America occupies much of Mexico and...

So I have a TL that is mostly worked out in rough, but I just want to get some ideas on my central premise.

The idea is that in 1846 Mexico sends some 500 men into California to enforce federal rule, in the resulting Mexican American War the original American incursion into California is defeated, which has two main butterflies:

1. Is that the British gain more of Oregon territory than IOTL as negotiations stall at the outbreak of war

2. Is that America occupies much of Northen Mexico including Baja California after the 'All Mexico' group gains some press and Polk panders to some of their desires.

I intended to explore American attitudes on admitting the Mexican territories as states, how this would affect the Civil War, and other things of course.

Are these reasonable butterflies? Or are they far fetched? I assume them to be but I am looking for other opinions.
 
Last edited:
So I have a TL that is mostly worked out in rough, but I just want to get some ideas on my central premise.

The idea is that in 1846 Mexico sends some 500 men into California to enforce federal rule, in the resulting Mexican American War the original American incursion into California is defeated, which has two main butterflies:

1. Is that the British gain more of Oregon territory than IOTL as negotiations stall at the outbreak of war

2. Is that America occupies much of Northen Mexico including Baja California after the 'All Mexico' group gains some press and Polk panders to some of their desires.

I intended to explore American attitudes on admitting the Mexican territories as states, how this would affect the Civil War, and other things of course.

Are these reasonable butterflies? Or are they far fetched? I assume them to be but I am looking for other opinions.

I don't know if Part 1 is very likely. Britain wasn't trying to push for everything it could get and the OTL settlement was pretty reasonable. The resolution wasn't life or death either, so if negotiations hit a snag they're likely just put off for a while.

But if there is some kind of 'cave' on Oregon, Polk will probably try to grab more of Mexico to assuage public opinion.
 
I don't know if Part 1 is very likely. Britain wasn't trying to push for everything it could get and the OTL settlement was pretty reasonable. The resolution wasn't life or death either, so if negotiations hit a snag they're likely just put off for a while.

But if there is some kind of 'cave' on Oregon, Polk will probably try to grab more of Mexico to assuage public opinion.

I only have them gaining everyting behind the Columbia River (where the British had more presence) rather than the extreme claim of up to the 42nd parallel.

The remainder is divided along the 49th parallel as per OTL.

Roughly the disputed area in this photo
 
So I have a TL that is mostly worked out in rough, but I just want to get some ideas on my central premise.

The idea is that in 1846 Mexico sends some 500 men into California to enforce federal rule, in the resulting Mexican American War the original American incursion into California is defeated, which has two main butterflies:

1. Is that the British gain more of Oregon territory than IOTL as negotiations stall at the outbreak of war

2. Is that America occupies much of Northen Mexico including Baja California after the 'All Mexico' group gains some press and Polk panders to some of their desires.

I intended to explore American attitudes on admitting the Mexican territories as states, how this would affect the Civil War, and other things of course.

Are these reasonable butterflies? Or are they far fetched? I assume them to be but I am looking for other opinions.

Well for your initial POD you have to remember that in California John C. Frémont is roaming around with quite a sizable amount of troops with him and he has/will gain the support of the local American immigrants. Along with the Pacific Squadron just waiting for word from Washington to attack.

1. If negotiations are stalled it gives more time for American settlers to move into the region, giving the US a better claim, and also the British didn't really press their claim to all the land North of the Columbia River because they knew that Americans would continue to settle in that region. The British would have accepted the previous Tyler Administrations offer, which was almost the exact same as the Oregon Treaty but due to political pressure from the Northern Democrats, Polk played a game of Brinksmanship until finally acquiescing and accepting the border at the 49th.

2. In OTL Polk had set his eyes on attaining a much larger share of Mexico then what we had recieved in OTL, it was only due to the rogue US diplomat Nicholas Trist that Mexico retained most of its territory South of Alta California.

1142385.jpg

Polk's Peace
 
Well for your initial POD you have to remember that in California John C. Frémont is roaming around with quite a sizable amount of troops with him and he has/will gain the support of the local American immigrants. Along with the Pacific Squadron just waiting for word from Washington to attack.

1. If negotiations are stalled it gives more time for American settlers to move into the region, giving the US a better claim, and also the British didn't really press their claim to all the land North of the Columbia River because they knew that Americans would continue to settle in that region. The British would have accepted the previous Tyler Administrations offer, which was almost the exact same as the Oregon Treaty but due to political pressure from the Northern Democrats, Polk played a game of Brinksmanship until finally acquiescing and accepting the border at the 49th.

