French Canada and a Successful American Revolution

[Martinus Paduei]

In another thread, the initial post writer is discussiing a possible timeline where the British keep Guadaloupe and return Canada after the Seven Years War. Presuming this is the case, will there still be an American Revolution? I think that there might well be, and if so, with the French in Canada, it may well be over more quickly. That said, the nascent alt-USA may not get all the land it did OTL. Would France take Rupert's Land? Territory around the Great Lakes? All the way down to the Ohio River? The whole Mississippi Basin? Or would the alt-USA have more or less what it had OTL? Or in addition, perhaps some of the the British colonies in Canada as well (Nova Scotia/Newfoundland/New Brunswick/Prince Edward Island) especially if they revolted along with the OTL 13 colonies? And what about the alt-USA gaining Bermuda and/or British territories in the Caribbean?

I have a few ideas, but I am really interested to see what the board thinks.

 

[Wendell]

I don't really see how this is possible. If the French keep Canada AND the lands between the Mississippi, then the English colonies are more tightly held on the East Coast, and likely benefit financially from the new Caribbean colonies. If, however, France keeps Canada but NOT the Trans-Appalachian lands, then Britain has incentives in this timeline to allow white settlement of those areas, and therefore much of the impetus of the war for independence is diminished.

 

[Avrorrange]

The stimulus for the revolution would have to be stronger.With the French as the bogeyman,the Americans are more likely to suck up to Britain's demands.Maybe much higher taxes than originally proposed.Another problem with France around is that the British government no longer 'owns' the lands across the Apalachian Mountains that it forbade colonists from settling.

 

[Matteo]

They may indeed. But to what point will they support new taxes and the monopoly Britain wanted to retain on trade and certain productions ?

Another point is that if time is given to them, the settlers of the 13 colonies may understand and accept that french colonies will block them east of the Appalachians but not threaten their existence.

 

[Umbric Man]

I made a topic on this once. At 1763:

-'Canada' is probably reduced to OTL Upper and Lower Canada.
-Rupert's Land, Nova Scotia, and Newfoundland are still British.
-The Old Northwest and Southwest Territories are likely British due to being so far off from Canada and Montcalm's genius and captured by a mix of Anglo-American troops not under the main forces of Wolfe and Amherst at Canada.
-New Brunswick and PEI can go either way. If they are French they will be Acadia Part Two. If Britain captures them in 1755 like OTL they'll be settled by Yankees, again like OTL.

If the ARW happens it still occurs due to taxation and land pressure, and that still can happen if Britain controls all land east of the MS River. Canada is still a dagger but a much lesser one due to the colonies having access to the Mississippi and new Great Lakes borders.

Nova Scotia will not revolt if it does not have access due to New Brunswick/PEI. It may try to if it does, since a good number of Patriot Scotians settled in NB. But the British naval base in North America is there and so NS has an extremely uphill battle like OTL to somehow revolt. In this world they still have Canada to worry on, too.

Bermuda is pro-patriot but its island status is also making it look uphill as heck. Same for Newfoundland.

Rupert's Land was conquered but merely plundered by France in the real ARW. Here, still holding Canada, they may keep it.

So in short, for the alt-Peace of Paris:

-OTL USA
-French North America holding the Canadas, likely Rupert's Land, and if they kept them in 1763, NB/PEI.
-British Nova Scotia OR Maritimes (if they took NB/PEI in the Seven Years' War) and Newfoundland.
-The West Indies as in 1783 of reality.

 

[raharris1973]

Rupert's Land was conquered but merely plundered by France in the real ARW.

really? I had no idea.

 

[bm79]

In this scenario, we are only talking about the return of Upper and Lower Canada (including Labrador) and Cape Breton and Prince Edward Islands. NB and mainland NS were ceded to England back in 1713 and would not have been on the table. As for Louisiana, the French had ceded it to the Spanish in a separate treaty before the POD, with the Spanish ceding the lands east of the Mississippi to the British during the Treaty of Paris.

This could be an interesting timeline to develop. Imagine the consternation in the colonies to see Canada returned to the French, after all the lives lost and money spent, after having fought valiantly and pushed their enemy off the continent, because London decided that sugar revenues were more important than the safety of their American cousins. Imagine the propaganda value that decision would give to those seeking independence.

On the other hand, the issue of taxes would be mooted in this scenario, since the continued French presence to the north would justify higher defense cost. Also, the Proclamation of 1763 closing the trans Appalachian lands to settlement could be butterflied away, since there would be neither any need to placate the tribes who'd previously fought on the French side (since now they can move to French lands if they like), and there's no longer any desire to redirect any settlement northwards to try to dilute the French population in Canada.

 

[yulzari]

Gosh. It could even mean that the Americans might be willing to pay for their own defence instead of expecting Britain to do it for free.