Dominion of Southern America - Updated July 1, 2018

[Glen]

British Southern America had been rent assunder by civil war in the 1830s. By 1840, half of the BSA had achieved responsible government, whilst the other half languished under direct military rule and the whim of Parliament. While from afar, the regions of British Southern America may have seemed homogenous blocks of Loyalist and Rebel, the truth on the ground was far from as simple. This was quickly discovered when the 3rd Baron Dorchester, direct descendant of Sir Guy Carlton, was sent by Parliament to investigate the causes of the Southern Civil War (aka the Slaver Uprising) and the prevention of future calamities. Baron Dorchester found on his journey to the British provinces that many loyalists who had bled for King and Country now found themselves more disenfranchised than ever before. After touring the region, Dorchester returned to England where he presented his report (thereafter referred to as the Dorchester Report). In it, he noted that while slavery and lust for gold had been the impetus for the revolt, the greatest threat to the future of the provinces was unrest over representation, which could in future turn even Loyalist families to intrigue, and threatened to embroil the United States of America if another conflict came to pass. His recommendations harkened back to his grandfather's call for a unification of British Southern America under the supervision of a Governor-General, but added to that the necessity for responsible government in a union of provinces that would slake the thirst of Southerners for representation yet act as a deterrent should the Americans to the north ever turn avaricious eyes towards British lands. He noted the precedent already being set in Texas, Carleton, and Indiana, and recommended that these provinces, united with those who had rebelled, would provide the best guarantee of stability for the future. He also presented to Parliament a petition by many prominant Loyalists, calling for such representative government.

Baron Dorchester Presents United Empire Loyalist Petition to Parliament:

 

[Glen]

ENZ - while I agree that in OTL a French NZ or French South Island is unlikely, in Glen's timeline British Australia is far weaker than it is IOTL - due to Britain's focus on the South.

It could be quite possible that Britain would have different interests or cares it this time line, wrt NZ.

Quite right, Julius, quite right!

This sadly will kill me as my ancestors landed in Dunedin and Christchurch in the 1850s BUT if this timeline is one when a future ATL AH.COM isn't beset by threads along the lines of "What if the Confederacy won" and Guns of the South isn't written, I consider my sacrifice worth it

Ah, your noble sacrifice is noted. Indeed, none of those timelines will exist, though would you consider the "What if the Confederation won Independence?" threads any better?

Yes, apparently the goal of this timeline is to kill off all AH.commers. Hey, where did your ancestors come from? Perhaps they'll hook up, just on a different continent.

 

[Glen]

Good question. Not sure of the answer. Some nasty shock, i.e. like WWI but a bit earlier. Or someone bashing heads together and pointing out that getting the children educated was the main priority, not which particular Christian theology they were taught, although that's a bit unlikely given religious ideas.

Sadly, the British if anything are likely to be a bit reactionary given the prevalence of deist thinking among the American Elite (a term the British find an oxymoron).

One possibility might be something happening to negate Thomas Arnold's reforms at Rugby school. Although I think there were other people doing similar things at other private schools around the same time. However his changes gave the private schools a lot more prestige, before which they were mainly renowned for aristocratic pupils and their riotous behaviour. Also he introduced a strong bias towards the humanities. [That had some big bonuses but did mean that the technical subjects were downgraded].

Well OTL Thomas Arnold is unlikely to exist with a 1790s birthyear, so there is some hope.

If you managed to prevent those reforms then the private schools might continue to have a bad reputation and the up and coming industrial and trading interests be deterred from sending their children to them. In that case they might have invested in developing their own educational facilities which also might have had a markedly more technological emphasis.

Sadly I doubt a 'bad reputation' would deter them from going if it gave them a chance to hobnob with the aristos, who they will want to ingratiate themselves with (social climbers that they are).

That's about the only thing that comes to mind as a POD that might swing things more in the direction that I would favour.

Well, maybe something else will pop up....

In terms of the Anglo-German alliance TLs that might have an effect, although markedly later. With good relations with Germany people in Britain might be interested in their educational system, which was very good in terms of producing well trained technical people. Also you might see more people going to Germany for education, at least in the shorter term.

Steve

Very good points. So good, in fact, I think this part will have to be reposted on the AGA thread.

 

[Julius Vogel]

Quite right, Julius, quite right!



Ah, your noble sacrifice is noted. Indeed, none of those timelines will exist, though would you consider the "What if the Confederation won Independence?" threads any better?

