Britain declares war on the Union in 1862....

67th Tigers

Banned
If DuPont sets up manure farms immediately, and the US accepts the harvests will collapse.

The answer is probably no. 7.7 million pounds of powder were used that year by the Ordnance dept alone, not including the Navy. This is around twice the stock held.
 

MrP

Banned
King Gorilla said:
Good point, but if the need is there it will be done and human waste would probably become a very important source of it. Otherwise Union blockade runners will do the same things the confederates did for needed war materials.

Could be problematic, that. Britain's the major source for world purchase of this stuff. Y'can go directly to the South Americas to buy it - but that necessitates either going directly past the RN bases off the CS coast or past the Rebels' ports or directly out into the Atlantic, and down, avoiding everything. Certainly possible, but very aggravating and difficult compared to breaking the OTL USN blockade which was fairly close to the shore.

Human waste will only become a useful source after a long time, and I'd expect the war to have reached a conclusion by then. If the war has carried on for an entire year, the USA will be an economic wreck and quite incapable of taking on the South merely for financial reasons.
 

MrP

Banned
67th Tigers said:
If DuPont sets up manure farms immediately, and the US accepts the harvests will collapse.

The answer is probably no. 7.7 million pounds of powder were used that year by the Ordnance dept alone, not including the Navy. This is around twice the stock held.

Ah, good man! Knew we could rely on you for the figures. :)
 
67th Tigers said:
If DuPont sets up manure farms immediately, and the US accepts the harvests will collapse.

The answer is probably no. 7.7 million pounds of powder were used that year by the Ordnance dept alone, not including the Navy. This is around twice the stock held.

So the US essentially has to tell the navy to sail into harbour and hand over its powder, the ravine craft have to hand over their powder and all forts have to be stripped of their powder.

The US also has to cease all training shooting.

And even then the US is probably going to have to be very choosy in what battles it fights if it hopes to have even a remote chance of seeing out the year.

Very bleak reading for the US.
 

67th Tigers

Banned
Even better, I find this a couple of pages on:

http://cdl.library.cornell.edu/cgi-...otisid=ANU4519-0123&coll=moa&frames=1&view=50

Powder stocks at begining of ACW: 1.1 million lbs (and 3.8m of Saltpetre)
Purchased in first year of the war: 7.7 million lbs (and 5.2m lbs of Saltpetre, all imported from the UK)
Issued to field army: 7.7 million lbs
Remaining stock: 1.1 million lbs (the remaining figure of Saltepetre is clearly an error, Saltpetre is used to make powder, and hence not issued. Since 2/3rd by mass of Gunpowder is Saltpetre, we can work out remaining stocks were enough for another 5.8 million pounds)


Assuming all imports of Saltpetre were post Trent (ISTR that the ships ceased in port were the first run, of about 1,500 tons of Saltpetre), that gives the US enough for 6.8 million pounds of powder, which will limit operations.
 
MrP said:
Could be problematic, that. Britain's the major source for world purchase of this stuff. Y'can go directly to the South Americas to buy it - but that necessitates either going directly past the RN bases off the CS coast or past the Rebels' ports or directly out into the Atlantic, and down, avoiding everything. Certainly possible, but very aggravating and difficult compared to breaking the OTL USN blockade which was fairly close to the shore.

Human waste will only become a useful source after a long time, and I'd expect the war to have reached a conclusion by then. If the war has carried on for an entire year, the USA will be an economic wreck and quite incapable of taking on the South merely for financial reasons.

True, I would agree with you, but this scenario is on the long war, rather than a major southern victory, british recognitian, negotiated peace shortly thereafter. The US would try to scramble up as much saltpeter as it could through hook or crook inorder to continue keep out british and hold onto as much of the south (boarderstates) as they could. The blockade would hurt the north but otherstates have undergone worse forms of enforced economic isolation and still managed fight on for years and years.
 

MrP

Banned
King Gorilla said:
True, I would agree with you, but this scenario is on the long war, rather than a major southern victory, british recognitian, negotiated peace shortly thereafter. The US would try to scramble up as much saltpeter as it could through hook or crook inorder to continue keep out british and hold onto as much of the south (boarderstates) as they could. The blockade would hurt the north but otherstates have undergone worse forms of enforced economic isolation and still managed fight on for years and years.

