Union and Liberty: An American TL

As for who shot President Houston, I haven't mentioned it yet partially because I'm not exactly sure. :D I'm leaning toward your run-of-the-mill crazy chap though, and of course there will be conspiracy theories. ;) The details will probably be revealed in the Great Men section on Houston.

Remember, prior to Lincoln's assassination it was thought that the president is sacrosanct. It'd better be a lone nut otherwise the very first presidential assassin's cause will be completely discredited by his atrocity.
 
Remember, prior to Lincoln's assassination it was thought that the president is sacrosanct. It'd better be a lone nut otherwise the very first presidential assassin's cause will be completely discredited by his atrocity.
Second presidential assassin. ;) Jackson was killed in this timeline as well.
 
Do we get a map of the sucession.

We should get one. And a new update.

Also Wilcoxchar just wanted to ask:

The section on the CSA forming makes it sound impromptu a much less organized than in OTL. Just on how it was created, by having delegates storm out of a meeting. And the Alexandria shot, which seems much less justified than the Fort Sumpter firing in OTL. Furthermore the fact that Jackson, Houston, and Tejas (which were all part of it in OTL) are not in it, yet, makes it feel less serious. The other non-OTL slave states Missouri, Kearney, Cuba haven't really shown their support for it either.

So is this CSA much more impromptu than OTL's?

Also about California's role in the Civil War, my guess is that it will suffer form quite a bit of immigration from the US as people escape the war. Will this affect it's politics? Such as no American's west of the Sierra Nevada?
 
We should get one. And a new update.
You'll get a map in the next few days, and hopefully a new update. Was meaning to get a map up but forgot.

Also Wilcoxchar just wanted to ask:

The section on the CSA forming makes it sound impromptu a much less organized than in OTL. Just on how it was created, by having delegates storm out of a meeting. And the Alexandria shot, which seems much less justified than the Fort Sumpter firing in OTL. Furthermore the fact that Jackson, Houston, and Tejas (which were all part of it in OTL) are not in it, yet, makes it feel less serious. The other non-OTL slave states Missouri, Kearney, Cuba haven't really shown their support for it either.

So is this CSA much more impromptu than OTL's?
Well, in OTL, Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Arkansas only joined after the attack on Fort Sumter so some states might still join afterward. I meant to have the seizing of Alexandria be the sort of equivalent to the attack on Fort Sumter, the firing of the shot was just for symbolic effect.

This CSA is probably a bit more impromptu than in OTL, but the circumstances are also more choatic. The secession wasn't really planned as the opportunity came up in such a short time, and the people high up sort of just ran with it.

Also about California's role in the Civil War, my guess is that it will suffer form quite a bit of immigration from the US as people escape the war. Will this affect it's politics? Such as no American's west of the Sierra Nevada?
Not sure about Cali's role in the war, but they will definitely get some immigration from people who are trying to escape the war.
 
Here's a tentative map of the formation of the CSA.

CSA Formation.png
 
no news from maryland? (OTLs first shed blood in the pratt st riot)??
if other states, especially Va, get spooked into seceding because of fear of a president seward, wouldnt maryland?
 
I thought Jackson didn't secede.
Look at the date. ;) It didn't secede yet. I only covered the secessions up to March 4 when Andrew Johnson was sworn into office.

no news from maryland? (OTLs first shed blood in the pratt st riot)??
if other states, especially Va, get spooked into seceding because of fear of a president seward, wouldnt maryland?
Different economic conditions and immigration patterns made Maryland less pro-slavery and more unionist than OTL.
 
Awfully close votes in Missouri and Tennessee on the Union side as well as Jackson, Cuba, and Virginia (to say the least). Is there a possibility of bushwhacking and counter secessions as with OTL?
 
Something tells me that this is going to be a much quicker war than OTL. The West is probably going to be even more disorganized for the CSA than OTL (particularly due to the lack of Tejas, Houston, and Tennesee backing them up).
However thanks to Veracruz (nice touch btw) and Cuba this CSA will actually have a navy. So we might see an ocean theater / Gulf front in TTL.

