Slavery after a 1833 American Civil War

In this timeline, as a result of the Compromise Tariff failing to pass Congress in 1833, the Nullification Crisis devolves into a early, but brief American Civil War with South Carolina trying to secede from the Union. The attempt obviously fails and South Carolina is placed under military occupation. It's state government is removed and probably faces charges of treason, facing either execution or a life sentence. A military occupation takes place for a few years before a compliant state government is instated and is readmitted to the Union.

In essence, secession in rebellion to the federal government has been attempted earlier and failed earlier than in our timeline. The precedent has been set.

However, since this war was over taxes and not slavery (and Andrew Jackson not only owned slaves, but was a slave trader earlier in his life and attempted to silence abolitionist newspapers), the institution of slavery is left intact.

With that being said, how is slavery resolved in this timeline, since the writing is now on the wall for anyone who dares to attempt to secede from the Union? Would it result in a second, longer and bloodier American Civil War or would the institution die a gradual death in the United States?
 
Excellent POD, one not explored enough. While an 1833 civil war wouldn't directly impact slavery, it would damage the power of Southern reactionaries in Congress, many of whom came from South Carolina. Further, after seeing what happened to SC after it tried to secede, this would possibly deter a few more Upper South states like Virginia or Tennessee from seceding over slavery in 1860. That being said, the Southern aristocrats would still want to fight over slavery once an anti-slavery President is elected. So I think some sort of pro-slavery insurrection would happen at some point, but it's hard to tell whether or not it would be a all-out civil war involving any more than a handful of Deep South states. If war did break out, it wouldn't last as long as our OTL war and we could see the Upper South being more racially moderate in the long term if they side with the Union.
 
The immediate question is what the knock-on effects on Texas and the brewing Mexican-American War are. Probably there is still a war; but something like the Wilmot Proviso might pass both houses of Congress, if the crisis strengthens anti-slavery sentiment. Does a less secure Slave Power panic earlier, starting a more winnable Civil War? Is secession seen as chancier, prompting states like Virginia to sit a Civil War out? It's hard to say; a lot could happen in those 27 years, depending on who ends up hopelessly beshitted in an abortive South Carolina secession crisis. Obviously Calhoun is in the doghouse, but who takes his place?

It's a good one. Lots of timeline fodder.
 
Last edited:
Attempting to secede while Old Hickory is president, . . . those poor bastards.

With so many prominent Southern leaders dancing on the end of a rope when the slavery question next comes up secession won't be seen as an alternative. So slavery will wither and die with the larger northern population winning more elections and the progress of technology killing it, eventually.
 
American agriculture was only fully mechanized in 1945, much later than most people think. Would a United States that retained slavery to 1945 still be a place worth living by that date? I doubt it. And that's assuming slavery can be made technologically obsolete, as opposed to Say's Law finding new and unpleasant expression as the supply of unfree labor create all sorts of it's own unpleasant demands. The word 'brothels' makes me shudder in this context.

I also doubt conflict could have been staved off that long. Support for slavery was tied to Manifest Destiny and too many other positions that are incompatible with the industrial North's, and non-secessionist South's, visions of a modern state - there would have been clashes over policy and representation long, long before then.

Secession would still be on the table, I think, but it would be seen as a less legitimate option, and more of a last resort and a gamble.
 
Interesting idea, the concept of secession during the 1864 civil war would likely remain, but states that were divided between seceding or remaining the union [Missouri, Kentucky] wouldn't secede and likely Virginia and Tennessee remain in the union. Texas might, but that's a hard maybe.
 
Or Tennessee might be the state that splits instead of Virginia, between the slaveholding and non-slaveholding regions. You might see a lot more states break like that; more infighting in slave states.

In a lot of ways, that could be worse; no formal secessions, just dissolution into half a dozen Bleeding Kansases.
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
t's state government is removed and probably faces charges of treason, facing either execution or a life sentence.

This didn't happen after OTL's longer, bloodier, much more extensive and revolutionary Civil War. Davis and Lee died peacefully at home. Why would the South Carolina rebels do worse here?
 
Quote attributed to Andrew Jackson talking to John C. Calhoun - "If you secede from my nation, I will secede your head from the rest of your body."
 

The Avenger

Banned
and we could see the Upper South being more racially moderate in the long term if they side with the Union.
The border states weren't exactly racially moderate after the Civil War, though. They had anti-miscegenation laws and segregated schools and all that--though Blacks there could vote starting from 1870.
 
The border states weren't exactly racially moderate after the Civil War, though. They had anti-miscegenation laws and segregated schools and all that--though Blacks there could vote starting from 1870.

Fair point. I think it would be better to say Virginia, Tennessee, etc would be less associated with Fire Eaters and more so with the moderate Unionists in Kentucky and Maryland. If Virginia stays in the Union, as it came close to doing in OTL, that means the Confederacy's military hub is gone right from the start and we are looking at a much shorter war, perhaps one where Robert E. Lee becomes a national hero instead of a traitor.
 
Top