I don't think that's feasible. Not given the gunpowder stats produced by 67th, old boy. They'd be pretty buggered. :(

I'll just PM Tielhard about this thread, he's been looking for stuff like this for a while. :)
 
Darkling said:
Which is exactly why the force with the shortest supply line has the advantage, the British just need to win a battle or two there to establish their claim on the region.



That sizeable force will have to see off all the forces Britain can assemble in Canada and the Canadian militia.

But let’s talk specifics, where is this sizeable force coming from?

And holding Niagara isn’t enough if there is enough shipping in British hands on Erie and Superior to supply a British force, all the British need then is Detroit.



It isn't an invasion of the US in general it is an occupation force to establish a British force in Minnesota (if they want to claim Minnesota West), the British just need to mark their presence there so they can claim that and all points west to the Rockies to be under their control.
Your right they can't hold Niagara so they just blow the locks to hell and no ships are getting tothe upper lakes for a year or so. As for resources on the upper lakes I don't see Canada having an advantage in ship building therefore supplying an invasion of Minn is going to be hard,you just want a small occupation in Minn for treaty puposes to 10 or 20 K starving redcoats count. I will agree that the UK/Canada may have the numbers in manpower but you need to be able to supply those men and Minn is on the far end of a fragile supply line. As I said you want to take land from the US in this war find a place you can take and KEEP IN SUPPLY. When you talk about an interior invasion of either the US or Canada your talking Russian distances with weather only marginally better,and infrastructures to match. A major part of the ACW that is forgotten was the Logistics struggle. AT this point the US rail net is going to be able to reenforce the Lake Front at speeds the UK can't hope to match.Her best option is to pick either a New England attack or join Lee in VA. You have stated time and again that the UK has more manpower,that may be so,but starving troops that are out of ammo are not going to accomplish what you want,and while Britannia Rules the Waves"Prarie Schooners weren't ships.
 
Ghost 88 said:
Your right they can't hold Niagara so they just blow the locks to hell and no ships are getting tothe upper lakes for a year or so.

Which buys the US a year, assuming they can actually take the locks in eth first place.

As for resources on the upper lakes I don't see Canada having an advantage in ship building therefore supplying an invasion of Minn is going to be hard,

By the looks of it the US is going to have more trouble finding powder for ships than building ships.

Anyway before the US or Britain is able to build/refit warships on the lakes Britain will be able to move troops (assuming again that sufficient ships are available) to attack Minnesota and raid any port capable of producing ships on Lake Superior or Michigan.

you just want a small occupation in Minn for treaty puposes to 10 or 20 K starving redcoats count.

If they hold the ground then they do count.

I will agree that the UK/Canada may have the numbers in manpower but you need to be able to supply those men and Minn is on the far end of a fragile supply line.

Canada has a rail outlet on Lake Huron, it’s just a supply line over the lakes to Duluth and then 5 days march on a road overland to St Paul.

As I said you want to take land from the US in this war find a place you can take and KEEP IN SUPPLY.

And once again that place in Minnesota.

When you talk about an interior invasion of either the US or Canada your talking Russian distances with weather only marginally better,and infrastructures to match.

I'm talking 100 miles from seaborne transportation along a road, it isn't exactly marching through Georgia (although of course that was pulled off).

A major part of the ACW that is forgotten was the Logistics struggle. AT this point the US rail net is going to be able to reenforce the Lake Front at speeds the UK can't hope to match.

You actually need those troops first before you start worrying whether you can get them somewhere fast enough.

Although I’m unsure whether the US rail net actually extends to Minnesota by this point (the earliest reference I can find is work started in 1870 to connect via Iowa to St Louis).

Her best option is to pick either a New England attack or join Lee in VA.

New England where the distances involved are just as large if not larger?

As for fighting in Virginia, that is of no benefit to Britain and Britain will do its usual peripheral campaign.

You have stated time and again that the UK has more manpower,that may be so,but starving troops that are out of ammo are not going to accomplish what you want,and while Britannia Rules the Waves"Prarie Schooners weren't ships.

