"It" meaning the Virginia convention voting to secede? or "It" meaning war?
Sorry I took so long to reply.
I meant that Virginia's secession was not inevitable. I don't know about the war, if Virginia hadn't seceded then perhaps Tennessee and North Carolina would have held back, it's hard to say. From my reading of William Freehling's "Showdown in Virginia", he seems to be of the opinion that Virginia was very reluctant to secede. This is from his introduction to the book, pages xv & xv1
"Contrary to popular myth, the outbreak of military hostilities at Charleston's Fort Sumter on April 12 did not itself turn most Virginia Unionists against the Union...The moment that shattered the Unionists' self-importance (and the Unionist majority) came instead when President Lincoln issued his April 15 proclamation.[for soldiers from Virginia]
When shocking verification swiftly arrived, important convention Unionists split two ways. William Ballard Preston, lately a Unionist, introduced a secession ordinance, to be submitted to Virginia voters for ratification on May 23. Then Robert Scott presented a substitute ordinance, giving the May 23 voters a choice between secession and a border conference.
On April 17, in the key test of the convention's response to Lincoln's proclamation, Scott's alternative to Preston's secession motion narrowly lost, 77-64. The tally showed that 45 percent of Virginia delegates still preferred other paths to a road straight to disunion. A shift of only seven votes would have at least temporarily deflected secession once again."
Mr. Freehling ascribes the passage of the secession ordinance to the extra-legal action taken by Henry Wise and his cohorts to seize the armory at Harper's Ferry. If Wise had not done that, the convention may have sat for some weeks more without taking further action.
Lincoln had summoned George Summers on April 4 for undoubtedly very good reasons, some way to defuse the Virginia convention. But Baldwin went instead, perhaps misunderstanding Lincoln's proposal. If Lincoln did indeed offer to evacuate Sumter in exchange for the adjournment of the convention it would have been very difficult for Baldwin to promise such a thing. I think it would have been very hard to dissolve the convention immediately. John Minor Botts, in his testimony after the war, indicated that Lincoln had knowledge of the convention's rejection of the secession ordinance as he was meeting with Baldwin. Perhaps Lincoln overestimated the solidity of Virginia's unionism and did not need to make any concessions. Many of the northern papers certainly overestimed the type of Unionism in Virginia. They overestimated the unionism of the West Virginia delegates especially. They generally were conditional unionists like Jubal Early. Most of them signed the ordinance of secession and stayed at the convention.
Virginia was in a very tough spot. It does seem that as time and the conflict enlarged it would be hard for the convention not to pass a secession ordinance. Only a week or so after the April 17 ordinance passed, Ohio Governor Dennison was granted special powers by the Ohio legislature and troops and supplies were being rapidly secured. Gov. Letcher, meanwhile, was supposed to sit on his hands and wait for the May 23 vote, while relying on an antiquated state militia for security. I sure wouldn't wanted to have been in that spot. I don't know what Letcher thought of Wise, but I can't imagine it was anything very charitable since Wise put him behind the 8 ball.
I forget just where I read it, but after the war when Pierpont was acting governor of Virginia, Henry Wise went to see Pierpont and during the discussion Wise complained that when he returned to his home he had found his former slaves had taken it over and were living there. Pierpont burst out laughing and a perplexed Wise sat there for a few seconds and then joined the laughter. It always seemed a rather macabre moment to me.