America with British Columbia

The US under Seward's Foreign Policy tried to gain British Columbia from the British in the late 1860s, but ultimately that did not pan out.

What if the US had been able to gain British Columbia and the boundary was set along the continental divide? As far as Pacific bases go, I think Britain either retains Vancouver island or strikes a deal to gain influence over Hawaii. The US meanwhile has to drop the Alabama claims and pay the British a pretty penny. Maybe the border is adjusted elsewhere in Britain's favor (48th or 47th parallel east of the rockies? Northern Maine? Islands in the Great lakes?)



upload_2018-12-12_9-52-4.png
 
You'd need a Canada with little prospect of a successful Transcontinental in order for this to pan out, since any Canada with strong prospects in the Prarie Provinces would fight before slamming shut any possability of a Pacific port. If that's the case, Vancouver Island as a whole would be strategically pointless to the UK and so the Sandwich Isles/Hawaii are probably the better bet. In that case, we have a US less interested I oceanic commerce into Asia and a greater focus on developing her Continetal territories. Alaska probably gets a boost here with a direct land connection, particularly once the Yukon Gold Rush kicks in.
 
You'd need a Canada with little prospect of a successful Transcontinental in order for this to pan out, since any Canada with strong prospects in the Prarie Provinces would fight before slamming shut any possability of a Pacific port. If that's the case, Vancouver Island as a whole would be strategically pointless to the UK and so the Sandwich Isles/Hawaii are probably the better bet. In that case, we have a US less interested I oceanic commerce into Asia and a greater focus on developing her Continetal territories. Alaska probably gets a boost here with a direct land connection, particularly once the Yukon Gold Rush kicks in.

Adding British Columbia would not seriously change the calculus which animated American interest the Orient. Heck, not even adding British Columbia and Rupert's Land would do that. Though there's probably a fascinating TL to be done about a situation where the U.S. does get BC and Rupert's Land, leaving a (geographically) rump Canada compared to OTL that's still rather demographically congruent with the early OTL Dominion.
 
The US under Seward's Foreign Policy tried to gain British Columbia from the British in the late 1860s, but ultimately that did not pan out.

What if the US had been able to gain British Columbia and the boundary was set along the continental divide? As far as Pacific bases go, I think Britain either retains Vancouver island or strikes a deal to gain influence over Hawaii. The US meanwhile has to drop the Alabama claims and pay the British a pretty penny. Maybe the border is adjusted elsewhere in Britain's favor (48th or 47th parallel east of the rockies? Northern Maine? Islands in the Great lakes?)

Granting Canada portions of existing States is completely out of the question, especially in the context of the 1860s. However, the British were willing to cede British Columbia without such anyway.

Seward's Attempt to Annex British Columbia, 1865-1869 by David E. Shi (Pacific Historical Review, Vol. 47, No. 2 (May, 1978), pp. 217-238):

The Oxford professor, Goldwin Smith, who later emigrated to Canada, advised Seward that Canada "seems likely (unless our statesmen adopt a different policy) to fall into your hands of itself, perhaps before you want it." The London Times echoed Smith's assessment, reporting that Britain would not object if Canadians wished to join the United States, but if a union was promulgated by force, Her Majesty's government would protest. This was a common view of British scholars and politicians, who had little faith in Canada's future and even less regard for her aspirations for dominion.
___

Between Russian America and Washington Territory lay the British colony of British Columbia. Until 1858 the area had been an underdeveloped and sparsely populated region, serving primarily as an outpost for the Hudson's Bay Company. In that year, however, the discovery of gold brought an influx of American miners. This rapid growth led to the formation of the Crown Colony of British Columbia. Its boundaries extended from the summit of the Rocky Mountains on the east to the Pacific Ocean and the Gulf of Georgia on the west, and from the Finlay branch of the Peace River and the Nass River on the north to the 49th parallel on the south. Vancouver Island remained a separate colony until 1866.

British Columbia's rapid growth and prosperity, however, quickly subsided. By 1865 the colony was in a state of decay, a "poor, struggling, bankrupt colony on the edge of things."' As the gold deposits were depleted, the populace began to drift away, leaving less than 10,000 inhabitants in 1866, three-quarters of whom were of British or Canadian origin. Moreover, since the Hudson's Bay Company owned the territory from the head of the Great Lakes to the Rocky Mountains, the colony remained isolated from the rest of Canada East and West. Consequently, the British Columbians, especially those on Vancouver Island, maintained closer economic and social relations with the western American territories and states than with either Canada or Great Britain.

