What if Davis, Lee, and others are hung for treason?

The Confederacy is soundly defeated as in OTL. President Davis and his cabinet are rounded up with all of the Confederate Army brass, Lee included. They are summarily hung by the Union Army, without orders from Congress. What happens next? How does reconstruction go? Will the south try to "rise again"?
 
In the words of Napoleon, "it is worse than a crime: it is a blunder."

When does this happen? Taking of Richmond? By whom? I can't imagine where you get all the people who "need killin'" in one place at one time, so it's hard to say just who does what here.

I'd be surprised if this had much actual effect on Reconstruction, but it will spin later interpretations of events. "If the sojers hadn't done that, we wouldn't be having all this trouble still." Waving the bloody shirt might not work so long.
 

Wolfpaw

Banned
Justice would be done, I'd say.

Have Lincoln stick with Hamlin as VP, then you have the Radicals in the White House and running Congress. If anybody is going to punish the CS leadership for its crimes, it'll be the Radicals.
 

EricM

Banned
I was always a bit confused as to why Henry Wirz was the only Confederate executed. The ringleaders certainly deserved it as well.
We certainly seem to be soft on traitors.

It's hard to say how it would have changed things. Many of the Confederate leaders have already been deified as heroes, so the only difference is they would be seen as martyrs I imagine.
 
At least Lee had the decency to resign his commission in the US Army before putting on the gray.

Now Davis... didn't they capture him wearing a bonnet?
 
Think about if in todays world many Officers in the USA army and former Senators and Congressman fight against the USA in a very bloody war. A war in which USA POW's are mis treated. Why would they not swing in the wind with a rope around their necks? Maybe if the Good guys (UNION) had punished the Bad guys and traitors (SOUTH) we would not have the blather today from the Tea party clowns who talk the same talk that many of the Rebs did than.
 
In the words of Napoleon, "it is worse than a crime: it is a blunder."

When does this happen? Taking of Richmond? By whom? I can't imagine where you get all the people who "need killin'" in one place at one time, so it's hard to say just who does what here.

I'd be surprised if this had much actual effect on Reconstruction, but it will spin later interpretations of events. "If the sojers hadn't done that, we wouldn't be having all this trouble still." Waving the bloody shirt might not work so long.
I'm not overly concerned about the scenario. I was thinking something along the lines of a Grant deciding he had the authority to punish the men responsible for half-a-million dead young men. But if you prefer, go with Wolfpaw's suggestion of the radicals ordering their hangings. That of course would give the proceedings an air of legitimacy.

And I agree, the ring leaders should have been punished more harshly than OTL. But let's focus on the consequences, not our emotions.
 
Well, soldiers doing it without prior authorization is a great deal different from the legitimately constituted national government ordering their deaths (presumably after trials).
 
The Confederacy is soundly defeated as in OTL. President Davis and his cabinet are rounded up with all of the Confederate Army brass, Lee included. They are summarily hung by the Union Army, without orders from Congress. What happens next? How does reconstruction go? Will the south try to "rise again"?

Any Union troops doing this are doing it in direct defiance of the wishes of Lincoln and in direct defiance of the terms of surrender offered by Grant.
 

Wolfpaw

Banned
Any Union troops doing this are doing it in direct defiance of the wishes of Lincoln and in direct defiance of the terms of surrender offered by Grant.
This is true, which is why you need to have a POD that removes Lincoln before Appomattox.
 
Execution is the number one way to create a martyr. That is what the US would face.

On the other hand, the actual reaction by the defeated Southerners (as opposed to loyalist Southerners) when given the most lenient post-war consequences in the history of rebellion since Augustus wasn't so good as to inspire a great deal of confidence making "martyrs" would make things worse.

It would, however, mean the Union is committing specifically to stomping out all traces of rebellion rather than getting it over with as quickly and painlessly (for whites) as possible, which would be a not insignificant investment.

Not beyond the nation's resources - the US was hugely prosperous and maintaining a meaningful sized army would not have been impossible by any means after the ACW - but probably beyond its will even more than OTL Reconstruction. And doing this half-assedly would be worse than not trying it at all.
 
Execution is the number one way to create a martyr. That is what the US would face.

Indeed; Lincoln was say too smart to make a blunder like that; if you want a functional and unified democracy after a civil war, reconciliation is a much better policy than giving in to revenge fantasies.
 

Wolfpaw

Banned
Indeed; Lincoln was say too smart to make a blunder like that; if you want a functional and unified democracy after a civil war, reconciliation is a much better policy than giving in to revenge fantasies.
There's revenge fantasies, and then there's the law. Those that had once sworn allegiance to the United States and then proceeded to take up arms against it should have been punished.

And all "reconciliation" got us was Redeemers and Jim Crow.
 
I'm not certain how well it'd go over in the southern states, apart from "poorly."

Take Lee for example; I'm pretty sure that if some hapless Union soldier had shot him on the battlefield, he probably wouldn't brag about it or feel good about it. A summary hanging following the War would go over even worse for all involved.

Meh. Civil wars are filthy businesses.

And all "reconciliation" got us was Redeemers and Jim Crow.

And a distinct lack of a second US civil war for some hundred and forty six years or so. Don't forget that.
 
Lee told his army to go home and not fight a guerilla war, didn't he?

Doesn't sound like a good idea to off him.
 
Justice would be done, I'd say.

Have Lincoln stick with Hamlin as VP, then you have the Radicals in the White House and running Congress. If anybody is going to punish the CS leadership for its crimes, it'll be the Radicals.


Do some googling on Hamlin.

He was a strong opponent of the death penalty, and campaigned for its abolition in his native Maine. He won't hang anyone except maybe the assassins of Lincoln.

Incidentally, rhetorical flourishes aside, this seems to have been the attitude of most Radicals. Istr reading that even Thaddeus Stevens, though more than willing to exclude ex-rebs from public office, once declared that were Jefferson Davis ever put on trial for his life, then he, Stevens, would serve without fee as defence counsel.

The will for that kind of nastiness simply did not exist, and its hard to see how it could have been made to exist.
 
Top