WI/PC: Slave Exodus following CSA Victory?

Canada could probably take more former slaves than in OTL, especially given the routes already established in OTL by the Underground Railroad, however probably only a limited amount more. However in 1867 (when the first colonies of British North America confederated into a single entity called "Canada") the population is only 3,463,000 people. The people living there simply wouldn't be be able or willing (slavery may have been abolished in the British Empire for decades, but it is not like non-whites didn't face a lot of hardship and discrimination by the anglo and franco settler population) to absorb anywhere near the amount of displaced people in this scenario. I am not sure about Mexico. It has a large enough population to absorb a large flow of people from the Us but it is also poorer and in a state of constant political turmoil so it is doubtful it can really fill much of the gap here either.

Most likely they get sent west, a lot of empty desert land. I figure the biggest destination for them would be Arizona, it would help keep an eye on the CSA. You would simply need to give them guns, which since they would be in the middle of nowhere wouldn't be much of a political problem.
 
Thinking about the long term viability of slavery in an independent CSA [1862, no Emancipation, foreign recognition, Democrat smash victory at the polls], I came upon a question. If the south is formally recognized as an independent republic, the Fugitive Slave Law of 1850 would logically no longer apply. What effect would this have on the numbers of runaway slaves, relative to the continuing war OTL? In my understanding, the North was quite racist during the period, but rather than dominative, hierarchical racism like you see in the south, it was exclusionary in character. Given that they didn't want black people in the territories, would the moderate Republicans make common cause with the Democrats to keep mass fugitive slave migration into the north, or did they have neither the will or means to exclude black people from the north?

Well assuming this 1862 POD from the OP, then we have at least an independent CSA with the original 11 seceding states, a fairly intact South economically, and huge Democrat gains in the North. You've got a fairly depressing scenario for blacks in the South.

We've yet to see the mass flight of slaves from the deep South, and even Tennessee will not have lost an inordinate amount of slaves at this point (and those that have run away can even be legally reclaimed via lawsuit).

The North will still be interested in taking in individual runaways, but it will be just as difficult for them to escape pre-war, which means no veritable flood of runaways across the border to be a political problem. Sure there will be debates about their status in the US (I imagine the Republican Party will have this as a party platform) but the numbers will simply not be big enough to make them a national matter.
 
Most likely they get sent west, a lot of empty desert land. I figure the biggest destination for them would be Arizona, it would help keep an eye on the CSA. You would simply need to give them guns, which since they would be in the middle of nowhere wouldn't be much of a political problem.


Just imagine how this would change the Old West cowboy movies...
 
Just imagine how this would change the Old West cowboy movies...

They would probably be focused in areas where they weren't sent and would still wind up being ignored. IIRC 1/4 of all cowboys were Black and a good many were Mexican in OTL. As such WASPS were , at most, barely over a majority of cowboys. Outside the movies being a cowboy is a dull, boring job that most White people didn't want to do. Cowboys are basically cow herders. If sitting on a horse looking at cows all day is your idea of an exciting life it is the job for you.
 
While successful escapees are rightfully celebrated, the truth is that the absolute numbers were always small, and generally from the Upper South (it's no coincidence that both Frederick Douglass and Harriet Tubman were from Maryland, while Henry "Box" Brown famously had to resort to extreme measures to escape from Virginia). Depending on the POD, not only will Maryland, Missouri, Kentucky still be in the Union, but they will probably still be slave states for some time (the disastrous Civil War having temporarily discredited abolitionists).

So, other than escaped slaves who benefited from the physical presence of the Union Army (and a Confederate victory POD presumably means fewer Union inroads, and thus fewer slaves able to escape this way, not to mention the precariousness of their situation without the Emancipation Proclamation), there seems unlikely to be a massive exodus. Those few who do can find shelter with the remaining abolitionist communities.
 
Outside the movies being a cowboy is a dull, boring job that most White people didn't want to do. Cowboys are basically cow herders. If sitting on a horse looking at cows all day is your idea of an exciting life it is the job for you.

It is many things sir, but rarely dull. Trying to move hundreds of cows across rivers and through the countryside while keeping them alive through storms, being chased by wildlife and chasing away rustlers is an extremely difficult task. The pay sucked and the accommodations were scant... that's why whites weren't all that keen on doing it until the price of beef starts to creep up.

You might also see more 'Johnson County War' type scenarios erupt as wealthy white landowners start moving in on areas the freed slaves were currently occupying. Of course, this assumes they all go west and don't choose to settle in the northern cities, which would probably be much easier for someone who shows with literally nothing more than the clothes on his/her back.
 
It is many things sir, but rarely dull. Trying to move hundreds of cows across rivers and through the countryside while keeping them alive through storms, being chased by wildlife and chasing away rustlers is an extremely difficult task.

For every minute you are doing that you are spending an hour watching cattle eat scrub grass.
 
Even if they're largely unsuccessful, would there be an increase in attempted runaways, and could Confederate reprisals bring about a partisan war with escaped slaves?
 
For every minute you are doing that you are spending an hour watching cattle eat scrub grass.

Soooo.... it's like every job from 150 years ago? A lot of tedium interspersed with moments of sheer panic and confusion.

