Southern Reaction to Imbalance in Senate?

[Thespitron 6000]

Suppose, say, that the population increase in Mississippi and Alabama was much lower than OTL, so that they would not be eligible for statehood in the 1810s. How would the Southern slave states react to proposals to bring Indiana and Illinois into the Union as in OTL as free states, resulting in a Northern majority in the Senate?

 

[GeographyDude]

1) But wasn't there already a 7-6 imbalance in favor of the North (and that's with counting Delaware as a Sourhern state)?

2) and didn't northern states like New Jersey hold persons as 'slaves' until relatively late? (And in a gradual abolition plan, the goddamn 'owners' often sold rather than free slaves at 21?)

 

[Thespitron 6000]

1) But wasn't there already a 7-6 imbalance in favor of the North (and that's with counting Delaware as a Sourhern state)?

2) and didn't northern states like New Jersey hold persons as 'slaves' until relatively late? (And in a gradual abolition plan, the goddamn 'owners' often sold rather than free slaves at 21?)

1. It was 9-9 before the admission of Mississippi, Alabama, Indiana, and Illinois.

2. Many had slaves, but had enacted graduated abolition; New Jersey did so in 1804.

 

[GeographyDude]

in that case it changed, because Vermont was the 14th state temporarily bringing the tally to 8-6,

Kentucky was the 15th bringing it to 8-7.

but notice the North is always staying ahead

 

[Thespitron 6000]

in that case it changed, because Vermont was the 14th state temporarily bringing the tally to 8-6,

Kentucky was the 15th bringing it to 8-7.

but notice the North is always staying ahead

And then Tennessee came in, tying it, followed by Ohio and Louisiana, keeping it tied. I'm not sure the South would be able to block the admission of Indiana and Illinois, given the terms of the Northwest Ordinance, I'm just curious what their reaction would be.

 

[Umbric Man]

Unhappiness but allowing it to pass is the likely course. It was the Missouri Compromise that REALLY bought the free-slave debate into the limelight of national politics (even if it was clearly shimmering before then).

Assuming a parallel course to OTL after the Compromise I'd see more Mexican territory taken, maybe West Florida split off as a third state to MS and AL when they do get statehood (West Florida is admitted out of the combined AL-MS coast and the inland areas kept as two separate territories until their statehood), and Texas divided up as needed (two states at the least, certainly). The Republic of Sonora and its secondary portion of Baja California will also get much more support by filibusters as potential balancing slave states. Hell, maybe Virginia will be egged on by fellow southerners to allow West Virginia secession if local elites agree to become a slave state despite the poor white farmers not owning much of any.

So at the least an extra Texas state (we'll assume that "Lincoln" proposal I suppose?), a Baja California and Sonora state for an extra two, possibly an earlier officially slaver West Virginia, maaaaaybe a West Florida state. So that's at least five in addition to all OTL ones by the Civil War.

Basically, the south will be even more expansionist for sure, and maybe a bit more divide-happy.