WI: President Breckinridge, 1857-1861
- Thread starter lerk
- Start date
-
- Tags
- breckinridge civil war
This could've happened even without the fall. The day before inauguration, Buchanan was staying at the National Hotel. It suffered a poisoning epidemic, and Buchanan was one of those lucky to not be affected. Breckinridge was elsewhere, so if Buchanan gets sick he could die almost immediately in office and Breckinridge would take the office
I'm not so sure I would call Breckinridge a "fire-eater." Yes, he ultimately did support the Confederacy, but he was much more of a moderate than the real fire-eaters like Robert B. Rhett, Edwin Ruffin, and William Lowndes Yancey. I'd expect Breckinridge to be even more friendly to the South than Buchanan, but I'm not sure how different it would really be to OTL.
Honestly the South might not secede. President Breckinridge, if he is smart, will make Stephen Douglas his VP. A unified Democratic Party in 1860 makes defeating the Republicans much easier, and if the Republicans nominate Lincoln, that basically ensures a split with many ex-Whigs supporting Bell. Lincoln might not even be the nominee: keep in mind, Lincoln became famous debating Douglas. Without that, the Republicans nominate someone far more radical than him, who is basically guaranteed to lose, especially given even more ex-Whigs will support whoever the Bell equivalent is, which there certainly will be someone.
An action which would not be binding upon his successor.
Crucial question is whether Breckenridge insists on the Lecompton Constitution being submitted to a popular vote. If not, Douglas will split with him as he did with Buchanan.
Absent Lincoln, the Republican nominee will be Seward, who is also quite electable, though it may be closer.
I could see Breckinridge compromising--Kansas will be a free state if the Republicans get behind an invasion and annexation of Cuba to be added as a slave state. I imagine Douglas would not be against such an agreement, and it probably demobilizes the Republicans either way. If they say no, then they are painted as anti-Manifest Destiny, and not willing to stand up for Northern farmers' rights. If they say yes, then they just willingly allowed another slave state into the Union.
Honestly I don't see that happening, but if it did, it would probably cause a split in radical isolationist and abolitionist Republicans and those who had supported the war and expansionism, making it easier for the Dems to win.
Breckinridge unlike Buchanan supported Douglas against Lincoln in 1858, despite Breckinridge's disagreements with Douglas over the Lecompton Constitution and the Freeport Doctrine. So it is just conceivable that the Democrats will be less violently divided and more open to a compromise candidate after four years of Breckinridge than under Buchanan. (Breckinridge was actually one of the more moderate leaders pf the pro-Southern wing of the Democrats. He had the support of the Rhetts and Yanceys but was not really one of them.)
Also, people forget that corruption in the Buchanan administration was one of the big issues of 1860--that's one reason why the Republicans called their candidate Honest Old Abe. [1] If Breckinridge's administration is less corrupt than Buchanan's in OTL, the Republicans might have done marginally weaker in some close states. Of course that's a big "if"...
[1] "After the election, a Republican congressman noted that many “true men, from all parties, joined our standard because of the corruptions of the national administration.”619 Another Republican congressman assured Lincoln that “[n]othing did more to secure the enthusiasm and unanimity in your favor than the general impression and belief of the corruption of the present administration and the confident belief that your character and history afforded the best guarantee of a change for the better.”620 Agreeing was Republican Senator James W. Grimes, who said: “[o]ur triumph was achieved more because of Lincoln[’]s reputed honesty & the known corruptions of the Democrats, than because of the negro question.”621 Grimes’ colleague Lyman Trumbull shared that view, arguing that the “country has become disgusted with the profligacy, plunder & stealing here [in Washington] in the Departments. Mr. Lincoln owes his election in a great degree to a desire for a reform in these respects.”622 A leading Democrat, August Belmont, echoed those Republican leaders: “The country at large had become disgusted with the misrule of Mr. Buchanan, and the corruption which disgraced his Administration. The Democratic party was made answerable for his misdeeds, and a change was ardently desired by thousands of conservative men out of politics. This feeling was particularly strong in the rural districts, and did us infinite harm there.”623 " Michael Burlingame, Lincoln: A Life https://www.knox.edu/documents/LincolnStudies/BurlingameVol1Chap16.pdf
Also, people forget that corruption in the Buchanan administration was one of the big issues of 1860--that's one reason why the Republicans called their candidate Honest Old Abe. [1] If Breckinridge's administration is less corrupt than Buchanan's in OTL, the Republicans might have done marginally weaker in some close states. Of course that's a big "if"...
[1] "After the election, a Republican congressman noted that many “true men, from all parties, joined our standard because of the corruptions of the national administration.”619 Another Republican congressman assured Lincoln that “[n]othing did more to secure the enthusiasm and unanimity in your favor than the general impression and belief of the corruption of the present administration and the confident belief that your character and history afforded the best guarantee of a change for the better.”620 Agreeing was Republican Senator James W. Grimes, who said: “[o]ur triumph was achieved more because of Lincoln[’]s reputed honesty & the known corruptions of the Democrats, than because of the negro question.”621 Grimes’ colleague Lyman Trumbull shared that view, arguing that the “country has become disgusted with the profligacy, plunder & stealing here [in Washington] in the Departments. Mr. Lincoln owes his election in a great degree to a desire for a reform in these respects.”622 A leading Democrat, August Belmont, echoed those Republican leaders: “The country at large had become disgusted with the misrule of Mr. Buchanan, and the corruption which disgraced his Administration. The Democratic party was made answerable for his misdeeds, and a change was ardently desired by thousands of conservative men out of politics. This feeling was particularly strong in the rural districts, and did us infinite harm there.”623 " Michael Burlingame, Lincoln: A Life https://www.knox.edu/documents/LincolnStudies/BurlingameVol1Chap16.pdf
Breckenridge was one of the most politically able people of his time and many of his actions, particularly as Confederate Secretary of War, speak of an underlying willingness to look at the long term, making sure Confederate archives were captured intact and as highest at large Confederate official, not coming home until until any chance of political retribution had passed, seem to speak of a man who might have come up with a third way forward to avoid a civil war, even possibly on at the cost of his own career or more likely win re election.