Definitively looking forward to what's coming up next.

One thing that would be really cool, is if more than one state pulls a West Virginia ITTL. Always thought that the southern chunk of Missouri (the Ozarks Platue) could have done it the other way around with only half of it seceding. Kentucky and Tennessee are also candidates for a reverse W.V. here. Avoiding the cliche and keeping W.V. in Virginia would also be cool.
 
A few questions:

1. What was the motive of Jackon's assassin? Besides to make Calhoun president?

2. Why isn't there as much Manifest Destiny in this timeline? I mean, Fremont campaigned in California during the rebellion just as in OTL, the Americans could've chosen to be expansionists and annexed California and Rio Bravo after the war with Mexico, alongside Texas. Though I'm hoping both will remain independent in this timeline, it would be interesting to see how Latino republics fare in North America compared to their brethren in Central/South America. But then I suppose the U.S. will get around to conquering them once they've gotten the Civil War sorted out.

3. How are race relations, since there are more Mexican immigrants?
 
Something tells me that this is going to be a much quicker war than OTL. The West is probably going to be even more disorganized for the CSA than OTL (particularly due to the lack of Tejas, Houston, and Tennesee backing them up).
However thanks to Veracruz (nice touch btw) and Cuba this CSA will actually have a navy. So we might see an ocean theater / Gulf front in TTL.

Definitively looking forward to what's coming up next.

One thing that would be really cool, is if more than one state pulls a West Virginia ITTL. Always thought that the southern chunk of Missouri (the Ozarks Platue) could have done it the other way around with only half of it seceding. Kentucky and Tennessee are also candidates for a reverse W.V. here. Avoiding the cliche and keeping W.V. in Virginia would also be cool.
Ooh. I've been thinking of possibilities for that. Good candidates would probably be western Virginia (of course), southern Missouri, and western Tennessee and Kentucky (the area of the Jackson Purchase). Maybe a few more surprises as well in other places.

A few questions:

1. What was the motive of Jackon's assassin? Besides to make Calhoun president?

2. Why isn't there as much Manifest Destiny in this timeline? I mean, Fremont campaigned in California during the rebellion just as in OTL, the Americans could've chosen to be expansionists and annexed California and Rio Bravo after the war with Mexico, alongside Texas. Though I'm hoping both will remain independent in this timeline, it would be interesting to see how Latino republics fare in North America compared to their brethren in Central/South America. But then I suppose the U.S. will get around to conquering them once they've gotten the Civil War sorted out.

3. How are race relations, since there are more Mexican immigrants?
1. Jackson's assassin was another typical crazy guy. Richard Lawrence killed Jackson for the same reason he did in OTL, he thought that he was Richard III of England. He also thought that Jackson was his clerk, somehow keeping him from taking his rightful place as king. Very crazy man. I originally thought of titling my timeline "Richard III's Clerk is Dead" :p

2. With the war against Mexico being 10 years earlier, the priority of the US was helping out the rebellnig republics more than gaining territory. Then Manifest Destiny was mostly placated with the Oregon War, but that might change after the war between the states as the population grows. (I hesitate to call this war the Civil War as it doesn't fit what a civil war is ;))

3. Hispanics in general are treated better, and currently there isn't really a classification between whites and people of Iberian or Central American origin.
 
I don't want to pester you with too many questions, but is there any particular reason for the lack of racism so far? Is it because they're mostly isolated to the frontier regions such as Tejas? I guess the Anglos would still think of them as swarthy Papists but perhaps there is no active animosity against them as long as they stick to their own communities along the margins and don't try to run for president.

I suppose I need to do a bit of research on that as well.
 
Great Men, Section 1: Henry Clay
I now present to you, the first in the series of Great Men sections. These sections will chronicle the efforts of the people that shaped the Union throughout its history. The first such person is Henry Clay.

