1850 had actually already failed as an "omnibus" bill, and only passed OTL as a series of legislation, some of which (like the Fugitive Slave Act) required President Fillmore's active support to pass.
They could also split the New Mexico "territory" roughly as OTL, but let the southern half enter as a state.
Yeah, I'd read as well that Fillmore was key to getting parts of the 1850 Compromise passed (like the Fugitive Slave Act); I also happen to think (just going on what I read in Battle Cry of Freedom) that Taylor's stance on slavery in New Mexico wasn't something he was ready to compromise on (though if so, I'd imagine it would more to do with the fact that the Mexican people already living there, American citizens by terms of the Treaty, were adamantly opposed to seeing slavery enter their land).
 
If the compromise fails and it comes to war, then Taylor wouldn't hesitate to mobilize the army and crush the rebellion. And unlike in 1860, much of the leadership in the upper South was opposed to secession in 1850. Taylor was a Louisiana slaveholder with popular support in the South, so unlike Lincoln he'd be in a decent position to make sure that Virginia and Tennessee stay in the Union. The Unionists most likely win the war for the same reasons as in OTL, only the war would be quicker if the Confederacy is smaller. If he is successful at winning the war and bringing the Union back together, Taylor would go down in history as an all time great American President. If for some reason he didn't, then he'd go down as one of the worst.
 
On a lighter note, it would mean someone other than Millard Fillmore becomes the go-to obscure President.
 
While Taylor didn't support the Clay "Omnibus" bill, it seems he would not have vetoed the Compromise in its final form. However, my question is: what would the Compromise have looked like in the event of a surviving President Taylor? Was the original suggestion of extending the Missouri Compromise officially dead in the water by this point, or could it have been revived, or possibly combined with a free California?

Highly unlikely. Most Northerners would oppose it as it would be a plain invitation to the South to push for the acquisition of more "slave" territory below the compromise line.

Probably the end result is not hugely different from OTL. Just possibly NM gets Statehood early.
 
Probably the end result is not hugely different from OTL. Just possibly NM gets Statehood early.
Agree with the latter, certainly. I’d also add that the Fugitive Slave Act is unlikely to pass without the President actively whipping votes on its behalf, which will have some pretty major effects in its own right.
 
On a lighter note, it would mean someone other than Millard Fillmore becomes the go-to obscure President.
John Tyler of course. Even less people know about him IOTL than Fillmore anyway, since you at least remember him for being "the guy with the silly name"
 
If the compromise fails and it comes to war, then Taylor wouldn't hesitate to mobilize the army and crush the rebellion. And unlike in 1860, much of the leadership in the upper South was opposed to secession in 1850. Taylor was a Louisiana slaveholder with popular support in the South, so unlike Lincoln he'd be in a decent position to make sure that Virginia and Tennessee stay in the Union. The Unionists most likely win the war for the same reasons as in OTL, only the war would be quicker if the Confederacy is smaller. If he is successful at winning the war and bringing the Union back together, Taylor would go down in history as an all time great American President. If for some reason he didn't, then he'd go down as one of the worst.

What are the consequences for abolition then? The Abolitionists might get the worst of it for being the ones who caused the crisis by demands for emancipation. Who knows how they would be perceived down the road if there was an Emergency in 1850? When is slavery abolished if abolition never becomes a Northern war goal?
 
The Firebreathers will get the immediate blame; they were the ones who tried to dissolve the Union, and they will be the ones who get defeated and thus politically marginalized at least in the immediate aftermath of the war.

The abolitionist movement is going to still be there, but realistically, free soilers will end up a significant portion of Taylor's coalition in the event of a civil war (even more than OTL, where he was supported by plenty of free soil Whigs like Lincoln), while the more diehard pro-slavery folks will be discredited. The aftermath of a Northern victory, even under a Taylor presidency, is likely to be something like the Wilmot Proviso, which means that slavery is contained.

On the one hand, that means that slave states will become increasingly outnumbered in the Senate, on the other hand, without the threat of expansion of slavery into the territories, a lot of the softer free soil folks will be less concerned about slavery in general.
 
The Firebreathers will get the immediate blame; they were the ones who tried to dissolve the Union, and they will be the ones who get defeated and thus politically marginalized at least in the immediate aftermath of the war.

The abolitionist movement is going to still be there, but realistically, free soilers will end up a significant portion of Taylor's coalition in the event of a civil war (even more than OTL, where he was supported by plenty of free soil Whigs like Lincoln), while the more diehard pro-slavery folks will be discredited. The aftermath of a Northern victory, even under a Taylor presidency, is likely to be something like the Wilmot Proviso, which means that slavery is contained.

On the one hand, that means that slave states will become increasingly outnumbered in the Senate, on the other hand, without the threat of expansion of slavery into the territories, a lot of the softer free soil folks will be less concerned about slavery in general.

Ah, thanks.

So when is slavery abolished?
 
Putting aside the question of the Southwest, if there’s no Fugituve Slave Act or Kansas a Nebraska Act,* could that cool Northern concerns about Slave Power enough that further southern annexations (eg Cuba) are more on the table? More generally, can we safely say that a civil war is averted for the time being?

*due to someone else winning in 1852
 
Putting aside the question of the Southwest, if there’s no Fugituve Slave Act or Kansas a Nebraska Act,* could that cool Northern concerns about Slave Power enough that further southern annexations (eg Cuba) are more on the table?
I don't think so. The main driving force behind that was the Fire-Breathers and (more generally) the Deep South. With them discredited, further annexations largely are too.
 
Probably sometime in the late 1860's. In OTL there were already strong movements in border states to abolish slavery by the year 1870.
Border states were very different from the Deep South on that question. I don't think slavery will be totally abolished before 1880.
 
Top