The belief among many colonists that the Home Office had abandoned them further contributed to their sense of isolation and frustration. During the Civil War, British Columbia alone of the British North American colonies was left undefended. Rear Admiral Joseph Denman informed the Admiralty that the colony did not warrant protection: "I would consider it would be greatly for the interest of England to divest herself of these possessions by any means consistent with honor and with justice to the English settlers." Denman's comments were symptomatic of a general spirit of Little Englandism emerging in Great Britain during the 1860s, a spirit that caused great concern among the colonists in British Columbia.

In such an unstable situation, growing support among the colonists for annexation to the United States represented a logical development. Many were painfully aware of the prosperity and lower taxes prevalent in the neighboring American states. Agitation for annexation began in 1866 and remained a prominent issue for several years. Vancouver Island emerged as the center of support for the movement, particularly the port town of Victoria.

Seward learned of the support in British Columbia for annexation from several sources. In January 1866, he received an extensive report from E. H. Derby, a congressional investigator. Citing the rising discontent among the colonists in British Columbia, Derby suggested that Great Britain cede its Pacific territory to the United States as payment of the Alabama claims:

If Great Britain desires to propitiate this country after all that has occurred, would it not be her true policy to cede to us a portion of her remote territories, valuable to us, but of little value to her? Were she to cede us Vancouver's Island and British Columbia ... might she not easily bring our claims to a peaceful solution...

Seward responded favorably to Derby's suggestion. After sending the report to the Senate for consideration, he began negotiations with Great Britain on the subject.

Discussions concerning the Alabama claims had begun immediately after the Civil War. The main issues were Great Britain's recognition of the Confederacy and her building of Confederate privateers. By 1866 the negotiations had reached an impasse. Seward wanted Britain's policies judged before a neutral arbitration court. Lord Russell refused, arguing that his country's actions were beyond the jurisdiction of any foreign court.

In June 1866, Russell's government fell. As the Conservatives assumed power, conditions appeared favorable for reopening the negotiations. In a lengthy dispatch to the new government, Seward listed the American claims against Great Britain for her part in building the privateers. Lord Stanley, the new Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, finally replied in November, professing his willingness to accept arbitration of the American claims, apart from those involving the right of the British government to recognize a state of belligerency. Seward countered in January 1867, stressing that the individual claims represented only a small part of the much greater losses caused by British actions which had prolonged the war. He implied that he was holding Great Britain responsible for indirect damages that could produce enormous claims. Apparently following the plan outlined earlier in Derby's report, Seward hoped to raise the claims high enough to convince British officials to agree to a quid pro quo settlement, ceding British Columbia in exchange for the claims.

For several months prior to this last dispatch, Seward had been receiving additional evidence from British Columbia indicating substantial support in the colony for annexation. Allen Francis, the American consul in Victoria, reported in September 1866 that "the people of Vancouver Island, and of British Columbia, are almost unanimous in their desire for annexation to the United States." He included an article excerpted from the Victoria Evening Telegraph of September 5, 1866, which characterized British Columbia's relations with the United States as being closer "than our relations with any of the colonies." Two weeks later a public meeting in Victoria voted to request Great Britain to permit annexation to the United States.

Without British Columbia, the Trans-Canada won't get built and thus Western Canada will likely remain sparsely populated with one of the mains settler demographics being American ranchers who were a constant concern of Anglo-Canadian authorities in the area, especially given that their only rail connections to the rest of Canada were dependent upon the United States and that many communities likewise looked to their American counterparts for leadership and security. Long term I'd expect everything west of Ontario to be annexed by the United States.
 
Granting Canada portions of existing States is completely out of the question, especially in the context of the 1860s. However, the British were willing to cede British Columbia without such anyway.

Seward's Attempt to Annex British Columbia, 1865-1869 by David E. Shi (Pacific Historical Review, Vol. 47, No. 2 (May, 1978), pp. 217-238):



Without British Columbia, the Trans-Canada won't get built and thus Western Canada will likely remain sparsely populated with one of the mains settler demographics being American ranchers who were a constant concern of Anglo-Canadian authorities in the area, especially given that their only rail connections to the rest of Canada were dependent upon the United States and that many communities likewise looked to their American counterparts for leadership and security. Long term I'd expect everything west of Ontario to be annexed by the United States.

