Oustanding two updates KI. Really great work.
I think you messed up the color coding in this segment:
TheKnightIrish said:
Shouldn't Cleburne all be in red or is there a Union Cleburne as well?
A Glorious Union or America: the New Sparta
- Thread starter TheKnightIrish
- Start date
Oustanding two updates KI. Really great work.
I think you messed up the color coding in this segment:
Shouldn't Cleburne all be in red or is there a Union Cleburne as well?
Oustanding two updates KI. Really great work.
I think you messed up the color coding in this segment:
Shouldn't Cleburne all be in red or is there a Union Cleburne as well?
Thanks. Fixed.
Thanks. Fixed.
Glad to help. Thanks for taking the time to color code it in the first place.
The play of personalities and terrain in new patterns continues to be fantastic. Great stuff.
On the morale front that is a very fair assessment.
I am going to post the conventions tomorrow. The prize of self-satisfaction is available to anyone who can guess/predict:
- The National Union Presidential/Vice Presidential Candidates;
- The Democratic Presidential/Vice Presidential Candidates; and
- Any significant third party candidates unless you think there won't be one.
I am having difficulty transfering my Convention voting tables into these posts. Once I have resolved that (or have given up) I will post the Coventions post which I already prepared.
Last edited:
1. Abraham Lincoln/Andrew Johnson
2. Franklin Pierce/George Pendleton
3. Ben Butler/Random Radical (not Fremont)
Chapter One Hundred and Eleven The Players Are Cast
Chapter One Hundred and Eleven
The Players Are Cast
From the article “The Conventions of 1864 – The Transition from the Second to the Third Party System” by Otis R. Mayhew
North & South Magazine 1999
The Radical Party – Forerunners of the Radical Liberal Party
“As the Civil War progressed, political opinions within the Republican Party began to diverge. Senators Charles Sumner and Henry Wilson of Massachusetts wanted the Republican Party to advocate constitutional amendments to prohibit slavery and to guarantee racial equality before the law. These bills were not yet supported by all Republicans. A number of “conservatives” particularly from Western states opposed this…
Democratic leaders hoped that the radical Republicans would put forth a ticket in the election because of President Lincoln’s perceived intransigence on the nature of Reconstruction. The New York World was particularly interested in undermining the National Union Party and ran a series of articles setting forth that the National Union Convention would be delayed until late in 1864 to allow a Radical time to collect delegates to win the nomination. Some of the extreme radicals looked to General John C. Frémont initially. Supporters in New York City established a newspaper called the New Nation, which declared in one of its initial issues that the National Union Convention would be a "nonentity"…
The Radical Democracy & Freedom Convention assembled in Massachusetts with delegates arriving on May 22, 1864. By now the delegations had fractured in their support. Lincoln’s hints throughout April and May that he might compromise with the Radicals on some elements of Reconstruction had muddied the waters. Lincoln’s reaffirmation that firm steps would be taken to protect the rights of freedmen after the war to prevent them becoming “America’s serf class” had secured the support of many waiving Republicans. Various names were nonetheless proposed: John C. Fremont, Benjamin Butler, even John Peck’s name was mentioned. The major exceptions were the New York and New Jersey delegations. They remained united, composed mainly of War Democrats, in supporting Philip Kearny. 375 delegates came from 17 states and the District of Columbia. They adopted the name the "Radical Party"…
A supporter of Butler was appointed chairman. The platform was vigorously discussed with much argument as to the severity of Reconstruction and a series of resolutions bogged down the convention proceedings for several days. The convention broke down without a nomination for president. Ben Butler had confirmed in a letter to the Convention that he would not accept the nomination of the Radical Party. Phil Kearny ignored the Convention’s declarations altogether, publicly calling it “a farce” and a “circus of disappointed office-seekers”. Fremont’s supporters could not gain any momentum, and thus could not get him nominated. The convention broke down but the organizers resolved to meet again after the National Union Convention scheduled for June 7-8, 1864. They never did…
The National Union Party – Lincoln’s Bastard
Before the election, Lincoln had overseen the joining of the War Democrats to the Republicans under the umbrella of the new National Union Party. At the commencement of 1864 some political leaders, including Salmon P. Chase, Benjamin Wade, and Horace Greeley, intended to oppose Lincoln's re-nomination on the grounds that he could not win re-election with his soft approach to Reconstruction and the outcome of the war still in doubt. However following the fall of Charleston to Isaac Rodman in May, as well as Kearny’s conquests in North Carolina, and Grant’s seemingly inexorable advance on Atlanta, not even the self-deluded Chase would actively contest Lincoln' re-nomination…
