The Anglo-American Reunion

[Luke]

I was reading the Anglo-American history special article in the April ‘07 issue of BBC History Magazine, and stumbled on the following passage (and promptly thought it would make a great AH timeline ):

“...surging American power and transatlantic rapprochement – prompted some remarkable proposals by the 1890s. The American naval captain Albert Mahan wrote on the “possibilities of an Anglo-American reunion”. The British jurist AV Dicey even called for a common citizenship.”

So how can we get people to take these proposals seriously, or possibly even adopt them? What would be the effects of the British Empire and the United States joining together? Could this have any effect on the Imperial Federation movement?

 

[Thande]

1890 is a good time because the USA and British Empire were on almost equal terms. Make an earlier First World War equivalent shorter and less damaging, have the Americans enter it from the start, introduce a serious enemy that's a threat to both Americans and British (a USSR-analogue that includes parts of Western Europe?) and it could happen...

 

[Dean_the_Young]

I suppose it would start with some treaties based on reciprocacity; free migration between the two, free flow of money between the two (and both's money being equal tender), and perhaps a cumulation with a treaty stating that a citizen from either side is guaranteed the same rights as their own citizen, both in court and out of it.

One problem I see, though, would be of empires and foreign interests. Different opinions on how to solve a certain things, the matter of imperial territories (though admittedly this is pre-Spanish American War, which would not only butterfly away but would also put off/remove American anti-imperialism sentiment), and perhaps most importantly the matter of head of government. Was there any possibility that virtually the entire Royal Family, perhaps on a ship at sea, could suffer some catastrophe and lead to a moving to a republic?

And of course, what the US does in Latin America may frustrate British policy makers endlessly.

 

[New Yorker]

In May 1890, riding a surge of public calls for reunion, the US Congress holds a joint session calling itself the "Third Continental Congress." It repeals the Declaration of Independence and submits to a rather surprised and embarrassed Queen Victoria. The Union Flag waives over the Capitol and the White House. Her Majesty names President Benjamin Harrison as the first Governor-General of the United States to oversee the transition. He confirms the members of Congress in their office. The Constitution is then amended to provide that the USA is an hereditary monarchy under Queen Victoria and her descendants and to provide for an elected Governor-General instead of an elected president. In reality not much changes. God Save the Queen becomes rather popular. There is debate on whether to merge Canada into the US or the US into Canada. In the end it's decided to ensure that all political decisions are made at the lowest level possible but also to provide for an Imperial Parliament to oversee matters of common concern. Both the US and Canadian dollars are replaced with the pound. The US and Canadian armed forces are merged into the UK command structure. There is no doubt that the British Empire is the most powerful nation in the world.

 

[Chengar Qordath]

I suppose it would start with some treaties based on reciprocacity; free migration between the two, free flow of money between the two (and both's money being equal tender), and perhaps a cumulation with a treaty stating that a citizen from either side is guaranteed the same rights as their own citizen, both in court and out of it.

One problem I see, though, would be of empires and foreign interests. Different opinions on how to solve a certain things, the matter of imperial territories (though admittedly this is pre-Spanish American War, which would not only butterfly away but would also put off/remove American anti-imperialism sentiment), and perhaps most importantly the matter of head of government. Was there any possibility that virtually the entire Royal Family, perhaps on a ship at sea, could suffer some catastrophe and lead to a moving to a republic?

And of course, what the US does in Latin America may frustrate British policy makers endlessly.

So, we might see an Anglo-American union that develops more or less along the same course as the EU has? Starting off with just some close trade agreements and a common market, and then gradually drawing the two states closer and closer together?

 

[Roberto]

There are doubtless going to be swarms upon swarms of unsatisfied Americans who want anything but to be British. What happens to them is variable. They could flee to the SW and fight a guerrilla war from the desert, flee to Mexico or Latin America, or attempt to secede.

Another interesting side note is what happens to the Bahamas and Bermuda. I would guess they too are added to the British North American block.

 

[Dean_the_Young]

Perhaps any ideas that don't involve an increasingly important power to spontaneously bend over and say "screw me, I'm yours"?

 

[Cicero the Younger]

Well, in From the Earth to the Moon, written in 1865, Jules Verne has a frustrated post-war American artilleryman, itching for another war in which to practice his craft, suggest that since America had once belonged to England, "why shouldn't it be England's turn to belong to America?" Nothing comes of the idea, as another character quickly points out that the president would not be receptive to the idea of such a war. Obviously, having America conquer England in the 19th century (or at any other time, really) is pure ASB, though it could still make for an amusing TL.

I'm not sure any kind of "reunion" between America and Britain would actually have been possible in the late 19th century. Though relations between the two had improved greatly since the early part of the century, they were still rival Great Powers with very different geo-political interests. We weren't even established as solid allies until the First World War, were we? At any rate, a 21st century reunion strikes me as a great deal more plausible than a 19th century one, and I'll add that a 21st century reunion does not strike me as plausible at all.

 

[Thande]

There are doubtless going to be swarms upon swarms of unsatisfied Americans who want anything but to be British.

Being in a country in personal union with the UK is not the same as being British.

 

[Tyr]

Though they weren't allies America wasn't really anyones ally. We were definatly friends and shared a culture and both are democracies so its what the people think that matters.

