Mexico wins in 1836
- Thread starter Grey Wolf
- Start date
Grey Wolf said:
They didn't join the war because they didn't have to. The Americans in Texas (the slave-holding Texians) won on their own and, thus, there was no reason for the United States proper to get involved.
Grey Wolf said:
You're not looking at it right. They would just be the "defeated" but mistreated, defeated Americans. The view of Texians in the USA would change from them being a different people with their own agenda, to them being former Americans mistreated and underpriveledged by a hostile Mexican government.
concerning slavery in Mexico: technically, it was illegal, but there were ways around it. The most common was to have the slave become an indentured servant with a 99 year contract (this was perfectly legal). Even with the slavery ban, there were out and out slaves in Mexico. One reason the Apaches and other natives of the SW hated Mexicans so is that there was a thriving underground trade in native american children, who were stolen by Mexicans and sold to wealthy families to be exotic house servants. From what I've read, slavery in Texas was never a huge concern to the Mexican government. It was a big deal in America though, as it was feared that a Texas that became independent would quickly join the US as a slave state.....
Black Texas
Santa Anna is kicked in the head by a horse, Urribe successfully beats the Texans and liberates the slaves. The Mexican government figures out that Texas is going to be settled by somebody and decides to settle lots of freed slaves there? There were around 250,000 freed slaves in the US and lots more in the Caribbean. The exslaves are certainly motivated to defend the border against more Anglo immigrants. The northern states aren't enthusiastic about fighting a war for slavery and conquering more territory for slave owners.
Without the Mexican cession California is settled by the Swiss or other Europeans to the extent that they outnumber the Americans? So it's sort of like America, but different? British? Would some blacks from Texas go by land? There was gold and other minerals in Colorado along the way.
When the Civil war happens the Union has an ally on the south, important for stopping smuggling of military supplies, and as a base for blockader warships. The Confederacy has to mount an invasion a long way over unsupported land, with no river or sea transport, in the face of the Union navy. They try, but not very successfully. Maybe the Union accepts Texas as a number of black states and they they wind up with a monopoly of most oil in the lower 48?
Santa Anna is kicked in the head by a horse, Urribe successfully beats the Texans and liberates the slaves. The Mexican government figures out that Texas is going to be settled by somebody and decides to settle lots of freed slaves there? There were around 250,000 freed slaves in the US and lots more in the Caribbean. The exslaves are certainly motivated to defend the border against more Anglo immigrants. The northern states aren't enthusiastic about fighting a war for slavery and conquering more territory for slave owners.
Without the Mexican cession California is settled by the Swiss or other Europeans to the extent that they outnumber the Americans? So it's sort of like America, but different? British? Would some blacks from Texas go by land? There was gold and other minerals in Colorado along the way.
When the Civil war happens the Union has an ally on the south, important for stopping smuggling of military supplies, and as a base for blockader warships. The Confederacy has to mount an invasion a long way over unsupported land, with no river or sea transport, in the face of the Union navy. They try, but not very successfully. Maybe the Union accepts Texas as a number of black states and they they wind up with a monopoly of most oil in the lower 48?