The nominating convention of the National Union Party, dominated by Republicans with a scattering of War Democrats, met in Baltimore on June 7-8, 1864. By that time, Lincoln’s supporters, uplifted by victories on a dozen battlefields, had thwarted various insurgencies and partially secured control of the proceedings. The platform called for pursuit of the war until the Confederacy surrendered unconditionally; a constitutional amendment for the abolition of slavery; aid to disabled Union veterans; continued European neutrality; encouragement of immigration; and construction of a transcontinental railroad. It also praised the use of black troops and Lincoln’s management of the war. On the first presidential ballot, Lincoln got all of the votes, and the National Union Party nominated him for a second term as president…
The difficulty for Lincoln was the planks for Reconstruction that the Convention adopted. Although personally popular with the membership of the party, Lincoln was still at odds with much of the leadership of the party – the Radical Republicans. Despite some inspiring, but vague speeches given by Lincoln during the spring, including the Union Mills Address, which hinted at a hardening of his attitude to Reconstruction, many radicals remained suspicious of Lincoln and his desire and ability to “subjugate the South”(Greeley). They therefore sought the adoption of a radical series of “planks” in the platform of the National Union party to spell out their policy on Reconstruction. That platform would look suspiciously like Kearny’s “Potomac Memorandum”. Lincoln sincerely believed that the formal expression of such a platform for a hard peace would extend the war by making the Confederates fight on out of desperation. The Radicals considered it the bare minimum they would be prepared to accept and would to build on it with more severe measures if they won sufficient seats in Congress…
The tactics of Lincoln’s opposition to such a rigid platform were not as well managed as his 1860 nomination campaign. His close friend and former campaign manager, David Davis, did not agree with Lincoln’s position on Reconstruction and this was symptomatic of many of Lincoln’s formerly close allies. Furthermore Lincoln had clearly indicated his desire to replace Vice President Hannibal Hamlin on the ticket. Hamlin was a fellow traveler of the Radicals and they demanded the support of Lincoln’s “pocket conservatives” (as they were described by Benjamin Wade) in return for a new vice presidential candidate. The decision by Lincoln’s supporters to give way on the platform in return for the dropping of Hamlin has been described as both foolish and realistic in equal measure by historians since…
In his dissatisfaction with Republican Vice-President Hannibal Hamlin, Lincoln has explored a number of alternative candidates. He had even asked General Benjamin Butler. Butler, still darling of the Radicals and some War Democrats, had refused on the grounds that the office of Vice President was “in political circles like dying without realizing it for 4 years”. The controversial Military-Governor of Tennessee, Andrew Johnson, a War Democrat, was also considered. Johnson was ideally suited to run as a vice-presidential candidate with Lincoln in 1864. He strongly supported the Union, he was a Southerner, and he was a leader of the War Democrats. However Andrew Johnson had got into disputes with two powerful figures – the politically powerful General William “Bull” Nelson, commanding in Kentucky (described as more of a “blood feud” than a disagreement by Ben Butler) and equally importantly, the General in Chief, Phil Kearny. On Kearny’s tour of the west he had dined twice with Johnson and meet with him several times. Kearny quickly let it be known that he thought that Johnson was an “incoherent, quarrelsome drunk who is a War Democrat today for no better reason than it has made him governor and hasn’t learned a damn thing these last 3 years” (at least according to Dan Butterfield). Kearny’s view was widely known in military and public circles. Nelson’s vendetta was politically more significant as Kentucky’s delegation worked before and during the convention to suppress any move to Johnson. They had their own compromise candidate in mind…
On that basis Lincoln passed over Johnson. He also passed over former New York Senator Daniel S. Dickinson. Dickinson was eminently qualified for the position but Lincoln was keen to maintain the regional balance in the Executive. Accepting Dickinson would mean replacing William Seward also of New York and Lincoln was not prepared to do without his counsel. In the end both Lincoln’s and the Convention’s approbation fell upon Joseph Holt of Kentucky. His credentials were as good as Johnson’s - he was a Southerner born in Kentucky and long resident in Mississippi; he was a leading War Democrat and former member of James Buchanan’s cabinet; and as Judge Advocate General of the Union Army he had first class military credentials as well (including Philip Kearny’s seal of approval)…
Abraham Lincoln of Illinois and Joseph Holt of Kentucky
The Democratic Party – Beginning of the Long Decline
