WI: Charles Sumner is killed by Preston Brooks?

Zioneer

Banned
So what if, instead of merely savagely beating Charles Sumner, Preston Brooks actually killed him? Would that affect any events leading up to the Civil War in any way?
 
IOTL, he practically killed Sumner as things stood. Sumner had to take a leave of absence from Congress for six months or something ridiculously long since he was so badly injured (iirc he went blind in one eye or something and walked with a pretty bad limp forever after).

But yeah, Brooke is definitely going to spend some time in the slammer and I wouldn't be surprised if he got sent home from DC afterwards. Not sure who'd take his place, but I assume there's a contingency for that. I'm not sure it'd affect the going-ons in Congress that much though. At this stage IOTL, shit was hardly getting done anyway on account of the gridlock, so I figure it can't get much worse than IOTL.

On the other hand, if Sumner's dead and Massachusetts can immediately appoint a successor to his post, his seat won't go unfilled as IOTL when they just had to leave it empty while he convalesced (I think it worked that way, don't remember). Maybe there's some crucial legislature his successor could vote on during that time period or something.
 
Shit goes down. The Civil War could well be moved up.
Radical Reconstruction policies are butterflied a bit without Sumner. We could have an American Santo Domingo later on, too.
 
On the other hand, if Sumner's dead and Massachusetts can immediately appoint a successor to his post, his seat won't go unfilled as IOTL when they just had to leave it empty while he convalesced (I think it worked that way, don't remember). Maybe there's some crucial legislature his successor could vote on during that time period or something.

They actually chose to leave it empty as a symbol of freedom. They could well have replaced him; I think that was standard procedure.
 
Given the times were not killers normally hanged. Does this give the Slaveocracy a martyr

Perhaps. Brooks would probably hang for assassination, but he might be seen as a martyr in the South, at least in some quarters. The North of course would see him as a bloody murderer.

Charles Sumner would definitely become a martyr for the abolitionists, on par with John Brown (provided that Sumner's death doesn't somehow butterfly away Brown's uprising in 1859).
 
Top