And your idea that the British can't supply a modest force over a 100 mile road is quite an interesting one.
 
King Gorilla said:
Yeah, a British expeditionary force joining Lee sounds like the most likely scenario for this timeline.

Britain tended to avoid getting involved in the main conflict, that was what allies were for.

Britain sailed around, attacked in strategically important but peripheral areas and provided economic aid to their allies.

Of course if the French are involved then Napoleon is likely to want to get involved in some grand campaign and that may pressure Britain into getting involved but I imagine the British would decide to fight along the Mississippi and possibly try to open a Southern route in Minnesota.
 

67th Tigers

Banned
Ummm,

Assuming the Brits are serious, maybe:

The 80,000 men, plus Canadians planned for in Canada and the Maritimes, busy trying to keep the US away from the Beauharnois Canal. Imagine this as the "Eastern Theatre" of the Anglo-American war, with Maine as the Shenandoah.

A detachment of the Indian Army occupies San Francisco (with maybe 30,000 men, this was typical of the expeditionary forces launched from India at the time). They range forward and snap up the little 200 man outposts the US has dotted over the west.

Milne gets his dream, and sails up the Chesapeake, taking forts as he goes and landing 10-20,000 regulars and marines in direct support of the Army of Northern Virginia.

Any Minnesota venture is likely to be small. However, a few thousand troops is prettymuch all that's needed. The US has nothing to defend Minnesota. This is a pretty good opportunity to use Canadian Rangers and Indians, since a search through the official war records for "British" mostly returns reports of "British backed" Indians raiding Minnesota etc. from Canada anyway.
 
Grimm Reaper said:
I adore the innocence of some here but even in 1939 France was Nazi Germany's top trade partner so if having Hitler in power didn't damage Franco-German trade then...

Sorry to nitpick but I saw this and had to check the facts. So coming from the Encyclopaedia Britannica from 1946 I found 1938 trade statistics and France only accounted for 3.6% of Germany's foreign trade. Unless in 1939 Franco-German trade skyrocketed?

Sources of German Imports in 1938 ($2,188,657,000)
1. United States 8.3%
2. United Kingdom 5.7%
3. Italy 5.2%
4. Sweden 4.9%
5. Argentina 4.4%
6. Brazil 4.0%
7. Netherlands 3.8%
8. Czechoslovakia 3.5%
9. France 2.9%

Destination for German Exports in 1938 ($2,111,421,000)
1. Netherlands 8.7%
2. United Kingdom 7.1%
3. Italy 6.6%
4. Sweden 5.2%
5. France 4.4%
 

67th Tigers

Banned
Grimm Reaper said:
67th Tigers, your scenario in the ACW is impossible.

Your ideas for New York, New Jersey and New England are simply absurd. None of them have the slightest interest in seceding. Arizona and New Mexico is a single territory and pro-Southern sentiment extremely weak, what with an estimated 22 slaves owned. Likewise Missouri and possibly Kentucky.

Such an effort by the British will leave the US no choice but to fight a long and bloody war for survival, guaranteeing massive British casualties and economic losses until some crisis elsewhere forces the British to scale back their demands dramatically to little beyond CSA independence.

...once you are forced to accept that most of your goals must be surrendered, continuing fighting over a few border territories gets very old...​

Now you have a US which will still be the strongest nation on the North American continent with a guaranteed hatred for the British, and a Great Britain whose reputation in the world is smeared horribly.

It also requires a complete reversal of just about every attitude in the British government for all this to get started but...

Maine seems to have had the strongest seccessionist bent, at least I keep finding one sentence references to it in papers, but haven't yet found a paper on Maine politics in that era.

NY City certainly did come very close to seccession during the war. That said, they had a fairly corrupt government. The US had to keep NYC garrisoned not against attack, but against the mood of the populace, much like Baltimore.

That said, all the die hard unionists had effectively removed themselves from local politics by joining the Army. The same thing happened in Ireland in 1916 (the majority Redmondites joined the forces, leaving only the Marxist ICA and IV).