Yes, apparently the goal of this timeline is to kill off all AH.commers. Hey, where did your ancestors come from? Perhaps they'll hook up, just on a different continent.

Hmm, I hadn't thought about that. At least promise me that the flag of the Confederation will not become a cultural touchstone for rednecks the world over!

I think my ancestors are largely Yorkshire, Scottish Celtic fringe (Highlands/Western Ilse), obsure parts of Ireland, then the Shetlands and Orkney. So I think just have a tradition build up of Northerner, Islander and Celtic Balls and Dances in the new colonies and I think we can call it quits

Regarding NZ - in OTL American whalers from the North East were a common sight in what became New Zealand waters and I imagine the same economic driver would be there in this situation. So we can assume that North America (all English speaking parts anyway) are quite aware of NZ and so may consider trying their luck.

 

[stevep]

Sadly, the British if anything are likely to be a bit reactionary given the prevalence of deist thinking among the American Elite (a term the British find an oxymoron).

All to probable although it would depend on circumstances and people. As I said, if there was a big shock it might force a rethink.

Well OTL Thomas Arnold is unlikely to exist with a 1790s birthyear, so there is some hope.

Sadly I doubt a 'bad reputation' would deter them from going if it gave them a chance to hobnob with the aristos, who they will want to ingratiate themselves with (social climbers that they are).

For some yes. But if the private schools for the aristocrats were seen as places of rowdy disorder and ignorance I could see a lot of the new wealth holders seeking a better solution in their own schools teaching subjects of interest to them.

Very good points. So good, in fact, I think this part will have to be reposted on the AGA thread.

I think such a late change would take some time to work through. Probably at least a generation before it started having a broader impact on British education, but would definitely be useful in such scenarios.

Steve

 

[stevep]

Understood. The reasons for this difference in TTL and OTL is mainly that:

• The British are more focused on the South and Caribbean than OTL.
• There is less immigration to Australasia from the UK due to the British in the South and the Caribbean.
• The French are doing modestly better since 1815 due to a more stable political outcome with the installation of Loius-Napoleon as president (think of him as in some ways equivalent to Juan Carlos of Spain IOTL and how he helped Spain after Franco). With more stable France, the French are starting to look once more across the world for influence. They see opportunities in Australasia.
• After the Reform Revolution, the British are on a bit better footing relations-wise with the French, who also are a more liberal monarchy for the time.

Glen

I can see points 3 & 4 and Britain has a much larger interest in the Caribbean than OTL. However given the smaller land area and much larger initial population compared to Canada would this mean less interest/settlement in the southern ocean region? Britain's focus would be on the Caribbean instead of Canada, not necessary instead of Australia. While its warmer BSA has less land than Canada. Also the initial step in settling the south, for convicts and trading interests nearby will still be there. In fact, with Britain largely excluded from the fishing and coastal trade of N America there will be groups such as whalers even more interested in the southern seas. Which will mean activity in the various islands and desires for bases in the region.

Also, no matter than relations with France might be better they will still be seen as our biggest political and economic rivals so if they start establishing footholds in the region interest in London and the RN especially will pick up.

Not saying Britain will be as dominant as it was OTL but I would expect it will still seek to exclude French and other foreign political establishments as much as practical. If they establish themselves in western Australia say I could see a strong call to pre-empt them when it comes to New Zealand, or vice-versa. [Especially since to elements of public opinion the French getting established in both will be seen as an encirclement. A bit like all the fears of the Russians invading India via central Asia, or even worse the French under Napoleon via Egypt].

Steve

 

[Glen]

Anywhere that has trees and has at least a 50% chance that I won't end up as an ATL redneck!

Noted. So British North Carolina, perhaps?

 

[Glen]

I can see the British doing what they did in Guyana and importing Subcontinental Asian indentured labour to Florida and wherever on the Gulf coast/Caribbeen has shortages as the emancipated Blacks move away.

The East Asians would quickly migrate to other trades and the plantation owners had less sway over them compared to the South Asians (who could be recruited by company men in India and forced into bad contracts, whilst the other Asians had to have sufficient mobility and skill to begin with to finance their own migrations to America and thus were less stuck with the horrible jobs).

Interesting points. First, let me ask you this - What makes you think the emancipated blacks will move away? Where do you think they will go?

