If that would happen it may well spread farther south as that is another 4 Free States and 4 less Free States. This would tip the power in congress and it would make slavery see as an institution of the past even more so then OTL.
Virginia abolishes slavery
- Thread starter Glass Onion
- Start date
If that would happen it may well spread farther south as that is another 4 Free States and 4 less Free States. This would tip the power in congress and it would make slavery see as an institution of the past even more so then OTL.
Or make the remaining Slavocracy ever more shrill in defence of thier 'Particular Institution'
HTG
I think that this is still an interesting timeline.
I think that if Virginia were followed by other states, Tennessee, Arkansas, Maryland, possibly Kentucky and North Carolina lots changes.
Assuming that there is still a Texas Republic I think that the leadership there would find joining a Union where Slavery was still under threat would be a lot less attractive.
Does this butterfly out the Mexican American War?
By the 1870s slavery in the states that still have it will look anomolous to some and obscene to others.
There would eventually be a three quarters majority of free states and a willingness to push through something like the 13th amendment.
Texas then looks very odd?
By the way how many US Citizens had an interest in going to California in the early 1840s?
I think that if Virginia were followed by other states, Tennessee, Arkansas, Maryland, possibly Kentucky and North Carolina lots changes.
Assuming that there is still a Texas Republic I think that the leadership there would find joining a Union where Slavery was still under threat would be a lot less attractive.
Does this butterfly out the Mexican American War?
By the 1870s slavery in the states that still have it will look anomolous to some and obscene to others.
There would eventually be a three quarters majority of free states and a willingness to push through something like the 13th amendment.
Texas then looks very odd?
By the way how many US Citizens had an interest in going to California in the early 1840s?
Pre war there were lots of complaints about Free Blacks being kidnapped in Md, Del, Penn, etc. and forcefully taken south to be sold.
With a Free Virginia in the way, this will end, and whe will have a lot more free Black communities in the Border states.
With Free states being a majority, any Mexican war would end with the US getting the 4 Second Tier border states. [Also no provision to divide Texas into 5 states.]
I assume Texas stays independent. A factor in the settlers wanting to leave Mexico was their wish to keep slavery. If slavery looked to be on its way out the the US it would look less attractive.
I have had a couple of other thoughts.
One is if expansion does not come from Mexico is there a chance of a war over parts of Canada.
The othere is could there be a Texas /Mexican war?
If so is there any risk of Texas winning and expanding (with slavery) right to the Pacific?
In that event is the risk of Sesssion going to be a risk of joining Texas?
I have had a couple of other thoughts.
One is if expansion does not come from Mexico is there a chance of a war over parts of Canada.
The othere is could there be a Texas /Mexican war?
If so is there any risk of Texas winning and expanding (with slavery) right to the Pacific?
In that event is the risk of Sesssion going to be a risk of joining Texas?
The Morrill tariff only passed in OTL because the CSA seceded and it did so before Lincoln took office. I have been unable to find any evidence that Lincoln said he would invade any state that refused to pay the tariff.
By 1832, Virginia was a huge net exporter of slaves, mostly to areas of the deep south that were experiencing tremendous growth with the explosion of the cotton culture. In fact, as Virginia began to industrialize and saw the growth of cities and towns at the expense of the large plantations throughout the antebellum period, many wealthy land/slaveowners either sold off their slaves to slaveowners down in the deep south, or sold their land in Virginia and moved with their slaves down South.
I imagine that if a move to emanicipate the slaves in Virginia became popular enough to become law, it would have allowed either payment to slaveowners to reimburse them for the value of their emanicipated slaves, or an opportunity to sell as many of their slaves down into the deep South before emanicipation took effect, in order for the slaveowners to obtain value for the property that they would be losing.