I'd agree the scenario is unlikely, the British did certainly consider allowing Maine to join Canada if it petitioned (and if they did they probably occupy it for the rail links). However, it only requires a change to Britain viewing this as a real war before committees start looking at other ways to geographically extend the conflict and use the British advantage in mobility. California is obvious (diverts no resources from elsewhere since it can be run out of India and Vancouver). Minnesota requires a zealous officer who understands Indian fighting in Manitoba.

"Backwaters" like California, Oregon and Dakota, Minnesota, New Mexico etc. are not likely to see massive armies, since noone can sustain massive armies in that area, not even the US (except the West Coast, which the British can supply from the sea). Once things get to the peace conference (settled by matters in the East) it will come down to bargaining, and having a few hundred soldiers in a territory will become major chips. When it comes to gains, all sides will want California....
 
Grimm Reaper said:
The US had @76 million people in 1900, the CSA would have been roughly 15 million of them but note that the south was also the greatest opponent of mass immigration into the US. So the US has @61 million in 1900 and more like 68 million in 1914, the CSA and Canada together have about 23 million in 1914 so it's a touch short of 3 to 1.
This presumes that other factors stay the same. They may well not. Plus your ignoring a lot of immigration to the US that almost certainly won't occur, ditto investment. Given the political circumstances mentioned a measure of those funds and population will also go to Canada or the CSA. Furthermore, even if the US has a 2-1 or 3-1 numerical edge they still have to consider what Britain can put in.

stevep, my point was the British in the 19th Century were very unlikely to even attempt the total war described above. If the hostility I suggested takes place it would be because the British did not consider the long-term effects, never because the British wanted an all-out fight to the death.

In brief, it might(or might not) happen due to British error but never by British intent.
What total war?:confused: Britain declares war because the Us refuses to apologise for breaking international law in the Trent incident. The US is blockaged and border fighting occurs. British actions will probably be largely defencive. However if, as suggested by most Americans, the US refuses to come to terms it will probably start using its naval mobility to raid or attack isolated areas where it can easily outnumber the Americans. I don't expect Britain will start using the sort of burnt earth policies the US used in defeating the Confederacy. [Possibly if the Us makes large scale destructive raids into Canada but even in 1814 we showed a lot of restrained at Washington]. If the US continues for more than a couple of years things may get rough but the primary damage will be to the US economy from the bloackage and its own actions. In those circumstances I could see Britain regaining what's now Washington state and possibly some minor border changes. Think it would take a long and bloody war, with a very obstinate US to get the sort of border changes 67th Tigers mentioned in his extreme scenario. If so there might be long hostility toward Britain, amongst others, but the US would be a lot weaker than anything in our timeline.

If the UK owes the US anything like the money owed in 1918 and defaults, I doubt that any nation will ever give London help again without being paid up front. Of course, little consolation prizes like Hawaii, Bermuda, Jamaica, etc might be mentioned.
I can't see britain defaulting but then given the modified circumstances I doubt if they would have anything like the debts they had historically. There was a mention in one of those US/UK war threads of the US seizing UK assets in the early stages of such a conflict, which might well be likely. If so the US would be even more screwed economically for probably a generation afterwards.

Why would France and the UK being bogged down in North America make Bismark less aggressive?:confused:
Depends on what you mean by booged down. A blockage using small proprtions of the RN and some forces to defend against attacks and hit vulnerable areas. If the French are involved as well, given the number of experienced troops they could put into the field the US would struggle pretty quickly even without the blockage effects.

I think the main hatred would probably be directed against Lincoln and Stewart for their stupidily in picking such a conflict and then persisting with it for so long.

Steve
 
Last edited:
stevep said:
Think it would take a long and bloody war, with a very obstinate US to get the sort of border changes Darkling mentioned in his extreme scenario.

Indeed that was what I was going for, really it would be up to the US to escalate things.

Initially Britain would just want to defend Canada, destroy the blockade and force the Americans to apologise.

IF the US attempts an invasion of Canada and/or privateering then Britain would begin active cooperation with the CSA and welcome France into the war with a joint recognition of the CSA.

If he US still refuses to come to terms then the British will start looking to pick up territory.

