Maryland goes Confederate
- Thread starter tom
- Start date
Mike Collins
Banned
tom said:
I grew up in Maryland. The MD legislature planned on meeting and discussing sesession. Pres Lincoln suspended habeas corpus and directed federal soldiers to arrest sessionist Marylanders. Had the vote been held its quite possible Maryland would have left the Union.
I dont think it would have mattered much. Washington DC did not have quite the importance it does now. Government could have been reconstituted in New York, Philly, etc. Also, there would not be any major influx of manpower or material from the South gaining MD. It would be a major set back, but I dont think it would guarantee Confederate success.
I disagree
If Maryland sided with the South....it would have put Lee that much closer to Philly and NY.........if Philly is taken........the South wins the war.
If Maryland sided with the South....it would have put Lee that much closer to Philly and NY.........if Philly is taken........the South wins the war.
Xen
Banned
Nelliebunky said:
That sounds too Turtledovish too me, if Philly is taken it doesnt guarantee anything, its just another loss, but then again I wouldnt think the Union would go on the defensive either, Washington would not fall and still be the capital, the Union had enough troops there to make it foolish for any Southern commander to try and take it.
Had Lee and his Army of the Potomic attempted to take Philadelphia it would of left him in position for a flanking Army from Washington, and other more northern Armies to leave him completely surrouneded, cut off in Philadelphia to where he cant get supplies, just sit in the city and starve. Maybe Lee would try to bust out in a desperate attempt to get back south but the Union could hammer his army every step of the way.
With Lee's Army trapped in Philly, there wont be much left between the Union Army and Richmond. The bluecoats just won the war, slavery ends that much sooner.
The North was bit slow to realize what the war meant and how it would have to be handled. Maryland's secession could well backfire badly. For one thing, instead of the First Battle of Bull Run the Army of the Potomoc is deployed to occupy Maryland and put down secession. Given the tight division in Maryland this would be relatively simple, ESPECIALLY since strong forces loyal to the union would be seeing the price rapidly mounting.
1) Maryland's panhandle would be immediately lost, in a fashion similar to West Virginia if Maryland wasn't put down fast.
2) The Army of the Potomoc would occupy the major cities, not to mention reinforce DC. Resistance would be extremely unlikely, especially in a state divided almost evenly.
3) Property values would collapse. In our history, a major anti-secession voice emerged after the riots in Baltimore caused the city to (briefly) lose an estimated one-third of its value.
4) Slavery, already at risk in Maryland, would crumble with most slaves within days/hours of free states. Possibly the potential of this manpower would hasten certain proclamations regarding the end of slavery.
5) With this diversion the Union would likely spend more time on defenses for DC and avoid some of the early embarassments of 1861. Even worse, from the South's perspective, the need for some kind of action might have gotten the Union moving into Tennessee sooner.
Xen, it was the Army of Northern Virginia under Lee, and it didn't exist until several smaller Confederate forces united for the first Battle of Bull Run. The likelihood of these forces suddenly being pulled together to attempt a forcing of the Potomac, in the face of superior Union numbers and the American Navy would be very low. Perhaps an assault on Harper's Ferry?
How would that work out? Quick defeat for the Union or some bloody early debacle for the South instead of a victory?
1) Maryland's panhandle would be immediately lost, in a fashion similar to West Virginia if Maryland wasn't put down fast.
2) The Army of the Potomoc would occupy the major cities, not to mention reinforce DC. Resistance would be extremely unlikely, especially in a state divided almost evenly.
3) Property values would collapse. In our history, a major anti-secession voice emerged after the riots in Baltimore caused the city to (briefly) lose an estimated one-third of its value.
4) Slavery, already at risk in Maryland, would crumble with most slaves within days/hours of free states. Possibly the potential of this manpower would hasten certain proclamations regarding the end of slavery.
5) With this diversion the Union would likely spend more time on defenses for DC and avoid some of the early embarassments of 1861. Even worse, from the South's perspective, the need for some kind of action might have gotten the Union moving into Tennessee sooner.
Xen, it was the Army of Northern Virginia under Lee, and it didn't exist until several smaller Confederate forces united for the first Battle of Bull Run. The likelihood of these forces suddenly being pulled together to attempt a forcing of the Potomac, in the face of superior Union numbers and the American Navy would be very low. Perhaps an assault on Harper's Ferry?
How would that work out? Quick defeat for the Union or some bloody early debacle for the South instead of a victory?
Hey Tom, why not go all the way and ask what would've happened had all border states- Kentucky, Missouri and Delaware in addition to Maryland- decided to go Confederate ? Has anybody read James McPherson's BATTLE CRY OF FREEDOM or some other equally authoritative ACW text lately to see how historians speculate on these key issues ?
