WI Britain annexes Hawaii?

In 1843 there was an incident known as the Paulet Affair where RN Captain George Paulet annexed the Kingdom of Hawaii on the word of the British Consul, Richard Charlton. Paulet proceeded to annex the islands in the name of the British crown until his superiors countermanded his actions.

So what if the British had decided to annex Hawaii? Doesn't need to be this incident but is a general what if question.
 

GdwnsnHo

Banned
I think it would make Britain officially the worlds most far flung empire in history, which is kind of cool.

A naval base in the middle of the Pacific could be useful, if Britain really had any interests in the central or northern pacific.

Is California colonised at this point? If not, it could be a very VERY roundabout way to colonise California. Brits and Indians in California sounds awesome to me, and could give the Empire a serious boost.
 
I think it would make Britain officially the worlds most far flung empire in history, which is kind of cool.

A naval base in the middle of the Pacific could be useful, if Britain really had any interests in the central or northern pacific.

Is California colonised at this point? If not, it could be a very VERY roundabout way to colonise California. Brits and Indians in California sounds awesome to me, and could give the Empire a serious boost.

No, California was definitely colonized by that point. The empire doesn't have a chance of taking it before the Americans do.
 
I think it would make Britain officially the worlds most far flung empire in history, which is kind of cool.

That's actually something amusing I hadn't thought of :p

A naval base in the middle of the Pacific could be useful, if Britain really had any interests in the central or northern pacific.

Well it would change some of their outlook on the Pacific, with an official naval base and coaling station right in the middle that really cuts down on cruising time and gives them a big leg up on their competition.

Maybe it paves the way for the British purchase (or seizure) of Alaska later on in the 19th century.
 
Hawaii would probably remain a British colony/protectorate until the mid/late 20th century, then become an independent country.

This Hawaii would have a much larger Indian population than OTL, and would probably be poorer than OTL, though there is the chance of Hawaii becoming economically similar to the Asian Tigers.

The interesting part is that if Hawaii remains British, this curbs US influence in the Pacific. This might butterfly the US conquering and annexing the Philippines, for example. Then again, growing US power might convince the Brits to sell Hawaii to the US, in which case things look a lot like OTL anyway. Or...how plausible is an Anglo-American war in the late 19th century?
 

shiftygiant

Gone Fishin'
Maybe it reinvigorates British interest in the Pacific and Britain presses for the Columbia border in the Oregon?

It is right before the decision to just use the 49th parallel, and whilst the 42nd is ASB at best, it doesn't rule out the British Pressing for the Columbia border. Claims that because Vancouver was a Canadian, and Vancouver discovered the region, they deserve it, and it'd be an easier border to patrol than the 49th parallel. If they do push for it, would the Columbia territory be merged into BC, or become it's own Province?

Additionally, what becomes of Alaska? Would Britain Annex it, bringing it into Canada (And thus making it the 11/12th province), or would America still make claims?
 

takerma

Banned
That is a fascinating question. Can US do much about Philippines without Hawaii? Also I wonder how the rise of Japan would play out.

Perhaps US would not be really involved in China that much.

Why did they not annex it anyway?
 
It is right before the decision to just use the 49th parallel, and whilst the 42nd is ASB at best, it doesn't rule out the British Pressing for the Columbia border. Claims that because Vancouver was a Canadian, and Vancouver discovered the region, they deserve it, and it'd be an easier border to patrol than the 49th parallel. If they do push for it, would the Columbia territory be merged into BC, or become it's own Province?

Additionally, what becomes of Alaska? Would Britain Annex it, bringing it into Canada (And thus making it the 11/12th province), or would America still make claims?

The exploration claims aren't really valid anymore. By the time the 1840s rolled around, it was more of a boots on the ground issue. If you were going by exploration claims then David Thompson wins for going down the Snake River to the Pacific.

I'd guess that it becomes merged with British Columbia, because the territory would be mighty peeved to win the dispute and get a piece of hacked off.
 
If there had been a US-UK war in the 1840's over Oregon--not likely, but possible if Cass had been elected president in 1844--I could see the British seizing Hawaii and making it a protectorate. Otherwise, it was just not worth the bad effect it would have on British-American relations.

