WI: The Newburgh Conspiracy wasn't prevented and the US became a dictatorship in 1783?

Deleted member 97083

In March 1783, some of the soldiers of the Continental Army, who had long been unpaid and were discontented about the lack of funding for future pensions, planned a military coup against the Congress of the Confederation. This was called the Newburgh Conspiracy. However, George Washington gave an impassioned speech against any violent mutiny, and afterward, agreements were made to partially pay the soldiers, diffusing the crisis. Though miscommunications later that year led to the Pennsylvania Mutiny (which encouraged Congress to found a new federal capital outside of Philadelphia), by 1790 the soldiers were fully compensated and peace was assured.

However, what if the Newburgh Conspiracy was not prevented, and Washington, among others, was killed in a military coup? Who would take power, and would the US have descended into dictatorship?
 
The "Newburgh Conspiracy" would be better named the "Newburgh Mutiny-that-wasn't". There was no concerted plan to seize control of Philadelphia and replace the Continental Congress with some other regime. At worst, the army would march on Philadelphia to demand that all arrears of pay be made up.

And there was no possibility of dictatorship; the Congress had very little power, and none of the states would pay any attention to a government proclaimed by mutineers.
 
If the delegates in Philadelphia were seized and held prisoner, the States would probably just appoint new ones and have them meet in Williamsburg or somewhere else beyond the mutineers' reach.

Iirc the various State militias considerably outnumbered the Continental Army, so the rebels wouldn't control anything except the ground they were actually camped on - rather how it tended to be for the British army in the recent war.
 
Last edited:

Deleted member 97083

There are legitimate historians who believe that a full coup d'etat was planned at Newburgh, such as Richard Kohn whose work has been debated but not disproven, as far as I know.
 
So only effect is create worse Army-phobia in the early US?

Pretty much, the idea that it would represent is more frightening than the actual execution. It's more Catiline than Caesar, nothing would happen, but that doesn't mean some of the more sensitive personalities that were around at the time wouldn't be moved to further weaken the military of the US. Devolving more power to state militias, perhaps even placing more definite limits on the powers of the presidency (when it comes to putting down rebellions with military force and committing troops without congressional approval, etc.).
 
Top