Would eventual Texas seperation be inevitable in an CSA victory?

I'm having a bit of a friendly debate with a friend of mine about this. They're rather insistent that Texas would eventually breakoff from a victorious CSA, and I'm rather skeptical that it would, at least, inevitably do so. It would be interesting to see what happened once they found and began to exploit Texas oil.

So, I'd like to hear what people think about the post-ACW actions of Texas in a TL where the Confederacy wins the war.

Possible but not inevitable, in the eyes of this Texan expat.

I think the status of Texas is entirely in the realm of 'possibly either way'. It will really depend on how one interprets the development of domestic affairs.

A curious question. I've always been fascinated by the fractured 'union' of the confederacy and its possibility for breakup early and late in the war. As for Texas its governor declared secession illegal but was over ruled and turned out. That of course was Sam Houston. Words from the man himself "I love Texas too well to bring civil strife and bloodshed upon her. " Not too knowledgeable of the subject myself but Wiki says there was even an offer made by Lincoln for 50,000 troops to keep the state in much like in Kentucky and DC. Just how much or percentage of Texas held Unionist sentiments?

I thinks it's likely, Texas has rather different economical and geopolitical interest from the rest of South, mixed with the fact that its the state which will likely receive the most European immigrants, I think that Texas will say goodbye to CSA.

I think it depends on the CSA's international policy with Mexico. I see a war between the two countries inevitable if the Confederacy gained independence.

lonewulf44 said:

A curious question. I've always been fascinated by the fractured 'union' of the confederacy and its possibility for breakup early and late in the war. As for Texas its governor declared secession illegal but was over ruled and turned out. That of course was Sam Houston. Words from the man himself "I love Texas too well to bring civil strife and bloodshed upon her. " Not too knowledgeable of the subject myself but Wiki says there was even an offer made by Lincoln for 50,000 troops to keep the state in much like in Kentucky and DC. Just how much or percentage of Texas held Unionist sentiments?

Click to expand...

A large chunk of the state was unionist, especially the immigrant communities such as the Germans around New Braunfels and San Marcos and the lesser known Dutch around Beaumont and Orange. Texas actually had the lowest black population and while cotton was a major crop we were not nearly as dependent on it as the other states. I also think the MExican population, who historically owned few if any slaves really cared for the war either, but I might be wrong.

If a victorious CSA goes fairly radical in terms of domestic policy, the economy collapses (or at least is not nearly as good as the USA's), or there is internal strife among the states then Texas wil leave rather than put up with BS they don't need.

Of course if Texas were to leave then the fun question becomes who will they turn to? Britain always enjoyed good relations with the Texans but the obvious candidate would be the US. The US socially might be a little weary of supporting a Texas seccession and 2nd Texan Republic but the benefits of helping the CSA lose its largest state, most valuable territory, and gateeway to the west & Mexico are to much to pass up.

If Texas were to seceed I see early pro-British leanings to use as leverage against both the CSA (to keep them from interferring) and the USA (To make them get involved). The 2nd Republic is founded with very tight relations with the US (unless negotiations are botched which they probably won't be since both states want the same thing) and a very cold one with the CSA 9Politically, not economically). Texas should last considerably longer than the 1st republic as the US will be very wary of annexing it, heck you might even get a Texas that lasts until the present day with a close alliance with the US.

The_Tsar said:

I think it depends on the CSA's international policy with Mexico. I see a war between the two countries inevitable if the Confederacy gained independence.

Click to expand...

Possibly but to what degree and when. Remember after the civil war both the CSA and Mexico are in no condition to fight (Mexico had just gotten over the whole Maximilian and France thing). If Texas stays and keeps the door to Mexico open there could be a war with Mexico for the Rio Grande state and Chihuahua like in the Turtledoe books but by that time Mexico had populated the north in response to the Mexican American war and Mexican fighters were among the best in the world at gurellia tactics. Any war between a weak Confederate army (and CSA armies will get weaker as technology advances) and whatever Mexico throws at it in the late 1800's will not be easy as will occupation and annexation. It would really take decades to calm down and even then its still a messy situation.

Big Tex said:

Of course if Texas were to leave then the fun question becomes who will they turn to? Britain always enjoyed good relations with the Texans but the obvious candidate would be the US. The US socially might be a little weary of supporting a Texas seccession and 2nd Texan Republic but the benefits of helping the CSA lose its largest state, most valuable territory, and gateeway to the west & Mexico are to much to pass up.

If Texas were to seceed I see early pro-British leanings to use as leverage against both the CSA (to keep them from interferring) and the USA (To make them get involved).

