What if Edward D. Baker did not die at Ball's Bluff?

OldReliable1862

First Sergeant
Joined
Jul 2, 2017
Location
Georgia
(This is a thread I posted on alternatehistory.com, I thought it might generate some discussion here.)

On 21 October 1861, Senator and Brigadier General Edward Dickinson Baker was killed in action at the Battle of Ball's Bluff. Baker was one of Lincoln's closest friends (Lincoln would name one of his sons after Baker, unfortunately 'Eddie' Lincoln would die at age 3). Baker's death gave Congress the reason it needed to form the Joint Committee on the Conduct of the War, with all their deeds, good and ill (which one it leaned closer to is debatable).

So what happens if Baker isn't killed? I doubt Congress will stop trying to find a way to intervene in the course of the war, so that'll be interesting. What could Baker go on to do in the war? I had wondered if Baker could be appointed to a position on the Supreme Court, but decided it would be decried as favoritism.
 
I don't know what the political repercussions would be. Military though I don't think Baker was a very good commander so he would probably go the way of Fremont at a later date in he stayed in the war. An interesting effect of this would be that Gen. Stone would not be arrested. Stone was a friend of McClellan and may have been an asset in the coming campaign.
 
After some reading, it appears Baker's death was not the sole reason Congress demanded an investigation. Ball's Bluff was a ugly defeat, made even worse by the battle wasn't even supposed to have taken place (Stone thought Evans had pulled out of Leesburg). It appears that the Committee on the Conduct of the War is still going to happen, but Stone may not be arrested.
 
Back
Top