The Democratic Party was bitterly split between War Democrats, Moderates and Peace Democrats, who further divided among their own competing factions. However since the murder of David Hunter the power and influence of the Peace Democrats was on the wane. Those who would unconditionally compromise with the Confederacy were considered outcasts by the majority of the party…
Leading Peace Democrat Fernando Wood first campaigned for Thomas H. Seymour and then for George Pendleton
Moderate Peace Democrats who supported the war against the Confederacy, such as Horatio Seymour, were preaching the wisdom of a negotiated peace. After the Battles of Union Mills and the Four Armies, when it was clear the South could no longer win the war, moderate Peace Democrats proposed a negotiated peace that would secure Union victory. They believed this was the best course of action, because an armistice could finish the war without devastating the South. The handful of remaining Radical Peace Democrats, known as Copperheads, such as Clement Vallandigham, were either in prison, in exile or were cast out of their own convention. The majority of the Democratic Party would not accept a candidate or a platform that would declare the war a failure or favored an immediate end to hostilities without securing Union victory…
There were few obvious candidates for the nomination. Horatio Seymour, Governor of New York was favored but had declared he would not accept the nomination. Former Connecticut Governor and former radical Peace Democrat Thomas H. Seymour actively vied for the presidential nomination but his history as a total opponent of the war stood against him. Some even suggested Andrew Johnson could be brought back into the Democratic fold to lead his party. As Harpers Weekly observed “those fit for the nomination will not accept it, and those seeking it are not fit for the nomination”…
The most startling name to appear on the ballot was that of General Ambrose Burnside. Formerly a Democrat before the war his current political allegiance was not known meaning that a, not particularly inspiring, Union General received both Republican votes for the vice presidential nomination and Democratic votes for the presidential nomination. However the War Democrats within the party, who utterly repudiated the Thomas Seymour candidacy (and the dead hand of Clement Vallandigham behind the Peace Democrats), wanted to lay down a marker that would alarm the Moderates and Peace Democrats into an acceptable compromise. They also wanted to establish their credentials a loyal Unionist Democrats. They choose to elevate Burnside as he was the widely publicized persecutor of Clement Vallandigham, and a man not afraid to arrest Copperheads who had once been his political fellow travelers before the war…
The convention was held in Columbus, Ohio on August 22–24, 1864. A pro-war pro-negotiated settlement platform was adopted over the Peace Democrats opposition. The South in the Union but on the basis of a negotiated settlement of the war’s issues would be their nuanced election stance. The nomination of a candidate was less straight forward particularly given the recent dramatic news from North Carolina…
After Horatio Seymour and Lazarus Powell let it be known they would not accept the nomination (Powell believed the nominee should be from a ‘free’ state). It seemed that the moderates would rally around former President, Franklin Pierce, while the radical Peace Democrats continued to support Thomas H. Seymour. However many other ‘favorite sons’ and compromise candidates remained in the picture. The announcement that Franklin Pierce would also not accept the nomination occurred after the third ballot. The moderates split, the more ardent for a “hard war but a just peace” went to Burnside, who had not even declared himself a Democrat still. The bulk however broke for Indiana’s favorite son Senator Thomas A. Hendricks. There was an expectation that the Peace Democrats might surprise everyone and win through if they could get momentum behind Thomas Seymour. However on the fourth and fifth ballots, the surge to Thomas Seymour did not occur. He was considered by the majority of the party to be a toxic candidate and even a handful of ardent Peace Democrats could not be reconciled with his candidacy, which kept the names of George Pendleton and James Bayard jr names in the contest…
By the seventh ballot the Peace Democrats bolted from Thomas Seymour to Pendleton in the hope a less polarizing figure could unite the party. Again the voting remained deadlocked throughout the seventh and eight ballots. The Moderates, Peace Democrats and remaining War Democrats all remained split. On the ninth ballot the New York delegation reintroduced Horatio Seymour’s name to the maelstrom. It was suggested to the convention that if it could agree unanimously to his candidacy he would be forced to relent and accept the will of the party. By the tenth ballot the weary party, desperate to avoid the factionalism of 1860, were drawn to Horatio Seymour. The delegates rushed to him with only 24 Peace Democrats voting otherwise. Although Horatio Seymour had ‘won’ the nomination, after some strong arming, there was an eleventh ballot which unanimously voted for Horatio Seymour...
