The War for Northern Independence

[zoomar]

This topic may have come up before, but I'd like to hear people speculate on the following WI:

Let's pretend...during the lead up to the 1860's, the legal standing of slavery in the United States becomes more entrenched as a result of a number of supreme court decisions. It is the law of the land, there seems to be no likely change, and it may expand into the western territories. In addition, other factors (tariff law, etc) trend in a way that does not favor the industrializing north. In 1860, number of northern states, including most of New England and several great lakes states, seek to secede from the United States and form the "North American Union". For the sake of argument, lets presume that the NAU at secession includes all of New England, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Indiana, with substantial pro-secessionist sentiment in Michigan, parts of Illinois, and in scattered locations in Plains and western territories such as Colorado.

Questions:

How would this happen? (feel free to revise the original premises as needed if this helps - I just want a flip-flopped ACW)

Would a United States comprised largely of slave states, slave-holding border states (like Maryland, Missouri, Kentucky, etc) fight to hold the union together or just say good riddance?

If it came to war, how might the military campaigns develop and where would they be waged.

How would other nations react - if there was a civil war would they be more or less likely to recognize the NAU than they were the CSA.

Who would win and why?

 

[David S Poepoe]

I think there will be, at least initially, a 'good riddance' attitude between the two sides. There could be some disagreements in the negotiations to settlement small problems since its likely that there would have to be a decision on the extension of the border westward to the Pacific.

A major obstacle will be California and if there would be a division of it in order to provide the South with access to the Pacific. There could be some Solomonic decision that basically establishes California as an independent republic.

 

[Leistungsfähiger Amerikan]

Another way to get this scenario is an alternate or earlier Dredd Scott style decision that mandates Northern States aid in the capturing of escaped slaves. The Northern States were infuriated in being complicit in slavery after this IOTL, so in an ATL they may leave the Union over the issue.

 

[zoomar]

Another way to get this scenario is an alternate or earlier Dredd Scott style decision that mandates Northern States aid in the capturing of escaped slaves. The Northern States were infuriated in being complicit in slavery after this IOTL, so in an ATL they may leave the Union over the issue.

I like this!

 

[zoomar]

I think there will be, at least initially, a 'good riddance' attitude between the two sides. There could be some disagreements in the negotiations to settlement small problems since its likely that there would have to be a decision on the extension of the border westward to the Pacific.

You may be correct. However, it's possible you would see even bloodier repeats of the Jayhawk wars as competing interests in the plains and western territories jocky for position. Since Congress had real problems reaching lasting compromise in OTL when the US was still one country, it seems to me quite likely that they could lead to war between two nations that don't particularly like each other. So, if armed conflict arose, perhaps it would be limited to "the colonies" rather than a war by the South to restore the Union.

As you say, in such a confused situation, California might elect for independence on its own - and maybe drag some other western territories along