The dichotomy between East Asians and South Asians is also interesting and worth keeping in mind. Thanks for pointing it out!

 

[Nugax]

IMO the blacks will try to move to developing industrial and Commerce centres like the *Birmingham complex and New Orleans, and/or become small farmers of less labour intensive crops (like cocoa).

They might not move very far at all, like the OTL Caribbean, its more they will no longer be willing to work plantation labour, much less move to do so and thus an region where plantations are expanding rather than pre-existing (Florida, parts of Texas and the Caribbean) will have labour shortages.

 

[Glen]

Curse you, my own sense of historical interest. Stabbed in the back by myself once again.

Sad, isn't it?

 

[Glen]

I can see the British doing what they did in Guyana and importing Subcontinental Asian indentured labour to Florida and wherever on the Gulf coast/Caribbeen has shortages as the emancipated Blacks move away.

The East Asians would quickly migrate to other trades and the plantation owners had less sway over them compared to the South Asians (who could be recruited by company men in India and forced into bad contracts, whilst the other Asians had to have sufficent mobility and skill to begin with to finance their own migrations to America and thus were less stuck with the horrible jobs).

Excellent idea! In OTL, the British did that with Guyana, Trindidad, Fiji, South Africa (esp Natal), East Africa (now largely gone of course), Mauritius, and British Malaya. It basically began as soon as the emancipation IOTL, so I'd expect the same general trajectory here.

Except...the second part of the driving need for Indian labor was a labor shortage in all of those areas. It's unclear to me if the southern colonies will face such a shortage. Also, they're presumably going to be under self government within twenty years, and in OTL, British colonies under self-government didn't really participate in this. Queensland, for example, came up with its own "solution" to the plantation problem, despite having essentially the same crops as many of the areas with Indian indentured laborers.

Regardless, I expect an Indian population of at least a few percent. It could become substantially more, rivaling the black population in places (outpacing it even in California), but that's all up to Glen.

Thats why I specified Florida (which doesn't have much of a plantation sector as of the yet) and the Caribbean, as I don't think that many places will need the labour (but those which do will need a lot).

Queensland was adverse to the Indian labour for cultural reasons (the power of unions and racism), the Pacific labour the Queenslanders brought in was both much more under the table and got round the legal restrictions on moving Indian labour*. Plus with the shorter distances and even less expectations the Pacific Islanders were cheaper.

The DSA will have both a different attitude towards race and labour relations and no cheaper alternative to the Indians IMO, so things might be rather different (more like South Africa than Australia perhaps?).

*Standards for pay and treatment (even if really shitty ones), and an onus to move women and families so that the new labour would settle in the west indies.

This is really great discussion, and I assure you that many of these points will be addressed in future updates.

So my basic take home point from all this is that it wasn't so much a 'labor shortage' as a 'plantation shortage' since many emancipated slaves in the British areas chose to abandon their former masters' fields for their own plots or work in towns. The Indian Indians (from the subcontinent) the British were able to cram into indentured type deals and shipped the whole families so they'd stay (despite there being some option for returning?).

Well, we'll see how all this plays out ITTL....

 

[Glen]

I see your point. The only issue I see with Florida is the agricultural industry there IOTL didn't really skyrocket until after WW2 (cattle ranching became big earlier, in the late 1800s, but you don't need much labor for that). If TTL operates like OTL, that means by the time Florida really gets running the prime period for Indian indentured labor will have run its course.

Recall, however, that IOTL Florida was left to languish by the Spanish after reacquiring it in the aftermath of the ARW, which put back settlement by at least 20 years. Then it had to be pacified because of the Seminoles who had taken refuge there in a series of wars, arguably slowing things by a decade or more further. Then there was the ACW and Reconstruction, as well as the economic dulldrums that the South was thrown into. Put all that together and you could argue that compared to OTL, TTL's Florida is at least 30 or more years ahead of schedule, and possibly will continue to accelerate in settlement and agriculture.

 

[Glen]

The first conference on responsible government in the British South of America was called in 1841, and was originally conceived to include the regions still under military government - North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, East Florida, Bahamas, Cuba, West Florida, and Louisiana. However, on the recommendation of Lord Dorchester, representatives from Carleton, Arkansas, Jamaica, Hispaniola, Richport (in Spanish, Puerto Rico) and surprisingly, Indiana, were also invited. It did not go well.