If the US drags its heals for a considerable amount of time then Britain will end up controlling the US west coast and areas around the great lakes, once thousands of British lives and millions of pounds have been spent in such a war parliament will have great difficulty not keep some of it's gains.

In essence it is like I said earlier, what Britain picks up depends upon how difficult the US wants to make life for itself.

If so there might be long hostility toward Britain, amongst others, but the US would be a lot weaker than anything in our timeline.

As an intellectual exercise lets look at potential weakness.

Assuming OTL settlement patterns (i.e. any lost Americans to BNA are replaced by British and Canadians not going to the US) then in the Doomsday scenario the population would be like this.

BNA (former US): 5,868,547
BNA: 5,301,000
Total BNA: 11,169,547

CSA: 28,140,034

US: 41,510,258

Allied total in North America: 39,309,591

The allies also have considerably more territory that the US must conquer.

Of course if this scenario involves British help to the French in Mexico as a quid pro quo we could also have a friendly and somewhat more stable Mexico with 13.6 million people.

I think the main hatred would probably be directed against Lincoln and Stewart for their stupidily in picking such a conflict and then persisting with it for so long.

I could easily see that as well, nobody likes a loser so the Republican party isn’t going to fair well after this war and their enemies will most likely heap blame for the war on them ( “we should have just let the South leave we are a democracy”, “that Abolitionist tyrant Lincoln drove them out”, “what idiocy to board British ships and then not apologise”).

That would also be useful to businessmen who just want to get back to trading with the South and Britain.
 
Last edited:

67th Tigers

Banned
An attempt to bang together a timeline.

"A Very Different 1862"

Jan 62: London receives Lincoln's refusal to release the prisoners. The country is in uproar. Palmerston authorises the activation of the Militia, approves the plan to allow the Volunteer Army to send volunteers and sanctions the Particular Service Squadrons to sail. Canadian Militia are called out en mass, around 25% of the Canadian Beat Militia respond (this is roughly historical).

Feb 62: Goldsborough is no fool. He abandons the blockade and ships as many men to New England as possible, concentrating his forces at Hampton Roads in the Chesapeake. Milne hits him there, the Battle of Hampton Roads is a major British victory. Border raids occur around Canada. Fort Detroit and Fort Montgomery (neither of which are well garrisoned) fall to the British. Fort Monroe comes under naval bombardment from British armoured warships, although reduced, the Fort refuses surrender, and Milne hasn't the land forces for a ground assault. He withdraws, leaving a blockading squadron. In New York, USS Monitor is commissioned and remains in NY harbour, expecting a British attack. Grant starts his penetration of the Mississippi and Cumberland Rivers, capturing Nashville.

Mar 62: With the forces evacuated from the South, the Union forms the Army of the St. Lawrence, Ambrose Burnside commanding, with Sherman as his second. They move north, invest and overwhelm Fort Montgomery with severe casualties. The British blockade of the Union is completed. News starts to reach other outposts. The British and American West African Squadrons fight an action that is essentially a series of single ship duels, resulting in Americas first naval victory of the war, although the Americans are forced to quit and steam for America. McClellan's Peninsula campaign is nigh on impossible, Fort Monroe has fallen to Johnston's Army of Northern Virginia, instead

April 62: The St Lawrence opens to navigation, tens of thousands of British regulars pour into Montreal. The Union Army of the St. Lawrence advances in Canada, seeking to cut the Beauharnois Canal by aiming straight for Montreal. Burnside's 50,000 man Army meets 25,000 British regulars, plus a similiar number of Canadian militia and is repulsed making a series of bloody frontal assaults at British prepared positions. Burnside withdraws from Canada towards Lake Champlain, but loses a considerable number of troops during the march to British cavalry. American newspapers consider the horror of the battle shocking.

USS Galena is commissioned, and joins Monitor in defending NY. Lincoln calls for 300,000 new enlistments, they start trickling in as states form new Volunteer Regiments.

