U.S. Capital After a Bloodier Civil War

Probably evacuated to philly... because of existing infrastructure...New York is out...there were riots I think at one point. Afterwards it remains temporary while new ifrastructure is developed further west more in the centre of the New Union. of course if they cannot agree....Who is to say that temporary would not become permanent.

Aye, if New York draft riots then that probably takes it right out.

Any accommodations in Philly will be temporary in intention, and thus probably very far from ideal. We'll have the bureaucratic inertia that builds up as more and more government agencies set up shot in Philly, balanced against the desire of the governing officials themselves to get out, or back to the place that was designed from the get go to be the capital (DC).

Now, could they go to Philly and set up shot some ways outside the city, and build a whole new Capital District from scratch? Yes, and that's what I'd pick if I couldn't pick DC.
 
Aye, if New York draft riots then that probably takes it right out.

Any accommodations in Philly will be temporary in intention, and thus probably very far from ideal. We'll have the bureaucratic inertia that builds up as more and more government agencies set up shot in Philly, balanced against the desire of the governing officials themselves to get out, or back to the place that was designed from the get go to be the capital (DC).

Now, could they go to Philly and set up shot some ways outside the city, and build a whole new Capital District from scratch? Yes, and that's what I'd pick if I couldn't pick DC.
thats what i meanèt abouut temporary becoming permanent... a new government suburb would not be out of the question northwards say towards Trenton. However with southern interests discounted... there is probably more room for a compromise candidate out west on the borders of Pennsylvania. As there won't be so many competing interests to mollify.
 
St Louis or Denver if pushed. you dont want it vonrable to inveders the coast or great laks is vounrable to sea attacks and the capital was destroyed by "invaders" . so security would still be an issue but i would say NY or Philly for cultural reasons


The CSA has about as much chance of getting to the Great Lakes as you have of swimming straight across one lengthwise. You really don't have to worry about a seaborne attack as the CSA navy was a joke and there is no way for them to get a large number of ships past the USN.
 
thats what i meanèt abouut temporary becoming permanent... a new government suburb would not be out of the question northwards say towards Trenton. However with southern interests discounted... there is probably more room for a compromise candidate out west on the borders of Pennsylvania. As there won't be so many competing interests to mollify.

I don't know that there won't be fewer competing interests. When they were placing the capital originally, there was hardly anyone west of the Appalachians to need mollifying. Move up to 1867, you can subtract the South, but you have to add the West.
 
Aye, if New York draft riots then that probably takes it right out.

Any accommodations in Philly will be temporary in intention, and thus probably very far from ideal. We'll have the bureaucratic inertia that builds up as more and more government agencies set up shot in Philly, balanced against the desire of the governing officials themselves to get out, or back to the place that was designed from the get go to be the capital (DC).

Now, could they go to Philly and set up shot some ways outside the city, and build a whole new Capital District from scratch? Yes, and that's what I'd pick if I couldn't pick DC.

Nonsense, Phildelphia or Boston or Cinncinatti for that matter could easily build a captial dome and White House if the national government decides to move their permenantly. It would probably be the outskirts but it easily could be done.
 
Nonsense, Phildelphia or Boston or Cinncinatti for that matter could easily build a captial dome and White House if the national government decides to move their permenantly. It would probably be the outskirts but it easily could be done.

They could add on to the outside, yes, but that's not what I meant at the first part. There wouldn't be time to purpose build places, especially not places as grand as the Capital and White House, so they'd probably commandeer the City Hall and use that for the time being. But staying in the Philly City Hall, when they used to have a purpose-built building in a while city of their own? Not seeing it.
 
They could add on to the outside, yes, but that's not what I meant at the first part. There wouldn't be time to purpose build places, especially not places as grand as the Capital and White House, so they'd probably commandeer the City Hall and use that for the time being. But staying in the Philly City Hall, when they used to have a purpose-built building in a while city of their own? Not seeing it.

A trashed city, remember? Even if the Capital Building is still standing I doubt they would be thrilled moving back to a city that resembles post-war Berlin.
 
A trashed city, remember? Even if the Capital Building is still standing I doubt they would be thrilled moving back to a city that resembles post-war Berlin.

It wouldn't be the first time Washington was attacked and damaged by an enemy power. Spend a couple years in Philly during the rebuilding, like they did with New York while the Capital was being built in the first place, and then head back once it is done. Hack, Congress met in another building for ten years after Washington was burned.
 
