What If Lincoln Had Worked With Virginia & North Carolina Prior To Calling On The State Militias To

Joined
Mar 11, 2012
Messages
15
I think that he would have found fertile ground there for talks with pro unionists which could have resulted in both states staying in the union;and without those two states the Confederacy could not have waged a war of any magnitude.
 

Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

KevinLuna

Private
Joined
Jan 24, 2011
Messages
115
Location
Maryland
I think that he would have found fertile ground there for talks with pro unionists which could have resulted in both states staying in the union;and without those two states the Confederacy could not have waged a war of any magnitude.
If I'm not mistaken, Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Arkansas seceded because the Union decided to wage war against the first seven seceding states, so I don't know if it would have been possible to keep them in the Union and still fight the war.
 

DanF

Captain
Joined
Feb 29, 2012
Messages
5,701
Those States had already committed to seceding if the Union used force against the States already seceded.
 

rhp6033

Sergeant Major
Joined
Aug 4, 2011
Messages
1,862
Location
Everett, Washington
I haven't seen any evidence whatsoever to support this thesis. The people within Virginia, Tennessee, N. Carolina, etc. were already in heated debates over secession, they might have eventually seceeded anyway. Lincoln did pretty much all he could just to keep Maryland, Kentucky, and Missouri from seceeding.

Unfortunately, rational discussions weren't of much use in late 1960 and early 1861, nobody was listening to each other. Many southern newspapers refused to even print Lincoln's inaugeral address, instead printing their own editorial opinion of what a "vile speech" it was - the ordinary southerners had little opportunity to form their own opinion.
 

BillO

Captain
Joined
Feb 2, 2010
Messages
6,401
Location
Quinton, VA.
There was no referendum, so I don't think the plantation owners cared what the ordinary southerner thought or wanted. It was, as they say, a "rich man's war, poor man's fight."
This is not correct as regards to Va.
 

ole

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Retired Moderator
Joined
Feb 20, 2005
Messages
34,431
Location
Near Kankakee
This is not correct as regards to Va.
Correct. Virginia was one of the few states that did have a referendum. A convention voted to secede and then the matter was put to all the people in a referendum. One of the notable things about the delay was that former governor Wise set about taking US property before the vote was in.
 

whitworth

2nd Lieutenant
Joined
Jun 18, 2005
Messages
2,514
The war of the Southern Confederacy is, therefore, not a war of defence, but a war of conquest, a war of conquest for the spread and perpetuation of slavery.

Deprived of the border states and hemmed in by the Mississippi in the west and the Atlantic in the east, the South has conquered nothing — but a graveyard.

Karl Marx
 

jenkingish

Corporal
Joined
Apr 3, 2011
Messages
458
Location
Olivet, Michigan
I think that he would have found fertile ground there for talks with pro unionists which could have resulted in both states staying in the union;and without those two states the Confederacy could not have waged a war of any magnitude.
Most pro-Unionists were 'conditional' unionists. The federal government using force to 'co-erce' the already seceded states, would not have met any of the 'conditions' suitable to remain in the union.
 

Robtweb1

2nd Lieutenant
Forum Host
Retired Moderator
Civil War Photo Contest
Annual Winner
Joined
Apr 20, 2011
Messages
3,010
Location
Grand Junction, TN
What was the outcome?
On the first referendum, the vote was against secession, but authorised the governor to activate the militia (sorry, I don't have the numbers handy). The second referendum was held after Lincoln called for volunteers to put down the rebellion. Across the state the total was 104,913 for and forty-seven thousand two hundred thirty-eight against the proposal.
 

NedBaldwin

Major
Joined
Feb 19, 2011
Messages
7,631
Location
California
I think that he would have found fertile ground there for talks with pro unionists which could have resulted in both states staying in the union;and without those two states the Confederacy could not have waged a war of any magnitude.
Worked with them in what way?

16th VA posted a link to information about Lincoln meeting with Virginian politicians. Is this what you had in mind or something different?
 

16thVA

First Sergeant
Joined
Dec 8, 2008
Messages
1,348
Location
Philadelphia
The testimonies are very interesting reading. Thank you.
You're very welcome. Some people think that Baldwin and Lincoln misunderstood each other at that meeting. I wonder what would have happened if George Summers, whom Lincoln first invited, had gone instead of Baldwin.

This is an interesting short examination of the Baldwin-Lincoln meeting.

http://www.tulane.edu/~sumter/FinalOrder/FApr4.1Comm.html
 

Diana9

2nd Lieutenant
Joined
Feb 25, 2012
Messages
3,463
Location
Southern California
You're very welcome. Some people think that Baldwin and Lincoln misunderstood each other at that meeting. I wonder what would have happened if George Summers, whom Lincoln first invited, had gone instead of Baldwin.

This is an interesting short examination of the Baldwin-Lincoln meeting.

http://www.tulane.edu/~sumter/FinalOrder/FApr4.1Comm.html
So it's possible the war was essentially the result of "a failure to communicate."

It's particularly interesting to me because I came to this forum to explore the question that has always been on my mind: was there some way the war could have been prevented? I also wondered why Lincoln had delayed sending relief supplies to Fort Sumter. This account offers some possible answers.
 


Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!
Top