I should also add that you're moving them around to various sources of water, keeping the bulls apart so they don't kill each other, aiding with calving season, separating for breeding and a multitude of other minor tasks.
 
Last edited:
Soooo.... it's like every job from 150 years ago? A lot of tedium interspersed with moments of sheer panic and confusion.

Point taken, it is just the movies give the wrong idea of what being a cowboy was really like. Far from being exciting and glamourous it was mostly boring and unrewarding.
 
A Gettysburg victory for the CSA or a Peace Democrat win in 1864 (Atlanta not fallen) are reasonable PODs for a CSA victory. At this point you have a significant number of slaves who are behind Union lines, and if it begins to look like the CSA will gain independence, any and all slaves/contrabands who can will try and get as far north as possible, certainly north of the states that will go to the CSA.

A scenario where the CSA is in a position to demand the return of any contrabands/escaped slaves from the USA is ASB in my opinion. Once the border is in place, escape from the CSA will be very difficult unless the slave is very close to the border. How welcoming the north is to slaves will be an interesting question, some may see the blacks as the cause of the CW and the severing of the Union. Others will be sympathetic.

In an independent CSA, with borders much more tightly controlled than the slave/free line before the war, escape will be very difficult. Internal controls on slaves will be much tighter than before the war, with the contraband experience proving to the masters that, contrary to their opinions, their slaves were not happy with their lot, "lovin de old massa". Also, whatever restraint the owners practiced in the south due to pressure/opinion from the north is out the window.
 
A Gettysburg victory for the CSA or a Peace Democrat win in 1864 (Atlanta not fallen) are reasonable PODs for a CSA victory. At this point you have a significant number of slaves who are behind Union lines, and if it begins to look like the CSA will gain independence, any and all slaves/contrabands who can will try and get as far north as possible, certainly north of the states that will go to the CSA.

A scenario where the CSA is in a position to demand the return of any contrabands/escaped slaves from the USA is ASB in my opinion. Once the border is in place, escape from the CSA will be very difficult unless the slave is very close to the border. How welcoming the north is to slaves will be an interesting question, some may see the blacks as the cause of the CW and the severing of the Union. Others will be sympathetic.

In an independent CSA, with borders much more tightly controlled than the slave/free line before the war, escape will be very difficult. Internal controls on slaves will be much tighter than before the war, with the contraband experience proving to the masters that, contrary to their opinions, their slaves were not happy with their lot, "lovin de old massa". Also, whatever restraint the owners practiced in the south due to pressure/opinion from the north is out the window.

How is the South going to patrol the border when the Union had so much issue controlling the borders with Canada and Mexico as it was OTL. With less resources plus recovering from a war fought almost entirely within their land, the South might have quite a bit of issue with border patrol.

Northern capitalists will "welcome" slaves as cheap sources of labour to exploit. But hey, they'll at least be paid a wage there.

Republicans will probably still emerge a force in the North, even after their defeat in the war. No Southern Democrats to balance them now. It won't be the late 19th century Republicans we know, but their stance on slavery will be interesting.
 
How is the South going to patrol the border when the Union had so much issue controlling the borders with Canada and Mexico as it was OTL. With less resources plus recovering from a war fought almost entirely within their land, the South might have quite a bit of issue with border patrol.

The issue really isn't about slaves making it across the border, they will, it is about the slaves being able to escape their own plantations/counties. The reasons for not wanting to leave or being unable to won't change just because the South is an independent nation.

Surrounded by a hostile population, the threat of the destruction of their families, the threat of execution, random brutality, all of these make for some heady consideration of escaping.

Northern capitalists will "welcome" slaves as cheap sources of labour to exploit. But hey, they'll at least be paid a wage there.

Which is precisely why OTL many Northern whites were not enthusiastic about Emancipation. That kind of competition for labor (and good old fashioned racism) is what allowed Democrats to make gains off of Emancipation.
 
The issue really isn't about slaves making it across the border, they will, it is about the slaves being able to escape their own plantations/counties. The reasons for not wanting to leave or being unable to won't change just because the South is an independent nation.

Surrounded by a hostile population, the threat of the destruction of their families, the threat of execution, random brutality, all of these make for some heady consideration of escaping.

Yeah, but it seems borderline impossible to really increase the rate of recapturing slaves compared to pre-Civil War without turning your society into a totalitarian police state. The cost of militarising your society to that degree would drain the economic resources of the South like nothing else. It seems like it would be an initiative of the Southern aristocracy alone and not the other classes of whites in the South. I'm not sure how the structure of the Confederacy might support this level of constant militarisation. Seems like if that occurred, it would be a huge political issue in the CSA.

Which is precisely why OTL many Northern whites were not enthusiastic about Emancipation. That kind of competition for labor (and good old fashioned racism) is what allowed Democrats to make gains off of Emancipation.

Here the Democrats have lost what would be their strongest support base for a century. Both Democrats and Republicans will have to reinvent themselves after the Civil War defeat, which probably means either 1864 or 1868 become realigning elections.
 
Also have to wonder how the border states factor in; would escaped slaves just find themselves reenslaved in a Union state? Would the Union abolish slavery immediately after losing a war against a slaveholding confederacy? Would the debate regarding slavery in the territories continue, and could it force Kentucky and Missouri into the Confederacy if the doctrine of secession survives its trial by fire?
 
Top