The CSA has about as much chance of getting to the Great Lakes as you have of swimming straight across one lengthwise. You really don't have to worry about a seaborne attack as the CSA navy was a joke and there is no way for them to get a large number of ships past the USN.


i was thinking about other nations like GB or France
 
GB and France weren't run by the insane. What could they hope to accomplish? They can't conquer the US so all that will do is piss the US off. For GB that GUARANTEES a US invasion of Canada.


yes but i think that we might consider them attacking again. the Capitol was destroyed two times in half a century. we where at war with GB twice one with in memory. even though unlikely it would still bug planers and the like. and all three countries have been run by crazies at times.
 
yes but i think that we might consider them attacking again. the Capitol was destroyed two times in half a century. we where at war with GB twice one with in memory. even though unlikely it would still bug planers and the like. and all three countries have been run by crazies at times.

In that case Columbus. Ohio or Indianapolis, Indiana or Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania would be good choices.
 
It wouldn't be the first time Washington was attacked and damaged by an enemy power. Spend a couple years in Philly during the rebuilding, like they did with New York while the Capital was being built in the first place, and then head back once it is done. Hack, Congress met in another building for ten years after Washington was burned.

Why bother? The main reason DC was picked it was between the slave and free states. That doesn't matter after the war.
 
Anyways, in general where is the most likely place for a new capital city in the North in a scenario like this in your opinion?

Right where the old one was - DC. For more or less the same reasons that a new building is being built on the site of the Twin Towers, or why devastated neighborhoods of New Orleans were reconstructed after Hurricane Katrina. "We're here, this is ours and we won't be beaten." If DC were indeed captured, unlikely as that was, there would be no better symbol of Union triumph after the war than to reoccupy and rebuild it. The Union would be saying, "The Confederacy was illegitimate and nothing it accomplished will be allowed to endure."
 
Right where the old one was - DC. For more or less the same reasons that a new building is being built on the site of the Twin Towers, or why devastated neighborhoods of New Orleans were reconstructed after Hurricane Katrina. "We're here, this is ours and we won't be beaten." If DC were indeed captured, unlikely as that was, there would be no better symbol of Union triumph after the war than to reoccupy and rebuild it. The Union would be saying, "The Confederacy was illegitimate and nothing it accomplished will be allowed to endure."

Maybe after the war, during the war would be stupid. DC is vulnerable to invasion and now you have the perfect excuse not to waste troops defending it and throwing them at the Rebels.
 
Right where the old one was - DC. For more or less the same reasons that a new building is being built on the site of the Twin Towers, or why devastated neighborhoods of New Orleans were reconstructed after Hurricane Katrina. "We're here, this is ours and we won't be beaten." If DC were indeed captured, unlikely as that was, there would be no better symbol of Union triumph after the war than to reoccupy and rebuild it. The Union would be saying, "The Confederacy was illegitimate and nothing it accomplished will be allowed to endure."

I think that's the American thing to do.

But personally, I do favor New York as the capital, just because... :p
 
Right where the old one was - DC. For more or less the same reasons that a new building is being built on the site of the Twin Towers, or why devastated neighborhoods of New Orleans were reconstructed after Hurricane Katrina. "We're here, this is ours and we won't be beaten." If DC were indeed captured, unlikely as that was, there would be no better symbol of Union triumph after the war than to reoccupy and rebuild it. The Union would be saying, "The Confederacy was illegitimate and nothing it accomplished will be allowed to endure."

The question was where else in the North, as in it's not going to be D.C.
 
Maybe after the war, during the war would be stupid. DC is vulnerable to invasion and now you have the perfect excuse not to waste troops defending it and throwing them at the Rebels.

Vulnerable? Perhaps. But Grant didn't take that seriously enough to keep the heavy regiments there when he needed bodies, and it worked out all right for him. DC would be best defended by an army in the field keeping the Rebels in Virginia, just as was (eventually) done OTL. Early caught the Union with its pants down and got no further than the outskirts. Of course, during an imagined Confederate occupation of DC, somewhere else would have to be the interim capital. New York seems the most likely candidate. But I believe the Union would move back at the earliest feasible moment.
 
Why not a purpose built capital on the Nebraska-Missouri line, or maybe even Kansas City itself? Central to the nation, could be built from scratch, the British Navy can't attack it, and it balances the West and East. Heck it could become a huge commercial venue quickly during the cattle rush and promote rail growth in the West too.
 
Top