If they will not meet us on the open sea (a Trent TL)

Saphroneth

Banned
...ItsHappening.gif

What's the balance of force looking on Canada/USA Border? Especially now troops from NY/NJ are being withdrawn?
At this point all armies on the Canadian border are facing roughly 1.5 to 2 times their own numbers in terms of Canucks plus British - the Canadians number around 100,000, the British 60,000, the Union is something close to 90,000 plus troops actually in coastal forts or on the coast. Since the British are better trained and the Imperial armies are better equipped, the only thing preventing the capture of (roughly) the northern United States, is that the British are not invading. They don't know how bad the small arms situation is, and they don't really want America anyway. (Well, they did invade Maine, but that's because a few battalions of infantry and the Nova Scotia Militia can save them a huge chunk of blockade distance as Maine's got such a long coastline.)

What this means, when combined with the small arms problem and the actions earlier in the year, is:

The Union armies in the south are faced with a deficit of roughly 250,000 troops compared to the OTL. (90,000 facing Canada, ~50,000 on the coast and ~110,000 unable to be armed) and have also taken significantly more casualties as the CSA is really pushing their summer offensive - something like 50,000 lost on top of the 250,000.
The Confederacy is up about 50,000 over OTL (it was more like 100,000 due to liberated troops and recruitment, but they've suffered pretty heavy casualties of their own during their offensives) .
 
Last edited:
At this point all armies on the Canadian border are facing roughly 1.5 to 2 times their own numbers in terms of Canucks plus British - the Canadians number around 100,000, the British 60,000, the Union is something close to 90,000 plus troops actually in coastal forts or on the coast. Since the British are better trained and the Imperial armies are better equipped, the only thing preventing the capture of (roughly) the northern United States, is that the British are not invading. They don't know how bad the small arms situation is, and they don't really want America anyway. (Well, they did invade Maine, but that's because a few battalions of infantry and the Nova Scotia Militia can save them a huge chunk of blockade distance as Maine's got such a long coastline.)

Funnily enough, the time in which the British Empire is most liable to invade the Northern USA is 'after' the War. If/When the British just how easily they could occupy the Northern USA, they may do so if they feel the Union is not acting in good faith during the negotiations.

Even worse for the USA: The fabled 'Rifle behind every blade of grass' seems like it would be much diminished by the constant Militia Call-Ups/seizure of weapons to equip the army. So occupation would quite possibly be the easiest it would ever possibly be since the 1776...
 

Saphroneth

Banned
Even worse for the USA: The fabled 'Rifle behind every blade of grass' seems like it would be much diminished by the constant Militia Call-Ups/seizure of weapons to equip the army. So occupation would quite possibly be the easiest it would ever possibly be since the 1776...
I strongly suspect that this is a post ACW concept. If there were so many rifles pre ACW they would be used in favour of the awful ones of OTL.
 
I strongly suspect that this is a post ACW concept. If there were so many rifles pre ACW they would be used in favour of the awful ones of OTL.

I was mainly quoting Yamamoto, he of WWII fame, but referring to the American idealisation of their citizenry as a ready and able milita that makes the country essentially unoccupiable. I can't speak to it's truth (nor can anyone, really, asides from possibly the war of 1812) but it doesn't look to be a strong force currently!
 

Saphroneth

Banned
At the outbreak of the ACW the US had around 600,000 long arms of all types (this number is approximate and includes weapons that went to the CS). Over the next four years it acquired:


First year 757,000 long arms
Second year 1,360,000 long arms
Third year 800,000 long arms
Final year 560,000 long arms

So adding that up it becomes clear that the Union gained roughly 3.5 million long arms through purchase or manufacture. Add that to all the orders made during the war and completed after it (including, for example, large numbers of Henry rifles), private purchases by officers or soldiers, and the purchases of the CSA, and it's clear that the ACW injected something over four million rifles or muskets into the United States and gave millions of men experience with using a gun (if not aiming with it) - that kind of change will turn most countries into "armed societies".


One thing I can say though is that I believe that "borders on maps become real" relatively quickly - the British don't want to invade the Union, it's costly.


Part of what's driving the conflict here is that the Union have decided that the British must be supporting the CSA, so don't want to sue for peace - because they don't realise that the British will be happy with a separate peace. They'll negotiate either in a position of strength or when the only outcome they see is basically losing even worse - because in the minds of Congress to negotiate means giving up chunks of the North and recognizing CS independence. (After that the actual terms the British want will come as something of a relief!)




And before I forget, something to note about strategic rail moves - what they don't do is deposit a new army ready-to-go at the end point. They move people, with their guns, and artillery takes a lot more rail capacity than infantry does.
Moving 20,000 infantry (for example) takes five hundred box cars, and it's the work of days or weeks to set up the logistical structure at the far end both to support the troops as they accumulate and to get them into an actual army after that.



...speaking of which, I have something that could go badly wrong for the Union in Missouri now...
Their supply trains are now essentially unarmed because they need the shooters on the front line... and then along comes the cavalry raid.
 
