AHC: US stops at 13

Why was it that new states/territories were created? Why weren't the territories Americans expanded into just attached to existing states?
 
Why was it that new states/territories were created? Why weren't the territories Americans expanded into just attached to existing states?

Because not all of them could. Look at the New England states for example. Continued expansion of current states would have favorited the already bigger southern states.

There is also the fact that western settlers probably had little interest in being ruled from the coast. Their interests and needs diverge. Not to mention the massive distances involved, especially in the early modern period.

Also, the map would look ridiculous...
 
Honestly I have a hard time seeing that happen. First of all the "no expansion" clause is pretty hard because America will definitely want two places: West Florida and New Orleans. The latter is very crucial when it comes to trade along the Mississippi, the former provides multiple natural harbors along the Gulf of Mexico which would help to defend New Orleans. Also that area had a large-ish number of English-speaking settlers. Unless the US never includes Georgia to begin with, I can't see them not wanting those delicious treats just south of it.

Now the "stopping at 13 part": there were province status/statehood movements in the regions ceded by the 13 original states to the federal government since the 1760s. Pre-independence there were people calling for the creation of new colonies like Vandalia, Charlotania and Transylvania. During and shortly after the American Revolutionary War entities like Vermont Republic, the State of Franklin and Westsylvania popped up. So overall there were already movements for self-government west of the 13 Colonies (well, Vermont isn't "west" but you get the point). Silencing those ideas is pretty much impossible, in my opinion.
 
perhaps a revision of the Constitution, revising the United States into 13 states some time after it gains its mainland territories? *knows nothing about USA politics*
 
The American Revolution was partly fought over westward expansion. This is approaching implausible territory unless you get some kind of radically different end of the war and/or Treaty of Paris, but then you might not even have 13 states to begin with.

The original states more or less all did have claims to the US western territory.

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

Anaxagoras

Banned
There were quite a few secessionist movements in the Trans-Appalachian region in the early years of the Republic. I'm sure there are plenty of PODs which might have some of them be successful. Jefferson even expected that some of the western territories might eventually break off and wasn't especially bothered by the idea.

Alternatively, if the British end 1781 on a slightly firmer footing (perhaps the French aren't successful in pinning Cornwallis in at Yorktown and his troops are able to escape to New York City), then the British might want peace but are in a stronger negotiating position. The western border is therefore set on the Appalachians rather than the Mississippi. American settlers would still be headed west, though, no matter what.
 
You'd have to away with the Northwest Ordinance, and somehow settle overlapping land claims while appeasing the states without western claims. Also, states may need to be left with greater war-making capacity.
 
Top