In the West, Shiloh does occur on schedule, however, with no possibility of a naval attack on New Orleans, Johnston is able to spare an additional 15,000 men for the assault, and has gunboats on the Tennessee, while the Union is a Division weaker than in OTL. Hardee's Corps flanks the Federals and Grant is reduced to an orbis against the river, Wallace's Division is beaten off. On the 2nd day, Buell's Army does not cross the Tennessee, but rather covers the withdrawal of the remainder of Grant's Army, before CS gunboats cut them off. Shiloh is a stunning victory for the CS, with 10,000 casualties to 30,000 Yankees (mostly captured when they couldn't cross the Tennessee). The remaining Federals fall back to Nashville. Johnston pursues and the Union withdraws from Nashville.

In the Eastern theatre, the other Johnston is sent as special advisor to Milne, leaving General Lee in command of the Army of Northern Virginia (well, I had too....). Lee decides to settle this war by invading the north and makes his preparations.

The CO, Vancouver, blockades San Francisco.

May 62: Lee attacks McClellan's Army of the Potomac around Manassas junction in what history would call the 2nd battle of Manassas. McClellan's Army is dispersed, trying to defend all axis of approach to Washington, and his 60,000 man wing at Manassas is facing an Army of Northern Virginia reinforced by forces previously containing the Union in the Carolinas and Georgia. Lee's 90,000 men smash Pope's Wing, but Lee is not able to convert this into the complete destruction of Pope. With Pope out of the way, Lee moves to invade the North.

Johnston, in talks with Milne, agrees to have the CS support a British amphibious assault on Baltimore, while the AoP is busy with Lee in June.

In the West, the other Johnston decides to invade Kentucky. A detachment under Bragg recaptures Forts Henry and Donaldson. Johnston advances on Bowling Green, and engages Buells Army of the Ohio (which has incorporated the remains of Grant's Army of the Tennessee), while Beauregard takes a detachment and seizes Munfordville. While tactically Buell does better than Johnston, he is massively outnumbered, and on hearing Munfordville (his line of supply and retreat) has fallen, is forced to surrender his Army, ending the campaign for Kentucky.

The Army of Nova Scotia (20,000 regulars and 30,000 militia), noting that Maine did not decided to seceed, advances to Portland, and secures the Eastern terminus of the Canadian Grand Trunk railway. Williams detachs off an "Army of Michigan" (20,000 regulars and 10,000 militia volunteers) to campaign in the area of Detroit, leaving him with just 20,000 regulars and 30,000 militia in the vinicity of Montreal, and just 20,000 militia on the Niagara peninsula.

The governor of Manitoba makes an adventure into Minnesota, with a column of just 4,000, including just one regular British regiment but many French speaking Canadians and Indians.

An Army arrives at San Francisco from India (30,000). Find the port defences too tough, the Army lands 5 miles up the coast, and takes San Francisco by land.

Monitor, Galena and a number of small Wooden ships sortee against the British at Long Island Sound. The British, aware of Monitor, have placed an Armoured Frigate covering this approach, HMS Defence, in addition to several wooden warships (including 2 Steam Liners and a Large Frigate). The Monitor finds she can't hurt Defence, while the same is true the other way around. However, after 2 hours, a 68 pounder ball from Defence strikes Monitors thinly armoured deck and pierces, an hour later Monitor flounders due to taking on too much water. Galena finds her armour totally ineffective. HMS Queen rakes her for 20 minutes before finally boarding and taking her a prize.

June 62

Burnside has rebuilt his Army. He now has 60,000 men, mostly new recruits who've been in the Army 6 weeks. He doubts his ability to take Montreal, and so digs in. Burnside and Williams face each other off.

The Army of Nova Scotia finds that the people of Maine aren't too averse to the occupation. They even manage to raise a brigade of local troops (mostly from the garrison that surrendered). The Maine born Joseph Chamberlin is appointed Colonel of the King's Maine Regiment, attached directly to the Army as they start to head further west, amazed by the lack of resistance. New Hampshire falls with hardly a shot being fired, and it isn't until they reach the Green Mountains of Vermont that raids on their supply lines by local partisans stop their advance.

