Border state slavery after a CSA victory

[oudi14]

So in this scenario, the South wins. For the sake of arguement, let's say that most of the major 1862 battles are more bloody than they were in OTL. The Peninsular Campaign was a horrible meatgrinder. Union casualties were ghastly. Then, when Lee invades Maryland, Antietam becomes a northern rout. [And please don't tell me this is ASB, that's totally besides the point] In the elections in November, the Republican party gets its ass handed to it. The people are war weary already, they decide that casualties at this level are just not worth it; they really don't care that much if the slaves don't get freed. By now, the war effort is effectively dead in the water; by year's end, an armistice has been signed, and union forces have withdrawn from those parts of confederate territory that had been occupied. Northern abolitionists seethe with fury, but there is nothing they can do, except help whatever slaves who still manage to escape from the CSA.
In the meantime, Britain and France have recognised CSA independance. [again, please resist the ASB comments] In this TL, there was not a glut of cotton in 1861, and the Lancastrian mills are crying pathetically for more. So despite the British govt. having strong reservations about the slavery issue, they establish diplomatic relations, and send a comissioner to Richmond.
So now, in this world, 1863 begins with 2 American nations. Lincoln, sad and broken, does not make the Emancipation Proclamation, and slavery is still legal in 5 USA states.

Delaware [very few slaves, nearly all concentrated in the south]
Maryland [quite a few slaves in the eastern counties]
West Virginia [not yet officially a state, few slaves]
Kentucky [a fair number]
Missouri [likewise]

So what now happens with slavery here? Do the likes of William Garrison, Frederick Douglass, et al., get their way, or does a dispirited Lincoln lack the spine to risk pissing off Maryland and Kentucky slaveowners? When and how does slavery end in the border states?
BTW, and I know many will disagree, but I believe that even in this TL, slavery ends in the CSA circa 1890 [and you may have a significant antislavery movement in the upper south long before that] AS Brazil goes, so must go the western hemisphere. The UK won't stand for the lone holdout to be an Anglo-Saxon democracy, and the confederacy needs British support more than it needs slavery.

 

[sloreck]

IMHO slavery goes away pretty quickly. Some of the states had very few slaves &/or were concentrated in a small area. West Virginia would definitely have an anti-slavery constitution. Unlike the deep south slavery, even in Missouri and Kentucky, was not "necessary" for the economy as it was in cotton & other plantations. A good part of the continuation of slavery in those states was the push from the "confederate" states to maintain a slave/free balance. Once the solid slave states leave, expect the north to get rid of slavery quickly - you may see a compromise with some sort of compensation for slave owners. Of course, there will be no slavery in territories of the USA not yet states.

 

[Ace Venom]

Slavery will be done in the Union by the end of the 1860's if not sooner. Once the war is over, there would be nothing stopping the passage of a Constitutional amendment to ban slavery in the Union.

 

[oudi14]

I agree with this. And, as a previous poster noted, possible compensation for slaveowners, as happened in the Empire, to lessen the blow. I believe that in tobacco areas, like Maryland and Kentucky, they were somewhat dependant on slave labour.

Slavery will be done in the Union by the end of the 1860's if not sooner. Once the war is over, there would be nothing stopping the passage of a Constitutional amendment to ban slavery in the Union.

 

[usertron2020]

The only state in the Union NOT passing the 13th Amendment would be Kentucky.

 

[General Greene]

If the Union troops withdraw from all occupied areas would West Virginia actually stay with the Union? After all the Confederates considered it part of VA and would want to keep it. I see a independent CSA stepping in to crush the counter-secession movement. If the North is war weary enough to actually let the CSA exist, why wouldn't it be war weary enough to give up West Virginia? (Not that I find this likely at all, just under the circumstances of the scenario).

 

[usertron2020]

If the Union troops withdraw from all occupied areas would West Virginia actually stay with the Union? After all the Confederates considered it part of VA and would want to keep it. I see a independent CSA stepping in to crush the counter-secession movement. If the North is war weary enough to actually let the CSA exist, why wouldn't it be war weary enough to give up West Virginia? (Not that I find this likely at all, just under the circumstances of the scenario).

Well, the most fanatical of secessionists were pushing for the inclusion of every slave state and territory in the Union (and even Kansas IIRC), so you can always speculate.

 

[RamscoopRaider]

If the Union troops withdraw from all occupied areas would West Virginia actually stay with the Union? After all the Confederates considered it part of VA and would want to keep it. I see a independent CSA stepping in to crush the counter-secession movement. If the North is war weary enough to actually let the CSA exist, why wouldn't it be war weary enough to give up West Virginia? (Not that I find this likely at all, just under the circumstances of the scenario).

