French Canada and US Independence

POD: Maximin de Bompart and his French Fleet gets better winds and manages to relieve the French Colony of Guadeloupe. Because of this, the British never take Guadeloupe in the Seven years war (1755-1763) and although the British conquer Canada, the French get it back in the Peace Treaty. (Whatever arguments are made that the Treaty of Versailles in 1918 was too harsh, the Treaty of Paris in 1763 could very easily be argued in the other direction)

Are the colonies willing to revolt with the spectre of the French Empire so close? OTOH, it means that the efforts of the colonists in fighting against the French & Indians were more or less wasted.

If so, does France consider helping the Colonists revolt, or would they be viewed as a threat to the French Empire and as such largely ignored?

If they do revolt, is supply to the Rebels easier?

And, given that in this scenario that French Posession more or less completely surrround a new USA (other than Florida), how long until the USA's expansion puts all of the Continental French posessions at risk?
 
POD: Maximin de Bompart and his French Fleet gets better winds and manages to relieve the French Colony of Guadeloupe. Because of this, the British never take Guadeloupe in the Seven years war (1755-1763) and although the British conquer Canada, the French get it back in the Peace Treaty. (Whatever arguments are made that the Treaty of Versailles in 1918 was too harsh, the Treaty of Paris in 1763 could very easily be argued in the other direction)

Presuming the British don't take Guadeloupe at another point, or don't still keep some or all of Canada...

(Pitt, remember, wanted to keep going and break the French Empire for all time).

The Spanish were reticent to support the American Revolution precisely because they bordered the young republic. I suspect the same factors would influence the French, but they might also see the Americans as potential vassals, as they saw the US to an extent in OTL.
 
The British colonists would no doubt be unhappy that had conquered were given away once again, just as had happened in the previous war. On the other hand you would not get the tensions that emerged from the Quebec Act and the Line of Proclamation (the British would likely get the Ohio country and encourage their colonists to settle there).

The colonists would also feel encircled by the Bourbon powers: Spanish Florida to the South, French Canada to the North, and French-allied tribes making raids to the West. They would thus be much more willing to see, and pay for, British troops to counter this threat. (IOTL part of the anger came from the fact they were paying for British troops to stop them from expanding West!)

I would also agree that the French would be reluctant to back them, if you even got to the point where colonies decided to rebel. Not only does it set a precedent of an independence movement for Canada, but it also challenges the idea of Royal power. IOTL the King did not have the issue of the former, and was worried to accept the latter on the basis that France desperately needed to weaken Britain after the Peace of Paris. A more even peace treaty would make them less desperate.
 
The issue of paying for defence would seem less of a problem if the French were still on their borders

Also what state are the Iroquois in by this time? Would they be resurgant if France recovers its lands?

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 
Top