Last edited:
And before I forget, something to note about strategic rail moves - what they don't do is deposit a new army ready-to-go at the end point. They move people, with their guns, and artillery takes a lot more rail capacity than infantry does.
Moving 20,000 infantry (for example) takes five hundred box cars, and it's the work of days or weeks to set up the logistical structure at the far end both to support the troops as they accumulate and to get them into an actual army after that.
This reminds me of Grant Comes East, and how I didn't buy him building up an 90 thousand some army in like a month. Thanks for confirming my suspicions.
 
I am wondering IF the British engangement in North America does change the French intervention in Mexico.

IF the French establish the Second Empire it might survive if the USA is weakened, but if the British do not participate in the interverntion (OTL they did initially), does France take a less agressive stance (I.E. military intervention to enforece the repayment of debts but NOT establisching the Empire?)
 

Saphroneth

Banned
The French were going into it from the outset to establish the Second Empire, this is the whole reason the British stopped participating! (They looked at the scale of force the French were bringing, realized it would cost more to use than the debt repayment would earn France, and deduced the truth.)
I suspect Napoleon III would still go for the Second Empire.
 

Saphroneth

Banned
Well, there's really strong limits on how much the CSA can pay for, even with cotton still being shipped.

True, but the CSA can still pay for a heck of a lot.

In 1860 cotton was 60% of total US exports - $200m a year. The war also caused the price of cotton to spike by a factor of seventeen - even keeping that to 1.5, the CSA has enough money to buy a truly vast amount of materiel. Add that to war measures (OTL the Union wasn't broken by losing this source and also raising revenue by about a factor of ten - assume a factor of five for bonds and the like for the CSA) and make the tax the CSA places on cotton exports 10 cents on the dollar (or equivalent means of recouping value) and you have a rough estimate of $150M of "budget" per year. (As far as I can tell the total productivity of the cotton of the CSA - discounting the border states - is about twice that of the Nevadan silver and Californian gold put together; the CSA is not hurting for foreign exchange!)

Even if this is wildly off, the total US federal expenditures by the Ordnance department 1862-3 are $42 million, while the massive buying spree of 1861-2 saw the Ordnance department spent $15M on small arms of all types (including pistols and sabres, amounting to over 1.1 million weapons), $10M for equipment for men and horses, $4.8 million on ammunition, and $4.5 million on artillery (total $33m).

So the CSA could most likely fund the Union's war effort, now all that cotton isn't rotting in bales in a warehouse.
As their army is to some considerable extent smaller, and as they're not trying to build a navy out of whole cloth (not now, anyway), they're not in danger of total fiscal collapse. Instead, with the loss of cotton revenues from last year, grain revenues dropping due to problems in the supply path (not the blockade, but the fear of the blockade) along with the loss of Californian gold and Nevadan silver and the effects of a crippling run on the banks in early 1862, the Union is the one in a greater state of financial peril.
(A lot of what the CSA's buying is their OTL purchases, just that they're both more able to get the good stuff - ie Enfield rifles and especially large numbers of relatively modern Minie rifles from France - and very much less of it is getting captured by Union ships, which is to say none of it is getting captured by Union ships.)
 
Last edited:
I wonder what affect the shortage of arms had on the American indians on the Union side?
What effect does the war have on immigration to the Union from Europe?
 

Saphroneth

Banned
I wonder what affect the shortage of arms had on the American indians on the Union side?
What effect does the war have on immigration to the Union from Europe?
Let's see...

The American Indians on the Union side - I'm afraid you may have to be more specific, though the Union's certainly in no position to hand out lots of weapons to American Indian tribes.
I do know that the California Column has been butterflied away (too many troops needed in California to handle the British) and any Indian wars which develop over the 1862-3 period may go rather better for the American Indians.
After the conclusion of the war, the Indians may be rather better off too - they'll be in the position of minor powers between two more major ones, and under those circumstances they're as much to be courted as allies (serious allies, not just 'obey or we end your pitiful existence') as anything.

As for immigration, immigration during the Civil War will be severely curtailed (blockade) and afterwards it's unlikely to be quite so significant as OTL. The migrants will still come to the Union, but not in the same numbers because the Union (relatively speaking) is a less attractive destination than OTL. Partly because it's significantly smaller than OTL (though still big) and partly because it can never quite regain the status of "above the fray" - even if the CSA is eventually reabsorbed, which I happen to think is unlikely (imagine Indian reabsorbtion of Pakistan, perhaps, or British reabsorbtion of Ireland - national identites develop quickly) then it'll probably lead to a generation or two of serious unrest.
 
