What If: Lincoln Gunned Down in Baltimore!

What if Lincoln and Hamlin are both killed before taking office? Who gets to be POTUS ?
I'm not really sure. According to the 1792 Presidential Succession Laws, it would have have fallen to the President Pro Tempore of the Senate. It would have been either Benjamin Fitzpatrick or Jesse D. Bright. I'm not sure which one it would be because there is a few months gap between the two and on March 4th (the old presidential inauguration date) there was no President Pro Tempore so I'm really not sure. Maybe someone with more knowledge on how a scenario like this would have gone could tell us more. It would interesting though because both men were Democrats.
 
and Jesse Bright of Indiana was the only Northern Senator expelled for supporting the CSA. Interesting. But the key point is who was President pro-tem when the last session of Congress expired.
 
Also I imagine that if the capital wasn’t moved to Philadelphia, it would likely be New York it moved to.
I’ve often thought they would have tried to move it further away from potential opponents of the Civil War like the New York Irish were. Chicago is certainly a possibility, but my imagination has generally been somewhere in Michigan, like Detroit or a surrounding area, or even Grand Rapids though that was less Yankee than most of Michigan. Toledo, Ohio would be perhaps an even better possibility that I had not thought of before – reasonably close, Yankee, secure and accessible.
I don't know for sure but I think it was Benjamin Fitzpatrick. I could be wrong though. He was from Alabama so that would be very interesting.
Likely Fitzpatrick would have reversed Lincoln’s planned policies and tried – as John Bell planned to – to hold the Union together. He would probably have tried the failed policy of “popular sovereignty” in all territories – after all it was the policy of Stephen Douglas with whom Fitzpatrick was allied.

Most likely, with the Northern support for the Republican Party, bills to establish new states or even organize new territories would fail to pass and the anger Northern whites felt from Southern domination of the Federal government would intensify. Quite likely the Republican Party would gain seats in 1862 and nominate a more radical candidate than Lincoln in 1864, who would still sweep the free states as Lincoln did. Likely that would mean secession as was seen in the winter of 1860/1861, only four years later.
 
Last edited:
I don't know for sure but I think it was Benjamin Fitzpatrick. I could be wrong though. He was from Alabama so that would be very interesting.

What about Solomon Foot? It looks like he had been President pro tempore for a week as of February 23, 1861 (the date on which Lincoln narrowly escaped assassination).

I’ve often thought they would have tried to move it further away from potential opponents of the Civil War like the New York Irish were. Chicago is certainly a possibility, but my imagination has generally been somewhere in Michigan, like Detroit or a surrounding area, or even Grand Rapids though that was less Yankee than most of Michigan. Toledo, Ohio would be perhaps an even better possibility that I had not thought of before – reasonably close, Yankee, secure and accessible.Likely Fitzpatrick would have reversed Lincoln’s planned policies and tried – as John Bell planned to – to hold the Union together. He would probably have tried the failed policy of “popular sovereignty” in all territories – after all it was the policy of Stephen Douglas with whom Fitzpatrick was allied.

Michigan is unlikely to be the site of a new capital in the event of CSA victory. Detroit sits directly on the Canadian border and Toledo, Ohio is only 20 miles away from Canada by boat. The War of 1812 was not ancient history in the 1860s, and the British Empire was at its height of power (especially in comparison to a war-ravaged, rump USA). I think the most likely location for a capital would be Chicago or somewhere nearby in northern Illinois or southern Wisconsin. Places west of the Mississippi (too far for Easterners), east of Appalachians (too far for Westerners), too close to the CSA, or in Copperhead country (i.e., Indiana or Ohio) are also unlikely to be locations for a new capital.
 
They would likely elect Seward I imagine.
It seems to me that Seward would have not been that different from Lincoln, and secession would have still occurred. If the Republicans had planned for this throughout 1861, they might have done better in the resultant war than they did, but it is difficult to believe that is what they would have planned for.
 
It seems to me that Seward would have not been that different from Lincoln, and secession would have still occurred. If the Republicans had planned for this throughout 1861, they might have done better in the resultant war than they did, but it is difficult to believe that is what they would have planned for.
What do you mean by "planned for"? Planned for what?
 

Gian

Banned
I've always disliked timelines where Lee sides with the Union. It simply wouldn't happen. If Virginia goes, he goes. The best you could hope for was that Lee might just retire and stay out of the war. But he isn't joining the Union :noexpression:

I was only asking for the link to the TL @Roger II mentioned about
 
I think backing the South would have been political suicide for the British
They may not have backed the South, I've seen timelines where they fought against the Union but refused to declare any type of alliance with the South due to the whole slavery issue. The trick is getting them interested enough to risk war, which is tricky in itself.
 
What do you mean by "planned for"? Planned for what?
I mean that the Republican Party leadership would have known that if they were to win the Presidency that the South would secede, and would have spent at least some time planning strategy for a reasonably predictable scenario, so they would deal with the secession crisis better than was observed in the 1860/1861 winter. Maybe even the Republicans would have had policies re what to do when the South secedes, unless having such a response in a party platform be illegal according to the Constitution?
 
Top