So if the law granted say a 2 year window to dispose of ones slaves before emancipation, we would have seen a wholesale exportation of slaves from Virginia down into the deep South. As such the slaves populations of those deep South states would have gone up even more then they did in OTL, while the number of slaves/freedmen in Virginia would be reduced dramatically. In addition, Virginia would lose a large percentage of its slaveholding aristocracy who would have left the state for more slave friendly areas. After a couple of decades of being a free state and with the political power no longer in the hands of the slaveholding class, Virgina would more likely resemble Pennsylvania, Ohio, etc. in its culture and political beliefs.
In the long run, maybe the border states emulate Virginia, but I think the deep South becomes more entrenched, more paranoid and suspicious, and much more likely to secede decades earlier than OTL with their overal political power diminished.
I imagine that if a move to emanicipate the slaves in Virginia became popular enough to become law, it would have allowed either payment to slaveowners to reimburse them for the value of their emanicipated slaves, or an opportunity to sell as many of their slaves down into the deep South before emanicipation took effect, in order for the slaveowners to obtain value for the property that they would be losing.
So if the law granted say a 2 year window to dispose of ones slaves before emancipation, we would have seen a wholesale exportation of slaves from Virginia down into the deep South. As such the slaves populations of those deep South states would have gone up even more then they did in OTL, while the number of slaves/freedmen in Virginia would be reduced dramatically. In addition, Virginia would lose a large percentage of its slaveholding aristocracy who would have left the state for more slave friendly areas. After a couple of decades of being a free state and with the political power no longer in the hands of the slaveholding class, Virgina would more likely resemble Pennsylvania, Ohio, etc. in its culture and political beliefs.
In the long run, maybe the border states emulate Virginia, but I think the deep South becomes more entrenched, more paranoid and suspicious, and much more likely to secede decades earlier than OTL with their overal political power diminished.
Jaded_Railman
Banned
I don't know about that. A lot more differentiated Pennsylvania from Virginia than slavery. While we like to group the Mid-Atlantic states (NY, PA, DE, ML, and VA -- sometimes NC, too) together like we group the New England/Northern states (NH, MA, VT, ME, CT, RI) or the Cotton Belt/Southern states (SC, GA, AL, MI, LA), based on culture or something like that, it doesn't work as 'well' for the Mid-Atlantic states as it does for the other two groups. Pennsylvania isn't like New York or Virginia in the same way Georgia is like Alabama or Mississippi.
This has a lot to do with settlement patterns. Pennsylvania was actually mildly cosmopolitan, at least in comparison to other nearby states. Philadelphia itself and surrounding counties were settled by a mixture of English, Swedish, and Dutch people, but the rest of PA east of the Appalachians was greatly settled by Germans and people from New Jersey. The Appalachians themselves were mostly populated by Scots-Irish protestants and a great smorgasbord of other people (the same cultural mix existed up and down the Appalachians, actually). West of the mountains was greatly settled out of New England, of all places, although the Germans continued to spread across the state.
Virginia, on the other hand, was actually almost entirely settled by this time, with a colonial population made up mostly of English people (with the same Scots-Irish mountain men from PA). Politics in both states were very, very heavily effected by their respective settlement patterns (mostly the respective religions of each settlement group). The great differences between the two states meant their politics were very different. Supposing there was stronger industrialization in Virginia, the change to her politics will be unique to Virginia, not a copy of those of another state.
EDIT: I guess I should mention ahead of time I'm talking less about entire populations and more about majorities that, during the antebellum period which is the subject of the post, mostly controlled the governments of the states in question.
Last edited:
Of the states you mentioned, only one was a Free state: Pennsylvania. Both Delaware and Maryland were slave states. Remember, Harriet Tubman was a slave in Delaware for part of her childhood.
The complaints mostly came from PA, IL, OH, & IN, all of which bordered the slave states.
~Salamon2
You left out the Welsh, who should be added with the English--the Swedish were more influential in Delaware but I guess you could say that a residual energy was left, and the Dutch were tag alongs with the Germans and were more often first generation Dutchmen who had fled to Amsterdam during the 30 years war and thus were technically German/Swiss. That's at least what I can tell about the SE PA region from my family tree. So yeah, never forget the Welsh, unless you want to offend me and my ancestors by saying that they're sub-deriviation of English.