On word that the Indiana delegation had accepted an invitation, half of the Georgian delegation walked out of the meeting. While representatives from Hispaniola attended, word had already reached the conference of demonstrations in the streets of the island against any form of union with 'slavers' on the mainland. The conference adjourned with nothing to show for it except a hard won agreement to reconvene the next year, in 1842. Even that had been questioned for a time, so was seen as some little success.

 

[Arachnid]

Considering how hard a sell Confederation was in Canada its hard to imagine it going down smoothly with such varied Colonies, really its at least 3 or possibly 4 different "country's".

 

[Nugax]

So my basic take home point from all this is that it wasn't so much a 'labor shortage' as a 'plantation shortage' since many emancipated slaves in the British areas chose to abandon their former masters' fields for their own plots or work in towns. The Indian Indians (from the subcontinent) the British were able to cram into indentured type deals and shipped the whole families so they'd stay (despite there being some option for returning?).

Pretty much. The option of returning was just the labour booking and paying ship back to India, which the regulations forced the plantation managers to allow. The paltry pay made this difficult however, and well under half didn't manage it/chose to settle down.

 

[Glen]

My understanding is that's the case (as is with tobacco), but the yields were much lower until modern technology could utilize the agricultural land in Florida to the fullest. Still, for example the citrus industry was much bigger in Florida than California during that period.

Yes, one would presume so. However, it will be the North of Florida that has most of the agriculture at first, whereas South Florida develops later (though perhaps earlier than OTL).

Edit: The basic point is, IOTL, black labor (peppered with some white labor) worked fine up until the postwar period in Florida, as demand for agricultural labor was lower. Hell, Florida was 44% black in 1900 - the Great Migration is part of the reason why Latino migrant labor became important.

Ah, but the Great Migration was due to the ramping up of the Factories in the North as much as Jim Crow in the South. Here the dynamic is going to be a little different.

 

[stevep]

Glen

It sounds like, unless there's a big clash with the US giving a strong motive for it, its going to be unlikely a unified grouping of all the British territories in the region will occur. More likely that the mainland [or most of] and some of the islands will form a bloc while various areas may stay outside. Possibly joining later if the grouping proves successful.

Steve

The first conference on responsible government in the British South of America was called in 1841, and was originally conceived to include the regions still under military government - North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, East Florida, Bahamas, Cuba, West Florida, and Louisiana. However, on the recommendation of Lord Dorchester, representatives from Carleton, Arkansas, Jamaica, Hispaniola, Richport (in Spanish, Puerto Rico) and surprisingly, Indiana, were also invited. It did not go well.

On word that the Indiana delegation had accepted an invitation, half of the Georgian delegation walked out of the meeting. While representatives from Hispaniola attended, word had already reached the conference of demonstrations in the streets of the island against any form of union with 'slavers' on the mainland. The conference adjourned with nothing to show for it except a hard won agreement to reconvene the next year, in 1842. Even that had been questioned for a time, so was seen as some little success.

 

[Glen]

Although i haven't posted here yet, let me just say how much i love TTL . Keep up the Good Work.

Thank you so much for your patronage! And hopefully you will post again when you get the chance!

However...

British Dixie: YYYYYYYYYYYYYEEEEEEEEEEEEEESSSSSSSSSSSS

French Western Australia and South New Zealand: NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

Ah, the timeline giveth, and the timeline taketh away.....

 

[Glen]

Interesting. What about the Hispanic upper class (former) slave-owners living in Cuba and the like? Does their different location (island mentality?) and ethnic basis make their migration patterns different, or even non-existent?

The Hispanic upper class in Cuba is about half way assimilated into the British slaveocracy. The Cubans have been under the British for about 30 years, and there's been substantial investment in and immigration to the island from Britain and the mainland of Southern America. The younger generation is bilingual at worst (and some only speak English).

Hmmm....probably ought to write on this at some point....

Just thought you should know I saved up my 1000th post for this thread by the way

I am honored, sir!

 

[eschaton]

The Hispanic upper class in Cuba is about half way assimilated into the British slaveocracy. The Cubans have been under the British for about 30 years, and there's been substantial investment in and immigration to the island from Britain and the mainland of Southern America. The younger generation is bilingual at worst (and some only speak English).

Honestly, I can't see a language shift happening in a settler colony that rapidly, if ever. Look at Mauritius. The British seized it from the French in 1810, but the white upper class there is still francophone to this day.