Lee's invasion of the north begins. Lee immediately suffers when many of his men refuse to invade the north, reducing his Army to 75,000 men. Crossing the Blue Ridge near South Mountain, and sweeping away McClellan's detachments, he is intercepted near Sharpsburg. The Battle of Sharpsburg is a resounding Confederate Victory,since McClellan is actually slightly outnumbered (75,000 CSA vs 70,000 USA) and considerably outgeneralled, Longstreet's Corps makes a wide right flanking maneouvre, enveloping the Federal left, while Stuart's Cavalry Corps moves to cut off the retreat. McClellan withdraws up the Hagerstown Pike, consolidating to the North with only 40,000 men. He then moves East towards Gettysburg where he hopes to turn south and reunite his army.

Meanwhile, at Baltimore, Milne's squadron reduces the defences of the Harbour and he lands Marines and troops, 6,000 of them. Wool's Division moves to meet them in fierce house to house fighting, but his superior numbers (10,000) are without combat experience. The British seize Baltimore.

Lee wastes no time. Detaching a wing of his Army under Jackson (20,000) to pursue McClellan, he takes the remaining 45,000 towards Washington. Jackson engages in another battle with McClellan at Hagerstown, with McClellan trying to entrain his army. McClellan gets 20,000 out, while the remaining 20,000 are casualties or captured by Jackson. Knowing he can do no more good here. Jackson marchs east to rejoin Lee.

Lee heads for Baltimore, linking up with the British, from there they advance towards Washington.

July 62:

The Siege of Washington

Washington is extremely well fortified, and is considered to be tougher than Sevastapol was. The British however know how to conduct a seige, and they're brought along a large siege train. The Siege of Washington will continue for several months yet.

In the West, Johnston decides he won't be upstaged by Lee. He decides to make not one, but two offensives. One up the Mississippi to St. Louis and one up the Ohio to Cinncinnati (under Beauregard). Given the confused state of the Union forces in the theatre, and the new riverine gunboats the CS has purchased off the British he is wildly successful.

August 62

The Siege of Washington continues, McClellan withdraws accross the Susquehanna, trying to consolidate and gather all the men he can.

Meanwhile, the Nova Scotian Army has crossed Vermont and Burnside has decided the time is right to move on them. . He orders a concentration against them, with his Army. Burnsides 75,000 are confronted by 15,000 British regulars and 25,000 Canadians. They even include a small number of Americans who've enlisted. Burnside shows he's learnt his lessons well, but despite inflicting more casualties than he receives (8,000 British vs 5,000 Americans) he is forced to quit the field to avoid encirclement when Williams Army pursues him. 8 days later another battle occurs in the Hudson River valley, with Burnside on the defensive. He stops the British at the cost of 20,000 men (vs 20,000 Brits), and withdraws further to cover New York City and Boston.

September 62

Washington falls. Despite everything, the US still do not surrender and Lincoln, now in New York, vows to continue fighting.

Johnston reaches and captures Pittsburgh, cutting the US in two.

All that remains is the final act. Since the US won't surrender, Philadelphia, New York City and Boston must be taken.

USS New Ironsides is commissioned at Philadelphia

October 62

Milne leads 7 armoured frigates into Boston Harbour, at the head of the British fleet. He reduces Boston and raids the Harbour, taking many prizes and firing the remainder before withdrawing.

New York explodes. The war has always been deeply unpopular there and the Mayor of NYC declares New York an Open City, effectively secceeding and avoiding a British attack.

November 62

Lincoln, on board USS New Ironsides, meets Admiral Milne and General Lee off Philadelphia. He offers the surrender of the United States.

In the coming negotiations, the CS gain recognition, and include the New Mexico, Arizonia, Indian Territories, as well as Maryland, Missouri, Kentucky and the return of Western Virginia.

The US recognises the independence of California and the other western provinces (under effective suzerainity of the British), the Independence of Indian territories around the Dakotas and Minnesota (again, under effective British suzerainity), New York City, and the annexation of New England by the British.

Long term, the US never becomes a Great Power. Denied the west, and the money it brings in there was never the economic draw to bring in new settlers. In 1914, the US population was only 24 million, against 25 million in Greater California and 31 million (including the now freed Blacks in the CSA following the 1867 ruling that every Negro child born after that date was considered Free).
 
Top