2. In OTL Polk had set his eyes on attaining a much larger share of Mexico then what we had recieved in OTL, it was only due to the rogue US diplomat Nicholas Trist that Mexico retained most of its territory South of Alta California.

1142385.jpg


Polk's Peace

Cool map, where's it from?
 
Well for your initial POD you have to remember that in California John C. Frémont is roaming around with quite a sizable amount of troops with him and he has/will gain the support of the local American immigrants. Along with the Pacific Squadron just waiting for word from Washington to attack.

1. If negotiations are stalled it gives more time for American settlers to move into the region, giving the US a better claim, and also the British didn't really press their claim to all the land North of the Columbia River because they knew that Americans would continue to settle in that region. The British would have accepted the previous Tyler Administrations offer, which was almost the exact same as the Oregon Treaty but due to political pressure from the Northern Democrats, Polk played a game of Brinksmanship until finally acquiescing and accepting the border at the 49th.

2. In OTL Polk had set his eyes on attaining a much larger share of Mexico then what we had recieved in OTL, it was only due to the rogue US diplomat Nicholas Trist that Mexico retained most of its territory South of Alta California.


1. I had in mind that Polk loses that game of brinkmanship with the British feeling they can push their claim a bit more.

2. Well I'm Glad that the idea of him annexing more American territory isn't too far fetched :p

As to the Americans losing in California, I had in mind they would capture San Farncisco and have their column blunted and forced to turn back in the desert causing a minor fiasco which forces a larger response and a second invasion. It is hardcore resistance from local Californios and Mexican soldiers that turn them back, not a huge defeat per say (only a few casualties) but enough to stall the American advance.
 
Any thoughts on how more occupied territory effects the Compromise of 1850?

It will probably help to speed up the fracturing of the Democrats since in OTL, it was the Northern Democrats that proposed the Wilmot Proviso in order to try and save their hide with Northern voters.
 
1. I had in mind that Polk loses that game of brinkmanship with the British feeling they can push their claim a bit more.

2. Well I'm Glad that the idea of him annexing more American territory isn't too far fetched :p

As to the Americans losing in California, I had in mind they would capture San Francisco and have their column blunted and forced to turn back in the desert causing a minor fiasco which forces a larger response and a second invasion. It is hardcore resistance from local Californios and Mexican soldiers that turn them back, not a huge defeat per say (only a few casualties) but enough to stall the American advance.

1. Ahh you underestimate the Napoleon of the Stumb the man was an excellent politician

2. Well Manifest Destiny still hasn't lost its appeal too

You also have to remember that you have Stephen W. Kearny coming in from Santa Fe, who has good supply lines and a large force of troops
 
1. Ahh you underestimate the Napoleon of the Stumb the man was an excellent politician

2. Well Manifest Destiny still hasn't lost its appeal too

You also have to remember that you have Stephen W. Kearny coming in from Santa Fe, who has good supply lines and a large force of troops

1. Well the Oregon claim isn't too important of a POD just thought it would be cool.

2. That makes me quite happy :D

Well Kearny's force was bloodied by local Californio militia, and it was only when his men combined strength with Fremont did they defeat the local militia. Not to mention that at Dominguez Rancho 50 Mexican militia repulsed 300 American marines, and at San Pasqual only forced the departure of the militia from the field in a pyrrich victory. Imagine the havoc a few hundred extra Mexican soldiers would wreak on American forces.

I don't think the first invasion being blunted is to far fetched with my POD, now it being 500 soldiers rather than 300 or so perhaps is.
 
It will probably help to speed up the fracturing of the Democrats since in OTL, it was the Northern Democrats that proposed the Wilmot Proviso in order to try and save their hide with Northern voters.

Well my alternate Civil War takes place closer to 1856-57 in here so a fractured Democratic party might speed that up.
 
So I have a TL that is mostly worked out in rough, but I just want to get some ideas on my central premise.

The idea is that in 1846 Mexico sends some 500 men into California to enforce federal rule, in the resulting Mexican American War the original American incursion into California is defeated, which has two main butterflies:

1. Is that the British gain more of Oregon territory than IOTL as negotiations stall at the outbreak of war

2. Is that America occupies much of Northen Mexico including Baja California after the 'All Mexico' group gains some press and Polk panders to some of their desires.

