Q: Were there attempts at secession before and after the Civil War?
- Thread starter Inkarri
- Start date
IIRC there were some secession talks during the Alien and Sedition acts era? Or is this just a mirage.
There was a threat of Georgia and the Carolinas leaving the 2nd Continental Congress at the Declaration of Independence over an anti-slavery clause, which was dropped in response. (Not sure if this counts as secession though since the US was just barely established).
Fire-Eaters talked about secession in the late 1840s, but nothing came of that.
Secession threats happened in Fremont vs. Buchanan (1856), but again nothing happened.
The only way the Crisis of Nullification could end in Civil War is if more southern states sided with South Carolina. The OTL efforts failed since not enough states did so. (Also even back then the South would have lost).
There was a threat of Georgia and the Carolinas leaving the 2nd Continental Congress at the Declaration of Independence over an anti-slavery clause, which was dropped in response. (Not sure if this counts as secession though since the US was just barely established).
Fire-Eaters talked about secession in the late 1840s, but nothing came of that.
Secession threats happened in Fremont vs. Buchanan (1856), but again nothing happened.
The only way the Crisis of Nullification could end in Civil War is if more southern states sided with South Carolina. The OTL efforts failed since not enough states did so. (Also even back then the South would have lost).
One problem is that a lot of movements that have been described by their enemies as secessionist denied that they were so. The Hartford Convention, for example, was controlled by relative moderates and never threatened secession--at least not explicitly. It merely proposed some amendments to the Constitution. Still, it also provided that if the amendments were rejcted, the convention would reassemble and consider (unspecified) courses of action.
The extent to which the "Nullifiers" were dsunionists has been debated. Some probably did want disunion, others thought that nullification was an alternative that could prevent secession--though even the latter th\ought secession might be necessary if the North did not yield. William W. Freehling sums it up as follows in *Prelude to Civil War*:
Last edited:
There were not any truly serious plans for any state to secede from the Union after the Civil War, though the story of North Dakota Governor William Langer’s legal troubles leads to this amusing anecdote:
The only remotely plausible scenario in which I could imagine secession becoming a real possibility after the Civil War would be a timeline with some sort of successful communist revolution in the United States, leading to conservative elements some state or collection of states breaking away. Even then, they would probably be more likely to declare themselves the rightful government of the whole United States (think of the Republic of China in Taiwan) rather than formally declaring independence.
If the Civil War was too easy or short that might not be the case.
There were yells of secession in the VA and some other legislatures during the alien and sedition crisis until Jefferson and Madison stepped in with their compromise resolutions.
Last edited:
The Hartford Convention was never about succession. It was about getting the Federal Government to take New England interests into account. The Republicans were more concerned with the interests of middle Atlantic, and Southern States.
Indeed, when the main reason given for a war is about shipping, then the region that has all the ships, as well as bordering the area that would see warfare, would naturally want to have a say in the matter. Little old ladies don’t want help crossing the street when the pharmacy is on the side they are already on.
Less reason to try to secede, and the other areas would be too far into the interior to successful make a go for it or be too small. Or they would no longer have the South dictating policy and flooding the senate and courts with their own people that now the rest have more of a say in what policy is.
The Hartford Convention specifically avoided inviting the more independence-minded and firebrand members like Timothy Pickering or Josiah Quincy.
It is a bit more complicated than that. The Hartford Convention was a compromise convention, to find a new common ground with the Madison Administration so that the war could end favorably for the Administration without further hurting the New English economy and not permanently harming Anglo-American relations so that the NE fishing economic monopoly did not falter. IOTL the news of the treaty and New Orleans came after the convention had sent its demands to Washington making them look like fools otl. However secession was not ruled out. George Cabot, Benjamin West, Chauncey Goodrich, Daniel Lyman and William Hall, the respective leaders of Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Connecticut, Rhode Island and Vermont Delegations agreed that if their demands were not met, then a second convention would be about secession. In a scenario where the War of 1812 is stretched into late 1815 New English Secession becomes a real threat to the USA. As it was, Massachusetts was basically conducting its own foreign policy iotl after exasperation with the federal government instituting the Maine Ceasefire on its own accord. Vermont and New Hampshire's Senates were discussing same measures iotl when the news of the treaty came.
They are still going to need some specific reasons to secede. Most of the people heading there were Americans and unless something came up they probably wouldn’t want to risk going at it alone. Indians, Confederates, Mexicans, the British... even without the threats, no need for them to rock the boat, especially when they were still getting on their feet on getting a stable population and economy. I suppose we should also consider whether the Confederates were allowed to secede (be it after their attacks on federal forts or not) or whether they one overwhelmingly, as well as if they somehow manage to grab the claimed Arizona Territory. If so, Mexico and California will be on their guards for Confederates attempts to grab a Pacific coastline.
Georgia and South Carolina (not as much North Carolina) weren’t the only ones who threatened to walk out of the Constitutional Convention. Delaware also threatened to leave if there was no equal representation in Congress. New Jersey quite plausibly could have as well. Or, Rhode Island just never ratifies the Constitution, given that they never sent anyone to the Convention regardless. New Hampshire didn’t show up until July 23 and if the New Jersey plan is never incorporated into the Constitution then they might see what they can do on their own or with Rhode Island and/or Vermont.