 

[Wendell]

Conversion of the Empire to states with republican forms of government?

It, while not likely, may be more plausible than having the U.S. become a full dominion of the Empire


So, let's consider this...

We could have Canada admitted as one or several states, perhaps Great Britain as a state, Ireland as a state, the assorted Caribbean islands as a territory or two, protectorates scattered about in Asia, Africa, the South Atlantic, and parts of the Pacific, and, finally, the states of Australiaand New Zealand

 

[67th Tigers]

It, while not likely, may be more plausible than having the U.S. become a full dominion of the Empire


So, let's consider this...

We could have Canada admitted as one or several states, perhaps Great Britain as a state, Ireland as a state, the assorted Caribbean islands as a territory or two, protectorates scattered about in Asia, Africa, the South Atlantic, and parts of the Pacific, and, finally, the states of Australiaand New Zealand

Every county of England (except maybe Rutland) makes the qualification to be a state. Yorkshire and some others can make several states. Each Australian state makes the qualification, as does both North and South Island.

In this case, the President is whoever the British decide to elect.. ;-)

 

[Wendell]

Every county of England (except maybe Rutland) makes the qualification to be a state. Yorkshire and some others can make several states. Each Australian state makes the qualification, as does both North and South Island.

In this case, the President is whoever the British decide to elect.. ;-)

That's too many small states, and Australia was sparsely populated at the time. Besides, a state can legallt split itself up at a later date.

 

[Thande]

Population of the United Kingdom in 1890: 39 million.

Population of the United States in 1890: 63 million.

Any notion of the UK being one US state is ludicrous (leaving aside the unlikelihood of an American system of government being accepted by the British - this is not hypocrisy, because the alternative would only be a personal union, with most of the US system of government left intact but technically parliamentary rather than republican).

If anything, the US breaks down to only about two country's worth if it directly joined the UK (which is also very unlikely, of course)...though it does give us an excuse to resurrect the CSA a-gain

 

[67th Tigers]

That's too many small states, and Australia was sparsely populated at the time. Besides, a state can legallt split itself up at a later date.

However, what constitutes a state is clear, and 47 of the 49 English administrative counties met the requirement (even the Isle of Wight), however, dividing up to create average states of ca 1.4m would result in 28 UK states (3 in Ireland, 1 in Wales, 2 in Scotland and 22 in England (7 of which can be made from single counties)).

 

[Wendell]

However, what constitutes a state is clear, and 47 of the 49 English administrative counties met the requirement (even the Isle of Wight), however, dividing up to create average states of ca 1.4m would result in 28 UK states (3 in Ireland, 1 in Wales, 2 in Scotland and 22 in England (7 of which can be made from single counties)).

Maybe Britain could be split into a few states, but 43 is too many, and increases its Presidential selection power rather than diminishing it.

 

[Thande]

However, what constitutes a state is clear, and 47 of the 49 English administrative counties met the requirement (even the Isle of Wight), however, dividing up to create average states of ca 1.4m would result in 28 UK states (3 in Ireland, 1 in Wales, 2 in Scotland and 22 in England (7 of which can be made from single counties)).

The English administrative counties did not exist in 1890.

Although it is fun to make fun of the Americans' state entry requirements Much easier to say "a county is any area which we damn well want to call a county"

 

[Alcuin]

Given that the idea is to create a union of equals, surely the best bet is to admit the British Empire (including Canada, South Africa, Australia, New Zealand and the Caribbean) as as many states as exist in the Union plus some territories that could be decided later.

Both the Empire and the US would be irrevocably changed by such an arrangement. I don't think the Constitution would be considered too onerous for the British Empire, and if some states decide they want a relationship with the Queen as well as the President, I'm not sure that would be a dealbreaker.

The real dealbreaker would be India. Perhaps the best way for this to work might be for Her Majesty to become the Empress of a semi-independent India.

 

[NomadicSky]

In May 1890, riding a surge of public calls for reunion, the US Congress holds a joint session calling itself the "Third Continental Congress." It repeals the Declaration of Independence and submits to a rather surprised and embarrassed Queen Victoria. The Union Flag waives over the Capitol and the White House. Her Majesty names President Benjamin Harrison as the first Governor-General of the United States to oversee the transition. He confirms the members of Congress in their office. The Constitution is then amended to provide that the USA is an hereditary monarchy under Queen Victoria and her descendants and to provide for an elected Governor-General instead of an elected president. In reality not much changes. God Save the Queen becomes rather popular. There is debate on whether to merge Canada into the US or the US into Canada. In the end it's decided to ensure that all political decisions are made at the lowest level possible but also to provide for an Imperial Parliament to oversee matters of common concern. Both the US and Canadian dollars are replaced with the pound. The US and Canadian armed forces are merged into the UK command structure. There is no doubt that the British Empire is the most powerful nation in the world.

That's a cool idea.

 

[67th Tigers]

The English administrative counties did not exist in 1890.

Actually, they were formed in 1889, under the 1888 Local Government Act

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Administrative_counties_of_England

Although it is fun to make fun of the Americans' state entry requirements Much easier to say "a county is any area which we damn well want to call a county"