I intended to explore American attitudes on admitting the Mexican territories as states, how this would affect the Civil War, and other things of course.

Are these reasonable butterflies? Or are they far fetched? I assume them to be but I am looking for other opinions.
The British believed that Polk was crazy. His campaign was 54 or fight. I don't think the British would push if they got offered the 49th.

Your best bet to get the bulk of Northern Mexico and Baja is to have Nicholas Trist die as he is in route to Mexico. Polk sent Trist to Mexico as calls for even more Mexico with the ease of the victories over the Mexicans were just becoming known. Polk recalled Trist but Trist stayed and worked out Guadalupe Hidalgo. But if Trist dies in route, Polk will get someone who will press for even more of Mexico and the person he sends to Mexico will press for even more. In fact I have a TL in the works based on this, but I will have things go very different than what you are planning I believe.

I could see the Bleeding of the Rio Grande in this TL.
 
The British believed that Polk was crazy. His campaign was 54 or fight. I don't think the British would push if they got offered the 49th.

Your best bet to get the bulk of Northern Mexico and Baja is to have Nicholas Trist die as he is in route to Mexico. Polk sent Trist to Mexico as calls for even more Mexico with the ease of the victories over the Mexicans were just becoming known. Polk recalled Trist but Trist stayed and worked out Guadalupe Hidalgo. But if Trist dies in route, Polk will get someone who will press for even more of Mexico and the person he sends to Mexico will press for even more. In fact I have a TL in the works based on this, but I will have things go very different than what you are planning I believe.

I could see the Bleeding of the Rio Grande in this TL.

Yeah replacing Trist seems like it is the easiet thing to do here to get more of Mexico.

I'm just trying to work out whether the earlier Civil War is feasible or whether any President would have the spine to confront the now quasi-Independent CSA after roughly 4-3 years of independence.
 
1. Is that the British gain more of Oregon territory than IOTL as negotiations stall at the outbreak of war

I think it was already stated, but had war broken out those negotiations would have just been put on hold, and both parties would have been fine with that.

2. Is that America occupies much of Northen Mexico including Baja California after the 'All Mexico' group gains some press and Polk panders to some of their desires.

I think the Tropic of Cancer border would have been likely, sure.
 
Yeah replacing Trist seems like it is the easiet thing to do here to get more of Mexico.

I'm just trying to work out whether the earlier Civil War is feasible or whether any President would have the spine to confront the now quasi-Independent CSA after roughly 4-3 years of independence.
Depends on who the POTUS is. If Taylor lived than no, he would raise an army and march south if anyone tried to leave the Union and crush them. Its that simple with Taylor. Personally I always wanted to see Taylor finish his term. He was against the Compromise of 1850 and the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 as well. He might of been willing to buy Cuba from Spain to get the South to get new free states in the Union.

But the earliest you can break out a civil war is 1856, the south wouldn't leave till you get Lincoln in the White House, as someone who won the white house with out any support from Southern states.
 
Depends on who the POTUS is. If Taylor lived than no, he would raise an army and march south if anyone tried to leave the Union and crush them. Its that simple with Taylor. Personally I always wanted to see Taylor finish his term. He was against the Compromise of 1850 and the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 as well.

The FSA was part of the Compromise. The claim that Taylor opposed the Compromise is not well founded, despite its long acceptance by mainstream historians. While Taylor did not expressly support the Compromise, the Whig newspaper which was generally regarded as the Administration mouthpiece did.

And there was no question of Taylor vetoing any part of the Compromise. He was a Whig, and it was a Whig principle that the Presidential veto should be used only against unconstitutional measures, not for policy reasons.

Where the story started was that Taylor demanded Congress grant immediate statehood to California, by accepting the free-state constitution Californians had already written, rather than futz around laying out territorial governments. Taylor had been a frontier administrator, and had bad memories of what happened when there was no clear legal authority.

But that ran right over the Southern insistence on maintaining the free/slave balance in the Senate, and on its "fair share" of the Mexican Cession. Taylor wanted statehood enacted without waiting to work out some kind of compensation for the South - but he didn't oppose a "Compromise" including such compensation.

In any case, it's almost ASB that Southerners would be panicked enough to declare secession when the President himself is a Southern slaveholder.
 
Top