Click to expand...

Thats very interesting. I wasn't aware of any major Texas-British relations during the Republic. I know that Britain was used more as a boogey-man in the means of motivating annexation by the US, but beyond that do you have any information?

David S Poepoe said:

Thats very interesting. I wasn't aware of any major Texas-British relations during the Republic. I know that Britain was used more as a boogey-man in the means of motivating annexation by the US, but beyond that do you have any information?

Click to expand...

No your right, Texas really only enjoyed good relations with the British only to really scare the US into action. If the US had waxed and waned a little more I've heard that Texas would have continued to lean closer to the British, probably never enough to become a protectoare or colony but possibly enough to get a defense pact out of it if Texas ever got attacked by Mexico.

But throughout the short years of the republic Texas had very coordial poltiical and economic relations with the British who wanted/needed a strong independent Texas ( I really want to say they went as far as to guanrtee Texas' border with the US and Mexico) to curb American power and give them another cotton exporter that wasn't as mired in the slavery question and instability as well as being a powerful rival, as the US.

I do know that Texas had three international embassies during the republic. One in DC obviously but the other two in London and Paris. The Texas Embassy location is actually near Trafalgar square, and exsists now as a Tex-Mex restraunt. I had a friend go there and said it kicks all sorts of ass, looks pretty neat if you ask me http://www.texasembassy.com/

Thanks for the imput everyone!

Some interesting stuff in there ... I wonder about if Texas did survive as an independent state to the present day. Given its abundance of oil supplies, it would probably be an incredibly wealthy nation, and have been for a long time, but I wonder if its population might not be somewhat lower due to the fact that it would not benefit so much from migration.

What about race/ethnic relations in the independent state of Texas?

Also, there's the fact that the Confederacy is a confederacy, which might mean it would be easier for states to leave.

Well right at the end of its independence Texas DID have close relations with Britain, since IIRC it was British pressure which got Mexico to recognise her independence.

By the by, though.

Regarding Maximilian, a victorious CSA might support him rather than threaten to kick out the French with force and back Juarez as per OTL

- - -

I guess the question is what would Texas get out of seceding back to being independent ? It was practically bankrupt when it was before

Best Regards
Grey Wolf

FallenMorgan said:

Also, there's the fact that the Confederacy is a confederacy, which might mean it would be easier for states to leave.

Click to expand...

IIRC, secession was (ironically) illegal under the Confederate constitution - if it wasn't, then I know there was certainly considerations of making it so at the time it was drafted.

Edit: From wikipedia:

The Confederate Constitution did not specifically include a provision allowing states to secede; the Preamble spoke of each state "acting in its sovereign and independent character" but also of the formation of a "permanent federal government". During the debates on drafting the Confederate Constitution, one proposal would have allowed states to secede from the Confederacy. The proposal was tabled with only the South Carolina delegates voting in favor of considering the motion.

Click to expand...

So the Confederates weren't particularly eager to allow what they'd done to the Union to happen to them. If Texas had tried to secede, then I'm sure it would have been contested.

Well if it seceded the Confederates would still be in a position to have to trade with them, and they'd get to dictate the terms of that trade and trade freely with the Union as well.

Also, the Confederates had plans to expand into the Latin Americas, while the Texans probably have a much more practical attitude towards Mexico.

An unintentional side-effect could be much of the unwanted free black population in the South in the wake of the war being encouraged to immigrate to Texas. Probably cause a lot of reactionary violence in Texas but would provide cheap labor for the white and hispanic landowners.

Maybe while Chinese are building rails in other parts of the West, blacks and poor hispanics would be working on a irrigation system in Texas.

I'd be interesting to see a British backed Texas and a French backed Confederacy. Of course then if you think of the French experiment in Mexico, that could lead to some immediate bad trouble for Texas.

Well, the Confederacy was founded on the idea that any state can leave at any time for any reason. While I don't think it's inevitable that Texas would attempt to secede, it is a strong possibility.

While virtually all of 'A Declaration of the Causes which Impel the State of Texas to Secede from the Federal Union' is about slavery, it does also complain about the government not protecting them from bandits, Mexicans, and ‘Indian savages’ and for not reimbursing Texas for the money they have spent on this.

I doubt the Confederate government is going to want to fork over the money to do this either, so that’s one potential grievance. I also suspect that Texas will be more expansionist than much of the rest of the Confederacy, which no longer needs to worry about expanding to add slaveholding states to maintain a balance in Congress.

OTOH, if Texas tries to go it alone, Mexico, especially if it’s still being run by the French, may just want Texas back.