And in case you doubt their influence I ask you to look up Bryn Mawr and Gwennedd. You also forgot to add in some residual French influence in Western PA.Back then I agree the "mid-atlantic" states category doesn't really fit. However today I'd say that the Mid-Atlantic region (PA to VA) is about accurate. Just remember, in PA there's a large splat of red called Pennsyltucky between the two blue dots. Also don't forget the big issue VA is having with blue Northern VA. The inclusion of NC is a post-Obama thing and is quite silly IMO.
~Salamon2
The magic word here, IIRC, is "Manumission", a slow, step-by-step emancipation. Brazil OTL IIRC set a "born after" date where all children born from that day forward are automatically free, though an "all free by date X" is a possibility too. You will see a lifting of any bans on slaves renting out their services to buy their own (or family's) freedom, which was common with the many skilled slave craftsmen/artisans.
Sam H hit the nail on the head here. A slow, iterative process that will see many of the more diehard plantation people move south, possibly to NC or TN potentially swaying those states further into the Deep South sphere. Possibly just into the Deep South. I'd assume MD and KY follow suit on manumission, TN too, potentially also MO and AK. NC depends on any demographic shifts due to VA expatriation. Freemen will, as OTL, find a hard time in VA and MD as a threat to "proper white people's jobs" and will likely be strongly persuaded to find a new place to live. One option is West, leading to a larger black frontier population (they won't find much welcome in the Midwest). Black Kansas?!? Another option is Liberia, and there were OTL rumors among the Freemen population that Libera was a "promised land".
A larger Colonization Society means more Freemen to Libera; not a gigantic number due to the costs, but potentially enough to maintain a larger American-Liberian population that's more than just an aristocratic class...potentially more integration with native populations. Interesting butterfly potential there.
VA will as others have stated go more industrial than OTL. "WV" has huge coal deposits to drive just such a revolution. Mills will happily open up that much closer to the cottonfields. *Roanoke (called Big Lick at the time, though Salem may become the Big City ATL) will become a transportation hub a lot sooner. The new jobs mean similar demographic changes as we saw in NY, PA, MA, etc. with more immigrants to fill the jobs. UNLESS...these dangerous new jobs simply become the perfect place for Freemen to be put to work away from "white people's" jobs.
TX is a real foggy area. There's still a "Manifest Destiny" mindset growing in the US to justify expansion. Unless Oregon comes along to satisfy this TX-CA still looks very inviting. There're also strategic concerns at play: TX is a damned good place to stage an invasion to seize New Orleans, at least in theory (swamps and all). Galveston Harbor alone is a good place for any hostile naval presence. Jacksonians will likely want to seize TX just for the sake of seizing TX! There's also the question of how much hostility to slavery there is in the US. I really don't see VA or any other of the "midatlantic sphere" becoming any sort of major place for anti-slavery or even anti-expansion (that was much more a Midwestern "Freesoiler" thing). The "antislavery" movement in VA was mostly economic, plantation owners like Washington seeing the "peculiar institution" as a financial burden to the Master as much as to the slaves. There likely will be a laizes faire view of slavery. "We cast off that lot a while ago...if some states want to bear that burden they're welcome to it." Much depends on other unpredictable butterflies IMO, but it's perfectly logical to assume an OTL-like situation happens over TX. The thorny issue is how many states do you make of it? The Deep South will want as many as possible, but they wont have the votes in the Senate to push any major compromises along those lines. There *could* be an earlier secession crisis ATL.
One other interesting butterfly is that the Deep South slave population is even bigger. This means slave costs are down and the demand for slave import is lower. It also means fears of a Haiti-style uprising grow proportionately with the black-white population balance. I can see the Deep South becoming truly paranoid about their Black Powderkeg with...frightening possibilities.