Mike Collins
Banned
Grimm Reaper said:
Lost to whom? What panhandle? Western Maryland was strongly pro-Union. The rest of the state (South MD, Northeast MD and the Eastern Shore) were pro-Confederate or at least strongly leaning to the Confederacy. If there was a split it would likely be Western Maryland going Union and the rest going South.
Really? I thought that President Lincoln said something along the lines of "if we lose Kentucky, we lose the war"? The Bluegrass State seemed pretty important to him, but then again he came from the place, if that has to do with anything.
I don't know much about Missouri's importance during the war, but if that seceeded would Confederate troops operating out of St. Louis towards Chicago do anything worthwhile? And Delaware is too small and out of the way to matter to me.
And about Washington City and Philadelphia falling, and the Union fought on beyond that, how long would it take before the European nations recognize the CSA?
I don't know much about Missouri's importance during the war, but if that seceeded would Confederate troops operating out of St. Louis towards Chicago do anything worthwhile? And Delaware is too small and out of the way to matter to me.
And about Washington City and Philadelphia falling, and the Union fought on beyond that, how long would it take before the European nations recognize the CSA?
KJM said:
I know it's plausible, but why on earth for all practical purposes would either nation hold its capital within a hundred miles of each other's borders? Especially with two nations that don't get along much, unless the CSA and USA become best friends or something.
If I was the USA, I'd move my capital far north of Maryland, Even Philly is too close to the Mason Dixon Line. How about Chicago? It was a choice in Victoria.
If I was the CSA, I'd raise funds and rebuild Montgomery into a proper world capital, or else move to Atlanta. Richmond is too far east and close to the Yankees for me, although it took the Union five years to capture it.
Ironically Kentucky was more helpful as a neutral to the CSA then it might have been as part of the CSA. The union was unable to launch a major offensive for fear of pushing her away(and perhaps other border states) whereas open secession could have been resisted.
Trtosky, for the US it was about pride and prestige maintaining the existing capital where it was. What the CSA thought it was doing I have never quite understood.
Trtosky, for the US it was about pride and prestige maintaining the existing capital where it was. What the CSA thought it was doing I have never quite understood.
Yah, I know. Pride and prestige ruled a lot of people's judgment, and not always for the better. I was actually thinking mapwise when I said that it would be ludacrous for the Northerners to keep D.C. should the Union lose the war. A nation's pride is altogether different.
And some reasons I think the CSA moved to Richmond was because it was capital of the most populous state in the Confederacy, because it was near the main fighting fronts, and it was decent as far as a world capital should go. IIRC the C.S. government wasn't too impressed with Montgomery and its smll-town ways, and Richmond would impress visiting European dignitaries much better. And the Tredegar Iron Works was there.
And some reasons I think the CSA moved to Richmond was because it was capital of the most populous state in the Confederacy, because it was near the main fighting fronts, and it was decent as far as a world capital should go. IIRC the C.S. government wasn't too impressed with Montgomery and its smll-town ways, and Richmond would impress visiting European dignitaries much better. And the Tredegar Iron Works was there.
Baltimore riots April-May 1861
Just thought of another potential Maryland goes Confederate POD- WI the Baltimore riots (described in detail at http://www.civilwarhome.com/baltimoreriot.htm) in April 1861 became more violent ? OTL, the 6th Massachusetts, marching thru Baltimore on their way to the front, were heckled and attacked on the 19th by a large pro-Confederate mob who hurled rocks and other projectiles at them, resulting in the Union troops panicking, turning their muskets on the mob and opening fire. This clash resulted in 4 federal soldiers and 12 civilians dead, followed by pro-Confederate city officials then authorising the destruction of the city's railroad bridges to prevent more Union forces from arriving. WI this riot had spiralled more and more out of control before martial law was imposed and large Union forces sent to garrison the city in May ? Could the large pro-Confederate sympathisers within Baltimore have rallied enough of a following to successfully bar the entry of Union forces and expel the Union troops already present ? Would such an event have led to open Maryland secession from the Union then ?
Just thought of another potential Maryland goes Confederate POD- WI the Baltimore riots (described in detail at http://www.civilwarhome.com/baltimoreriot.htm) in April 1861 became more violent ? OTL, the 6th Massachusetts, marching thru Baltimore on their way to the front, were heckled and attacked on the 19th by a large pro-Confederate mob who hurled rocks and other projectiles at them, resulting in the Union troops panicking, turning their muskets on the mob and opening fire. This clash resulted in 4 federal soldiers and 12 civilians dead, followed by pro-Confederate city officials then authorising the destruction of the city's railroad bridges to prevent more Union forces from arriving. WI this riot had spiralled more and more out of control before martial law was imposed and large Union forces sent to garrison the city in May ? Could the large pro-Confederate sympathisers within Baltimore have rallied enough of a following to successfully bar the entry of Union forces and expel the Union troops already present ? Would such an event have led to open Maryland secession from the Union then ?