Back round information on Ireland and America Civil war.
Confederate uniforms made in limerick, Ireland

Tait uniforms
Tait-uniforms-1.jpg

Sir Peter Tait was born in Scotland in 1828 but moved to Limerick at a young age
His most lucrative client was the British Army, particularly during the Crimean War. He produced some 120,000 British uniforms between 1856 and 1858. By then he had moved to larger premises on Edward Street, employing 1,300 staff.Peter Tait’s and Limerick’s connection with the American Civil War began in December 1863, when 50,000 caps, greatcoats, jackets, trousers, shirts, blankets, boots, stockings and haversacks were ordered by the Confederate government. Tait also entered into a separate contract with the state of Alabama in June 1864. In order to fulfil his contracts Tait had to navigate one rather tricky obstacle—the federal blockade of Southern ports. He employed ships such as the Evelyn, which managed to run the blockade five times, with her last departure from Foynes, Co. Limerick, in October 1864; she would not return until September 1865. Another was the Condor, which ran aground off Fort Fisher in North Carolina in late 1864. Though her cargo was safely loaded onto another ship and brought ashore, the famous Confederate agent Rose O’Neal Greenhow, who had been returning from Europe, was drowned.A number of Tait Confederate jackets survive, mainly ones issued late in the war. The surviving examples are of cadet grey kersey with linen lining, and are further identifiable through their eight-button front, with five-piece bodies, two-piece sleeves and wool broadcloth collars. Tait of Limerick buttons—marked ‘P. Tait & Co./Limerick’ on the back—are also regularly recovered by relic-hunters on Civil War battle sites. The most common survivals of both jackets and buttons are in north-east Carolina, and the Petersburg and Appomattox campaigns. Peter Tait continued to prosper despite the defeat of the Confederacy, and he became mayor of Limerick between 1866 and 1868.
http://www.historyireland.com/18th-19th-century-history/tait-uniforms/


New book reveals strong Limerick connection to American Civil War
Such was the renown of the factory that it was a featured in a London Times article of the time, which remarked on its modern working conditions and the efficiency with which it was capable of producing garments.

This efficiency was put to good use when the firm won a contract to supply the Confederate government with some 50,000 uniforms in 1863 - at the height of the American civil war.

In the book, the authors reproduce various documents relating to this - and other - contracts with the Confederate government, including a letter written in December 1863 by Peter Tait’s brother - and agent - James to the Confederate Secretary of War, James A Seddon offering to supply his army with 50,000 uniforms, shirts and caps, 10,000 pairs of boots, 100,000 pairs of stockings and 50,000 haversacks to the total value of £158,475 sterling. A further contract to supply 40,000 uniforms was signed a year later in October 1864 - leading the authors to conclude that ‘Peter Tait and Co intended to become the largest supplier of uniforms to the Confederate States, and was poised to do so had to war gone on past April 1865.

However, in order for Tait to get these uniforms to the Confederate armies, he first had to defy the union blockade which aimed to prevent supplies reaching the Southern states. The Alabama state contract led to Tait buying a share in the steamship Evelyn - eventually owning a two-thirds share in the ship. It departed Limerick for Bermuda on October 27 of that year and from there to Wilmington, North Carolina where most of the uniforms were successfully unloaded.
http://www.limerickleader.ie/news/a...-book-reveals-strong-Limerick-connection.html
 
Last edited:

Saphroneth

Banned
Hm, interesting.

I'm afraid that may be butterflied away - it's nearly two years post PoD - but if they were of the scale to offer uniform orders in early 1862 they might get the contract anyway (as the CSA spends money earlier than OTL because it actually has some...)

That said, would it be okay to ask you to wrap that in spoiler tags? It's just so it doesn't take up too much space on the page, as I imagine it looks like an update at first.
 
Let's see...

The American Indians on the Union side - I'm afraid you may have to be more specific, though the Union's certainly in no position to hand out lots of weapons to American Indian tribes.

I was thinking about the problem of settlers defending themselves against the indians and how many troops the union could withdraw from the indian frontier.
 
Hm, interesting.

I'm afraid that may be butterflied away - it's nearly two years post PoD - but if they were of the scale to offer uniform orders in early 1862 they might get the contract anyway (as the CSA spends money earlier than OTL because it actually has some...)

That said, would it be okay to ask you to wrap that in spoiler tags? It's just so it doesn't take up too much space on the page, as I imagine it looks like an update at first.

I could see him doing it earlier as he was producing uniform for the British army in the crimean war.
His most lucrative client was the British Army, particularly during the Crimean War. He produced some 120,000 British uniforms between 1856 and 1858.
 

Saphroneth

Banned
I was thinking about the problem of settlers defending themselves against the indians and how many troops the union could withdraw from the indian frontier.
As far as I am aware the troops on the Indian frontier were relatively negligible - only the strength of a single regiment was involved in the Dakota War, even counting militia. It wouldn't really help the Union much to withdraw them (though I could see them doing it) but it would rather dramatically help the Indians.

I could see him doing it earlier as he was producing uniform for the British army in the crimean war.
Yes, I saw he'd ended up large by 1858. And in case you're not aware, spoiler tags are with SPOILER inside the square brackets, instead of QUOTE.
 
As far as I am aware the troops on the Indian frontier were relatively negligible - only the strength of a single regiment was involved in the Dakota War, even counting militia. It wouldn't really help the Union much to withdraw them (though I could see them doing it) but it would rather dramatically help the Indians.


Yes, I saw he'd ended up large by 1858. And in case you're not aware, spoiler tags are with SPOILER inside the square brackets, instead of QUOTE.

Thank I was not sure how to do spoiler, until you told me.
 
Top