Sam H hit the nail on the head here. A slow, iterative process that will see many of the more diehard plantation people move south, possibly to NC or TN potentially swaying those states further into the Deep South sphere. Possibly just into the Deep South. I'd assume MD and KY follow suit on manumission, TN too, potentially also MO and AK. NC depends on any demographic shifts due to VA expatriation. Freemen will, as OTL, find a hard time in VA and MD as a threat to "proper white people's jobs" and will likely be strongly persuaded to find a new place to live. One option is West, leading to a larger black frontier population (they won't find much welcome in the Midwest). Black Kansas?!? Another option is Liberia, and there were OTL rumors among the Freemen population that Libera was a "promised land".
A larger Colonization Society means more Freemen to Libera; not a gigantic number due to the costs, but potentially enough to maintain a larger American-Liberian population that's more than just an aristocratic class...potentially more integration with native populations. Interesting butterfly potential there.
VA will as others have stated go more industrial than OTL. "WV" has huge coal deposits to drive just such a revolution. Mills will happily open up that much closer to the cottonfields. *Roanoke (called Big Lick at the time, though Salem may become the Big City ATL) will become a transportation hub a lot sooner. The new jobs mean similar demographic changes as we saw in NY, PA, MA, etc. with more immigrants to fill the jobs. UNLESS...these dangerous new jobs simply become the perfect place for Freemen to be put to work away from "white people's" jobs.
TX is a real foggy area. There's still a "Manifest Destiny" mindset growing in the US to justify expansion. Unless Oregon comes along to satisfy this TX-CA still looks very inviting. There're also strategic concerns at play: TX is a damned good place to stage an invasion to seize New Orleans, at least in theory (swamps and all). Galveston Harbor alone is a good place for any hostile naval presence. Jacksonians will likely want to seize TX just for the sake of seizing TX! There's also the question of how much hostility to slavery there is in the US. I really don't see VA or any other of the "midatlantic sphere" becoming any sort of major place for anti-slavery or even anti-expansion (that was much more a Midwestern "Freesoiler" thing). The "antislavery" movement in VA was mostly economic, plantation owners like Washington seeing the "peculiar institution" as a financial burden to the Master as much as to the slaves. There likely will be a laizes faire view of slavery. "We cast off that lot a while ago...if some states want to bear that burden they're welcome to it." Much depends on other unpredictable butterflies IMO, but it's perfectly logical to assume an OTL-like situation happens over TX. The thorny issue is how many states do you make of it? The Deep South will want as many as possible, but they wont have the votes in the Senate to push any major compromises along those lines. There *could* be an earlier secession crisis ATL.
One other interesting butterfly is that the Deep South slave population is even bigger. This means slave costs are down and the demand for slave import is lower. It also means fears of a Haiti-style uprising grow proportionately with the black-white population balance. I can see the Deep South becoming truly paranoid about their Black Powderkeg with...frightening possibilities.
Tallest Skil
Banned
Having VA vote to be a Free state seems weird if you look on a map (forgive the map I did it in 5 minutes):
You're cutting off two slave states from the rest & for the first time you make it possible for slaves to escape south to freedom.
~Salamon2
Would you not think that the surrounding pressure from free states would result in Maryland and Delaware to become free as well?
Probably, although I think that their conversion would be over the course of a decade, during which the prominent slave holders would either sell their slaves, free them, or ship them & themselves down to the Deep South, or maybe they might just go West and try and ensure more new Slave states to replace the old.
~Salamon2
~Salamon2
You're cutting off two slave states from the rest & for the first time you make it possible for slaves to escape south to freedom.
~Salamon2
South, North, West...any direction but East! Well, unless you have a boat...
But on topic, I'm personally sure any manumission efforts will be gradual, giving MD and Del a chance to enact their own manumission laws before things get too...complicated. I'd also assume VA will be more cooperative on fugitive slave extraditions than Quaker PA. No real VA Underground Railroad likely IMO except perhaps through "WV" to Ohio...and then why not just go to/through PA to begin with?