Well the North was squatting on a lot of CS territory, even if the North is routed in Northern Virginia, there are still places were the South simply can't force Union troops out of (mostly coastal enclaves)

Withdrawing all of these men takes time, and Lincoln will want to make sure that while the negotiations are going on he gets as much of the Union to stay as possible, and say what you will about Lincoln he was good at negotiating, and with the bargaining chips he has Lincoln can probably get West Virginia, as bad as war weariness for the North is the South won't be in much better shape (given the nature of the weapons of the time the South will have to take 33-50% the losses of the north out of 25% the population), once independence is secured they will be a lot less willing to keep fighting for some goddamn worthless mountains

 

[oudi14]

That's about what I was thinking re:WV. In a peace agreement, which will get signed eventually, the coastal enclaves and western TN will be evacuated by union forces, because the local population will want to stay with the CSA. But not West Virginia. And the ANV will have also suffered horrendous casualties in the war, so the cooler heads in Richmond will probably decide to just let the western counties go, not worth more bloodshed, just as folks up north already decided that freeing the slaves was not worth more of their sons dying [even though this wasn't what the war was really fought over in the first place]

Well the North was squatting on a lot of CS territory, even if the North is routed in Northern Virginia, there are still places were the South simply can't force Union troops out of (mostly coastal enclaves)

Withdrawing all of these men takes time, and Lincoln will want to make sure that while the negotiations are going on he gets as much of the Union to stay as possible, and say what you will about Lincoln he was good at negotiating, and with the bargaining chips he has Lincoln can probably get West Virginia, as bad as war weariness for the North is the South won't be in much better shape (given the nature of the weapons of the time the South will have to take 33-50% the losses of the north out of 25% the population), once independence is secured they will be a lot less willing to keep fighting for some goddamn worthless mountains

 

[General Greene]

So the North gets it by default because the South is to tired to care? That sounds about right for West Virginia...

 

[stubear1012]

Escaped slaves and the Underground Railroad

What will happen in this time line to slaves who escape to the Union Army lines? Will they be allowed to go North to freedom? Also, will the Northern states tolerate an underground railroad that brings slaves North to freedom?

Regards

Stubear1012

 

[usertron2020]

What will happen in this time line to slaves who escape to the Union Army lines? Will they be allowed to go North to freedom? Also, will the Northern states tolerate an underground railroad that brings slaves North to freedom?

Regards

Stubear1012

Without the South in the USA, the Democratic Party is prostrate, and the Whigs inside the GOP have other concerns. While an early defeat prior to the Emancipation Proclamation confirms the war wasn't about Slavery ITTL, the Abolitionists are now in the position of saying "We told you so" about the consequences of anti-abolition Whites getting their way with not arming Free(d) Blacks. So I could see men like Thaddeus Stevens in the drivers seat.

Of course, without a solid framework of just how the South won, you can speculate anything.

 

[Fiver]

The Confederacy's lone exception on the international slave trade was it was okay to import slaves from the US. I'd expect some border state Union slave owners to trade slaves for cotton or other commodities. They would not take Confederate currency, the stuff was nigh-worthless.

 

[Rich Rostrom]

Without the South in the USA, the Democratic Party is prostrate,

Not really. In 1874, tthe Democrats won a solid majority of House seats in Union states.

While an early defeat prior to the Emancipation Proclamation confirms the war wasn't about Slavery ITTL, the Abolitionists are now in the position of saying "We told you so" about the consequences of anti-abolition Whites getting their way with not arming Free(d) Blacks. So I could see men like Thaddeus Stevens in the drivers seat.

More likely, there is a reaction against Abolitionists for provoking the war and Republicans for losing it.

There may still be pressure in the U.S. for ending slavery - an amendment would now affect only four of twenty states. Some slave states may adopt a gradual emancipation law or an "apprentices for life" system such as New Jersey had to get rid of hereditary slavery.

However, northern Democrats (and many Republicans) didn't want blacks around on any terms. I think that Border State slaveholders will be encouraged to move their property south, either by selling it or emigrating with it.

That's what apparently happened when slavery was abolished in the northeastern states in 1800 - 1840. There were over 38,000 slaves in
PA, NJ, NY, CT, and RI in 1800. Kings County NY (modern Brooklyn) was over 25% slaves. Between 1820 and 1830, NJ reduced its slave population by 5,303, but added only 5,843 Free Colored to a base of 12,460; the difference of 540 is far below natural increase over ten years. Some may have moved west; but most probably were sold South.

There may also be a revival of the colonization program.