When Horatio Seymour received word that “Seymour has been nominated” he assumed it was Thomas H. Seymour. “We are defeated now for we have nominated a defeatist” was his pessimistic response upon hearing the news. His surprise at realizing the nominee was in fact himself can only be imagined. Whether it was relief that the candidate was not his namesake, or his understanding that there was no other viable candidate, he relented and accepted the nomination…
The party opted for regional balance and, in a direct challenge to the National Unionists who had nominated Joseph Holt of Kentucky for Vice President, they voted to nominate their own Kentuckian, Lazarus Powell to the post. Powell, though reluctant to accept the presidential nomination as a southerner, had no qualms about running for the Vice Presidency…”
Horatio Seymour of New York and Lazarus W. Powell of Kentucky
Last edited:
Great chapter, KI! TTL's election of 1864 looks to be more interesting than OTL.
A few thoughts:
With the Union capturing Charleston, sooner or later, news of the Charleston Massacre is going to reach the North (presumably from Negroes who exaggerate it); when that happens, the Radicals' hand will be strengthened further and the democrats will really look foolish (if not downright defeatist.)
BTW if I was P.G.T. Beauregard, I would seriously be in fear of my life right now.
A few thoughts:
- Copperheads: No surprise they would be persona non grata in the country; hell, I'm surprised there were no lynchings.
- Republicans: Pretty much what I expected with the whole Radicals vs Conservatives fight; I can see Andy Johnson pissing off people like that, especially Kearny (who is definitely becoming a power in his own right.)
- Democrats: Talk about dead in the water; the War wing joined the Republicans, the Peace wing is discredited completely if not in jail or exile, and the moderates are trying not to sound desperate. I mean trying to nominate Pierce? Talk about a rickety platform: "A hard War but a negotiated Peace" ? People will be asking "Negotiate about what?"
- Kentucky: Interesting that both VP candidates are from that state.
With the Union capturing Charleston, sooner or later, news of the Charleston Massacre is going to reach the North (presumably from Negroes who exaggerate it); when that happens, the Radicals' hand will be strengthened further and the democrats will really look foolish (if not downright defeatist.)
BTW if I was P.G.T. Beauregard, I would seriously be in fear of my life right now.
As far as the Charleston Massacre is concerned the cat is out of the bag by the Conventions. The issues for Radicals is that it is simply a Massacre. For Peace Democrats its Union-inspired servile insurrection and proves them right in their worst fears about the Emancipation Proclamation and arming negros. While the North as a whole is leaning more towards the Radical Republican stance, there are still many people who's views on the war and slaves hasn't changed one iota. Their inability to move with the majority opinion is going to have a drastic affect on the Democratic Party in the years to come...
I can see a surviving Bull Nelson dominating Kentucky politics for awhile and if he could provoke Jeff C Davis to murder and earn the hatred of Oliver Morton, I imagine his relationship with his neighbour Andy Johnson would quickly merit the blood feud description.
Kentucky with Bull Nelson, two VP candidates and another coming (I've seen the Kearny/Lovell Rousseau poster) is going to be a very interesting place post war.
Kentucky with Bull Nelson, two VP candidates and another coming (I've seen the Kearny/Lovell Rousseau poster) is going to be a very interesting place post war.
Feel free to have a go at posters or whatever for the Election. My limited Paint program is laborious to use.
Actually it refers to the classification of various political phases in US politics. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_parties_in_the_United_States
Needless to say in TTL the transition from the Second Party system to the Third Party System takes longer and will the resulting system will be different.
As to the 'Three Party' System I think you are referring to, you'll have to wait and see how the next few terms turn out...
Four years earlier. I wonder if he could have held the New York governorship? Could he run for both at the same time? Who will run for the National Unionist Governor of New York now?
Poor Lincoln - be better get through his Reconstruction Light before the election. There will a lot more Radicals after the election trying to pass Reconstruction Heavy.
....never mind the fact that the Union had nothing to do with inciting the riots and that whites were rioting too...
Considering how the Democrats are falling apart, more than likely they are going to end up as a extremist fringe party....
No kidding....and with the Massacre inflaming passions, Lincoln could face his worst nightmare....a veto-proof supermajority of radicals in both House and Senate....
I can see a national three party system or more in the US but it would be of two parties primarily vying for each state, just that's its two different parties depending on the state:
Massachusetts: National Union-Republican V Radical
Kentucky: Democrat V National Union-Republican
South Carolina: Democrat V Radical maybe
Very few states might have three parties vying for success. That would work maybe.
I am suffering from technical difficulties at the moment but hopefully I will have one or two new chapters over the weekend - Kearny finally reveals his plans for Peck and The Fighting Lambs as the campaign in North Carolina reaches its climax...