AHC: Make California British

Using a POD no earlier than 1720, make California British, this can be a British colony, influenced area, puppet etc.
Bonus points if after 1790.
 
Drake actually claimed it in 1579 at Point Reyes Peninsula, north of the city of San Francisco according to a number of studies that concluded last year. That's 30 years before the Spanish made any real effort to claim it in the form of Sebastian Vizcaino's mapping expedition.

However as per your requested POD Britain can agree to buy California prior to the US-Mexican War. There were discussions. Santa Anna needed the money. The population wasn't particularly Mexican following several waves of immigration of Americans and Europeans. The Royal Navy would have loved those harbours.

Alternatively I read once that some of the "Bear Flag" Revolutionaries or at least someone during the brief revolution requested that the local British Admiral who was on scene would annex them. The British Fleet present massively outgunned the American Fleet. However having just quickly swept the interweb I can find no reference for that. Perhaps it is a fiction or my imagination or perhaps, like the Texan request for British protection, it has been retconned from popular US history as being unpatriotic. :p
 
Alternatively I read once that some of the "Bear Flag" Revolutionaries or at least someone during the brief revolution requested that the local British Admiral who was on scene would annex them. The British Fleet present massively outgunned the American Fleet. However having just quickly swept the interweb I can find no reference for that. Perhaps it is a fiction or my imagination or perhaps, like the Texan request for British protection, it has been retconned from popular US history as being unpatriotic. :p

Sounds more like it's just obscure. I remember learning about the Texan request for British protection in school, at least.
 
About the early 1840s many Californios in Alta California were hoping for either annexation by the British, French of the United States. They were tired of being ignored and mismanaged by Mexico City.
 
So with the British acquiring California, does this have an effect on the Oregon Territory dispute as well? With the British in California, would the US use this as an excuse to annex all of the Oregon territory?
 
I would think it would depend on /why/ Britain decided to annex California. Other than the traditional "fit of absent mindedness", the only reasons I can see would be

1. Somehow the British picked up that there was gold there .
2. They wanted the ports for refit/replenishment purposes for ships going round Cape Horn and across the Pacific. Which would be logical , except that, because of the East India Company monopoly, there was very little British maritime traffic across the Pacific . Possibly if the South Seas company had worked out differently.
3. They wanted the ports as bases for interception of Spanish ships (especially the Manila galleons). Lawfully in time of war, and piratically in time of peace. Obviously, the Spanish authorities would not be happy about that, and such a purpose would probably be the one that first suggested itself to the authorities. Whether Britain would think California worth fighting for, or trading much off for in treaty negotiations is questionable.

(1) might mean Texas being more attractive to Britain (and new Mexico etc). If there is gold /here/ maybe also /there/.
(2) could also make Texas more attractive, since trade and settlement would probably spread back into the hinterlands, and possible eventually down the Rio Grande.
(3). Can't see any effect on Texas.


Does (did) California produce timber suitable for ships' spars ? I know the iconic redwood is not suitable, but were there other species. Britain was always desperate for sources of large diameter timber for masts and spars.
 
Last edited:
Were there any British squadrons in the eastern Pacific during the Seven Years War?

Iirc it wasn't conquered by the Spanish until the 1770s, so could have been occupied then without a fight (perhaps as a base for operations against New Spain) and kept at the peace.
 
Didnt the Russians have some quixotic ideas about annexing Hawaii and formalizing broaders claims in the Americas about this time?

Is Russian shipping worth raiding in the north pacific (dont recall much discussion of activity in the Crimean War 10 years later expect in the western pacific).
 
Were there any British squadrons in the eastern Pacific during the Seven Years War?

George Anson, who was First Sea Lord during the Seven Year War had been the last RN captain to circumnavigate the globe so had the best knowledge of the Pacific but he didn't get as far as California as he headed from Peru to China.

Britain was in control of the Falklands as a base to round the Horn and had better ships in the Seven Year war compared to those of 20 years previously so an expedition was possible just not likely as there are no British interests in the Pacific until much later.

That said I thought about creating a TL a couple of years ago in which the Brits did round the Cape more often and explored the west coast of America / Canada during the 1812 war. The difficulty I had was realistically getting a colony started so far from the UK - there are only so many storms that can drive ships from Australia to California! If you could get settlers there then I think the colony would be viable in ways that the Eastern early settlements were not, but why would people travel round the world to settle when already established colonies existed much closer.
 
Would annexing California mean a different policy by Britain towards Texas?

It would make it rather awkward.

Scenario 1 : Britain sides with the Mexicans in the USA-Mexico warove borders of Texas. Britain supported Texan independence not its annexation by USA. With British support, Mexico is able to stalemate the USA in the Mexican war and the Texan border remains mostly at the Neuces (sp?). This would almost certainly trigger the 54-40 or fight scenario which ends in an American defeat (debatable but fighting UK and Mexico at the same time would be difficult for the flegling US Army). Britain acquires the rest of California in a deal with Mexico to pay off the debts to the UK and France, pre-empting the invasion by Napoleon III

Scenario 2: Britain sides with Texas in the war of '36 and ends up bankrolling the Republic afterwards. As part of the war Britain occupies and later annexes California (which essentially makes the Oregon question a dead duck). USA and UK relations go downhill fast

Scenario 2 is slightly more likely in my opinion as an earlier intervention under Palmerstone is more in character than under Aberdeen
 

Dirk_Pitt

Banned
Easy.

Britain wins ARW and over time conquers in a westward fashion, eventually annexing California, and possibly Baja California as well.
 
Easy.

Britain wins ARW and over time conquers in a westward fashion, eventually annexing California, and possibly Baja California as well.
I was going to mention something like this :p - but there doesn't even need to be a ARW if the POD is in 1720, 56 years is quite a long time for things to work out differently.
 
There is a book written on this. If you want a post 1790 POD, your going to need "British" Republic of Texas first. In the early-mid 1840's British agents on the ground in Mexico and California were practicly begging the Peel Government to let them convince Mexico to trade them California for Mexican debt. However the it all depended on the RoT. Britian didn't realize until it was to late how close the US was to annexing Texas, Mexico refused to cooperate until Fremont was marching through Oregon and Texans weren't all gung-ho about potential emancipation or British overseers. Simply put, the negotiations between Texas, Britain and Mexico simply took to long. and If the RoT would have become a protectorate of Britain or if Britain guaranteed it's independence from Mexico, the stage is set for a easy and almost painless aquisition of California.
 
Top