In OTL, the closest the British came was Lord Paulet's seizure of power in 1843, but this was soon repudiated by the British government. Lord Paulet did have his supporters on the Honolulu waterfront, who rejoiced at seeing the psalm-singers lose their influence--among other things, Paulet relaxed the liquor laws of Honolulu and repealed the laws against fornication (except in public streets). [1] Herman Melville, clerking in Honolulu at the time, strongly defended Paulet's conduct. However, as J. C. Furnas sums it up in *Anatomy of Paradise: Hawaii and the Islands of the South Seas* (pp. 154-5) https://archive.org/stream/anatomyofparadis012497mbp#page/n169/mode/2up "Unwilling for ports so important to American whalers to be in British hands, Washington protested sharply. John Bull was already nervous about Uncle Sam *in re* Texas and Oregon. But, before instructions could reach the Pacific from England, Rear-Admiral Thomas, Paulet's senior, arrived at Honolulu in HMS 'Dublin' and formally repudiated his lordship's doings. The king was reinstated in a ceremony still commemorated by the name of Thomas Square in Honolulu." It was during that ceremony that King Kamehameha III famously said "Ua mau ke ea o ka 'aina i ka pono" ("the life of the land is perpetuated in righteousness"--which to this day is the official motto of the state of Hawaii. Admiral Thomas remained in Honolulu until March 1844, "suffering as best he could through more temperance dinners..."
http://books.google.com/books?id=w19C8zZC21EC&pg=PA117

[1] The Hawaiian Kingdom at the time of Paulet's seizure had been heavily under the influence of US missionaries. Note this provision in the Kingdom's 1840 Constitution: "That no law shall be enacted which is at variance with the word of the Lord Jehovah, or at variance with the general spirit of His word. All laws of the Islands shall be in consistency with the general spirit of God's law." http://www.hawaii-nation.org/constitution-1840.html Someone in soc.history.what-if once proposed as a challenge getting this language (apart from the words "of the Islands") into the US Constitution...
 

GdwnsnHo

Banned
So, could it safely be said that with a bit of effort and luck, we could see OTL Seattle be part of British Columbia?

Alaska is a consideration

What about impressing upon Japan? We've got the Bakumatsu just around the corner - it could mean Britain can provide more assistance to either side, British Protectorate in Japan? Yes please!
 

TinyTartar

Banned
That is a fascinating question. Can US do much about Philippines without Hawaii? Also I wonder how the rise of Japan would play out.

Perhaps US would not be really involved in China that much.

Why did they not annex it anyway?

The US claimed a bunch of sparsely inhabited islands in the 1850s and 60s that had guano on them, and they were mostly turned into coal refueling stations for westward bound ships if they were big enough. Most were really not and later on were used for nuclear tests.

The Philippines were doable merely because the US had a longstanding Asiatic Naval Squadron. Remember, Hawaii was not annexed until the same year that the US and Spain went to war. There was not much time to really make Hawaii into the crucial position that it became yet, so they had to do something.

A British Hawaii is also likely going to be open to American ships due to our already large presence in the islands both because of landowning planters, as well as US Protestant Missionaries.
 
The US navy had investigated the possibility of taking the then largely ignored Taiwan before congress squashed the idea. Good, defensible ports giving the US access to Asia are in huge demand. If Hawaii goes to the British the Americans are still going to want somewhere permanent to put a fleet and American merchants are going to want an Asian port for trade. Taiwan is a plausible possibility.
 

TinyTartar

Banned
The US navy had investigated the possibility of taking the then largely ignored Taiwan before congress squashed the idea. Good, defensible ports giving the US access to Asia are in huge demand. If Hawaii goes to the British the Americans are still going to want somewhere permanent to put a fleet and American merchants are going to want an Asian port for trade. Taiwan is a plausible possibility.

I'm pretty sure the Qing claimed it and had some people there by this point in time. And the Japanese certainly had their eyes of Formosa as well.

I think maybe getting an enclave in Taiwan to get a port, much like the Portuguese and Dutch had done in the East Indies at first, is a doable idea. Maybe Taipei might be what you are looking for. But the entire island I think would be a step too far, especially when you consider the utter lack of experience in the US government dealing with that kind of situation.
 

Saphroneth

Banned
The idea was so much fun I mocked up a flag.

hi_fi.gif



(hee hee)
 

GdwnsnHo

Banned
The US navy had investigated the possibility of taking the then largely ignored Taiwan before congress squashed the idea. Good, defensible ports giving the US access to Asia are in huge demand. If Hawaii goes to the British the Americans are still going to want somewhere permanent to put a fleet and American merchants are going to want an Asian port for trade. Taiwan is a plausible possibility.

I think you're going to find issues if the UK has Hawaii, it means they are going to try and be the important guys - and aren't going to let the US take Taiwan if they think they can get there first. It would be an amazing midway between India, Hong Kong, and Hawaii.

Britain is going to be hungry for Taiwan.
 
Maybe the U.S. makes do with the Bonin Islands which the Americans discovered and settled before the Jaoanese came in claiming to have owned the those centuries uninhabited territories? Or let the U.S. get that treaty port in southern China the Japanese stopped them from getting by threatening the Chinese. Anyways, I think the British may need to make concessions like to the French in other territories. They tended to have to do that a lot, like with giving the Caprivi Strip, Heliogland, and hegemony over Tangykia open exchange for the the basically non-existent german influence of Zanzibar.
 
Top