Great Men, Section 1: Henry Clay


Henry Clay was a great statesman and orator who served in the United States Senate. Born in Virginia in 1777, Clay's family moved to Kentucky soon after where he studied law. During the 1790s and early 1800s, Clay established a lucrative law practice in Kentucky including high profile cases such as successfully defending Aaron Burr in 1806 when he was indicted for planning an expedition into Spanish territory. Along with his success in his legal career, Henry Clay was also influential in Kentucky state politics. Clay was so influential that in 1806, he was selected by the Kentucky legislature to represent Kentucky in the United States Senate during the remainder of John Adair's term, despite being too young to constitutionally serve as a United States senator.

Henry Clay's political career was much more successful and lasted longer than his career practicing law. After his serving in the Senate in 1806, Clay was elected to the House of Representatives in 1811. The first day of his first session in Congress, Clay was elected Speaker of the House. Clay was reelected to the House and to the speakership five time during his fourteen year tenure in the House of Respresentatives. While Speaker, Clay transformed the position into a position of power and manipulated the committee memberships to give the War Hawks control of the important House committees during the War of 1812. Clay took the lead supporting the war as the head of the Democratic-Republican Party and served as a peace commissioner at the Treat of Ghent in 1814. During the remainder of his service in the House of Representatives, Clay was a founding member of the American Colonization Society, advocated the American System, and helped gain Congressional approval of the Missouri Compromise.

Probably Clay's defining moment while Speaker of the House was his manipulation of the results of the election of 1824. While Clay had gotten the fewest number of electoral votes, no candidate obtained a majority. Thus, the election went to the House of Representatives. While Jackson had won the most votes and the popular vote, Clay did not want to see Jackson become presdient. And Clay could not be elected as only the top three candidates were eligible in the House, and Clay had come in fourth. So as Speaker of the House, he gave his support to John Quincy Adams, who won the election. Adams appointed Clay as Secretary of State, which Jackson was enraged at and called a 'corrupt bargain'. This was a major point in the election of 1828, and was one of the reasons that Jackson defeated Adams for the presidency that year[1].

After this election, Henry Clay served as a senator off and on for much of the 1830s and 1840s. Clay was an influential voice during both the presidencies of John Calhoun and William Henry Harrison. Clay served as a moderating force to Calhoun and as internal competition to Harrison, although Harrison accepted some similar policies as Clay such as the American System and the Third National Bank. However, the two broke with each other during the election of 1844. Clay was frustrated by Harrison's increasing resistance to his influence, and after losing the Whig nomination to Harrison, Clay never supported Harrison. This led to Harrison's loss to James K. Polk, but it also led to the end of Clay's Congressional career. Still, Clay is considered one of the great orators of the Senate and along with Daniel Webster and John C. Calhoun form the Great Triumvirate which dominated the Senate in the 1830s and 1840s.

For the last years of his life, Henry Clay spent much of his time in Lexington where he set up a moderately successful realty office. In 1853, Clay visited Liberia, the product of the American Colonization Society, and caught yellow fever. Clay died two months after he returned to the United States. Henry Clay was the second person to lay in state in the Capitol Rotunda after Andrew Jackson.

[1] Everything up to about here is OTL.
 
I don't want to pester you with too many questions, but is there any particular reason for the lack of racism so far? Is it because they're mostly isolated to the frontier regions such as Tejas? I guess the Anglos would still think of them as swarthy Papists but perhaps there is no active animosity against them as long as they stick to their own communities along the margins and don't try to run for president.

I suppose I need to do a bit of research on that as well.
I can't recall any hostility toward Hispanics in OTL before the Civil War, but that might just be because they were so sparse. But the only really big Hispanic communities in the United States right now are Cuba, areas in Tejas, and Jackson around Pensacola. So there is a tolerance of them, since they mostly stick to their own areas. Although Cuba will soon gain prominence in politics with its large population, so that could change things.
 
Top