Thande
Donor
It would probably be a system similar to that used earlier in New York, which had manumission over a period of many years; looking at things through a Civil War hindsight prism tends to make people forget that New York had one of the largest slave populations of the early US and abolition there was pretty darn controversial as well. In fact you could easily reverse the kind of isolation seen in Salomon's map if you had a TL where New York keeps slavery but is surrounded by free states...
Virginians weren't really opposed to the enslavement of human beings as such. But they were opposed to (1) having "negroes" in their state and (2) the planter aristocracy that slavery enabled. The law that nearly passed in OTL was specifically designed to give time for most slaves to be sold south, because that was the point of the law (And I'm not meaning to blacken Virginians as horribly racist--that was the majority basis for free-soil sentiment, North and South).
So with this POD, you might get, paradoxically, more expansion into the Caribbean and Mexico, new slave states being created there, because the free states feel secure in their majority (provided that there's enough new free territory that the free staters feel they have an outlet for their population). You probably get a much earlier ATL Homestead bill, and transcontinental railroad projects.
One thing to consider in this TL re Mexican expansion: the fear of an influx of Mexican citizens into the rest of the country, who can't be kept out because of Constitutional clauses concerning rights and privileges of citizens of other states, relies on Supreme Court interpretation and application of those clauses that only occurred long after the time of these events. Many states had laws keeping out free blacks, and the Supreme Court might well uphold a law that restricted state citizenship so long as it was "neutral" with respect to other states, i.e., a law keeping out citizens of the state of Chihuahua would be unconstitutional, but a law keeping out Hispanics or Spanish-speakers would not.
So with this POD, you might get, paradoxically, more expansion into the Caribbean and Mexico, new slave states being created there, because the free states feel secure in their majority (provided that there's enough new free territory that the free staters feel they have an outlet for their population). You probably get a much earlier ATL Homestead bill, and transcontinental railroad projects.
One thing to consider in this TL re Mexican expansion: the fear of an influx of Mexican citizens into the rest of the country, who can't be kept out because of Constitutional clauses concerning rights and privileges of citizens of other states, relies on Supreme Court interpretation and application of those clauses that only occurred long after the time of these events. Many states had laws keeping out free blacks, and the Supreme Court might well uphold a law that restricted state citizenship so long as it was "neutral" with respect to other states, i.e., a law keeping out citizens of the state of Chihuahua would be unconstitutional, but a law keeping out Hispanics or Spanish-speakers would not.
I think the thing about settlement patterns is overplayed. The Dutch and the Swedes in the Mid-Atlantic had massively Anglocised, taking up English culture, habits and names. Some were even offended if you reminded them they were Dutch. Coastal elites in Richmond and Baltimore would have been fairly similar. People talk about ideology, but in reality most people have preferences for what personally benefits them, and then work their ideology backwards from there. Once Virginia gives up slavery, it would feel like it was less under attack from the federal government, and consider secession much less reasonable.
The 1860 Census shows Virgina had over 490,000 slaves, more than any other slaveholding state.
Eh...I sorta agree, sorta disagree. On one hand, those two states do have rather sharply-defined political regions (Pennsyltucky and NoVA) that buck their primary party trends. However, these are abnormalities and do not reflect the majority of the states' respective political slants. Furthermore, there's more to defining a state's regional affiliation than how liberal or conservative they are (if that was the deciding factor, then by that logic Atlanta isn't part of the South since it's long been a "New Democrat" stronghold). Culture plays a huge part in that sort of thing; the DC-adjacent counties aside, Virginia looks, sounds, tastes and feels like part of the South. Pennsylvania is pretty similar to both Ohio and rural New York (albeit with a substantial Appalachian character the further west in the state one gets).
And besides, the encyclopedia definition of where the South ends and the North begins is the Mason-Dixon line; one can make all the rationalizations about other possible "boundaries" (e.g. the Missouri Compromise Line), but the bottom line is that the border between Maryland and Pennsylvania is what your average US citizen thinks of as separating the two regions.