I think I've come up with a scenario where this could happen. The War of the Regulation is more of a serious threat to the British, so they make concessions to the plantocrats (which also angers the northern colonies, just like the concessions to Quebec did).
When the OTL American Revolution begins, the North is more patriot and the South is more loyalist, so the Patriots see strategic benefit in freeing slaves, which they do, making the South even more loyalist. The freed slaves and northern officers fighting for the Patriots also lead to victory in the South.
After the war, southern leaders are seen as complete traitors, and freed slaves are seen as patriots, so slavery is ended nationwide in the new United States.
Problem is will the South still secede from Britain in this new circumstance?I think I've come up with a scenario where this could happen. The War of the Regulation is more of a serious threat to the British, so they make concessions to the plantocrats (which also angers the northern colonies, just like the concessions to Quebec did).
When the OTL American Revolution begins, the North is more patriot and the South is more loyalist, so the Patriots see strategic benefit in freeing slaves, which they do, making the South even more loyalist. The freed slaves and northern officers fighting for the Patriots also lead to victory in the South.
After the war, southern leaders are seen as complete traitors, and freed slaves are seen as patriots, so slavery is ended nationwide in the new United States.
Problem is will the South still secede from Britain in this new circumstance?
They might not, but there would still be some patriot activity even before northern patriots start marching south. Also Virginia had so many founding fathers, and such a desire to expand west, that it will probably join the revolution anyway.
Okay, let's try this:
1) Slavery is not established by positive law in the US. It's left as no-actual-legal-status one way or the other.
2) British North America is incorporated as parliamentary constituencies. They're unfairly large per MP, but it's representation.
3) Therefore, it's part of England. Therefore the Somerset ruling applies.
4) Slavery is not legal.
Okay, let's try this:
1) Slavery is not established by positive law in the US. It's left as no-actual-legal-status one way or the other.
2) British North America is incorporated as parliamentary constituencies. They're unfairly large per MP, but it's representation.
3) Therefore, it's part of England. Therefore the Somerset ruling applies.
4) Slavery is not legal.
Yeah, but the South alone wouldn't be able to win that I think.If that happened the southern colonies would probably rebel early.
IIRC,there were other geographical factors that led to the north becoming more industrialized.Would the South industrialize at equal capability to the North in this scenario? Double the industrial capacity of the US by the mid 19th century?
IIRC,there were other geographical factors that led to the north becoming more industrialized.
IIRC,there were other geographical factors that led to the north becoming more industrialized.