The American ranchers who were present were invited there during Clifford Sifton's attempt to settle the prairies, if there's a greater worry of American annexation you probably see different demographics recruited instead (more Scandinavians, Germans and Ukranians).
 
Without British Columbia, the Trans-Canada won't get built and thus Western Canada will likely remain sparsely populated with one of the mains settler demographics being American ranchers who were a constant concern of Anglo-Canadian authorities in the area, especially given that their only rail connections to the rest of Canada were dependent upon the United States and that many communities likewise looked to their American counterparts for leadership and security. Long term I'd expect everything west of Ontario to be annexed by the United States.

Unlikely. By 1870 Manitoba was a province of Canada and Rupert's Land was part of Canada, dubbed the Northwest Territories.

Odds are, following the Red River Rebellion, it will be of utmost national security importance to get a railroad out there.

We might see a Canadian west more tightly bound to eastern Canada TTL.

I wonder if Alberta and Saskatchewan will be one province TTL. They tried for it OTL, but Ottowa wanted to weaken western political power and thus made sure the west was admitted as two provinces.
 
Last edited:
Without the Pacific Coast, Canada would be very different. It would be more focused on the Montreal-St. Lawrence-Toronto corridor and a lot more regional differences. It's a 50/50 shot of whether Confederation happens. In the event of multiple Dominions...

  1. Dominion of the Maritimes (Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island) and maybe Newfoundland and Labrador as part
  2. Dominion of Canada (OTL Quebec and Ontario) maybe with Manitoba part of it.
  3. Dominion of the Prairies / Dominion of Alberta (Saskatchewan and Alberta, maybe with Manitoba)
  4. Or, if Newfoundland and Labrador is separate, then a Dominion of Newfoundland
 
Without the Pacific Coast, Canada would be very different. It would be more focused on the Montreal-St. Lawrence-Toronto corridor and a lot more regional differences. It's a 50/50 shot of whether Confederation happens. In the event of multiple Dominions...

  1. Dominion of the Maritimes (Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island) and maybe Newfoundland and Labrador as part
  2. Dominion of Canada (OTL Quebec and Ontario) maybe with Manitoba part of it.
  3. Dominion of the Prairies / Dominion of Alberta (Saskatchewan and Alberta, maybe with Manitoba)
  4. Or, if Newfoundland and Labrador is separate, then a Dominion of Newfoundland

Except Confederation happened before the admission of British Columbia.
 
The American ranchers who were present were invited there during Clifford Sifton's attempt to settle the prairies, if there's a greater worry of American annexation you probably see different demographics recruited instead (more Scandinavians, Germans and Ukranians).

With the rail connections to get them West in Minnesota, it's not going to have much success; why go to Alberta when you can go to the Dakotas, you've already got to pass through there anyway?

Unlikely. By 1870 Manitoba was a province of Canada and Rupert's Land was part of Canada, dubbed the Northwest Territories.

Odds are, following the Red River Rebellion, it will be of utmost national security importance to get a railroad out there.

We might see a Canadian west more tightly bound to eastern Canada TTL.

I wonder if Alberta and Saskatchewan will be one province TTL. They tried for it OTL, but Ottowa wanted to weaken western political power and thus made sure the west was admitted as two provinces.

The Trans-Canada was built due to British Columbia wanting it as a condition of joining Canada, and that political will won't exist here in the ATL. The project very nearly failed repeatedly IOTL and without a Pacific outlet there is no real political or economic basis for the railway as it will be a project that leads to nowhere. Given IOTL the Anglo-Canadians saw Western Canada as North America's Siberia, wracked by rebellions in the era in question and with extensive political (Many Western Canadian communities looked to nearby U.S. states for security and leadership) and economic ties (the Dakotas and Minnesota were Western Caanda's connections to the outside world), selling it to the Americans make sense. Especially given that in this ATL much of its population will be American without the influx the railway brought in.
 
Last edited:
No BC Lions

Would it be the Vancouver Lions or since Detroit would already be the Lions could 've the Cougars or Grizzlies

Would Seattle and Vancouver develope the same?

Seattle would likely be the larger port.

Vancouver would probably not be as big as today. So probably no football team.
 
No BC Lions

Would it be the Vancouver Lions or since Detroit would already be the Lions could 've the Cougars or Grizzlies

Would Seattle and Vancouver develope the same?

Seattle would likely be the larger port.

Vancouver would probably not be as big as today. So probably no football team.

Given how Vancouver is a better port than Seattle, I imagine it'd be a larger city and Seattle would be a smaller one.
 
Top