Oh, it is definitely the least viable of the three options. Even in OTL when they declared independence, said independence only lasted for 14 years so it would not be for long ITTL either. It would be temporary at best. Also, if anyone has any other options in mind other than those in t poll, feel free to say so.
I say make it a province in its own right.
 
So it looks like the fate of Vermont was decided by an absolute majority but not by as much of one as I expected. Surprising. Anyway, the next part should be ready by tomorrow.
 
Chapter Four: The Moment of Truth
Chapter Four: The Moment of Truth

1613489454732.png

After the Royal British army surrendered at Boston on March 20, much of British North America turned quiet. George Washington had left Boston on April 4 to head back to Philadelphia, reaching New York City on April 13. General William Howe was waiting for additional supplies, including additional fleets to replace those lost by the American colonists up on Dorchester Heights. The British fleet finally left Boston Harbor on April 9, temporarily stationing in Halifax, Nova Scotia before arriving in London on April 28 for supplies. Back in Massachusetts, news about the British surrender and departure from Boston spread like wildfire. The reaction, while celebratory across the board, was rather mixed. Some were convinced that the British leaving was enough to put down their weapons and make peace. Others became more uproarious, empowered that if the Minutemen could defeat the British, what reason would there be for a rebellion to not continue to grow. Either way, the euphoria was highly visible throughout the entire colony from Boston to the Berkshires.

Elsewhere, there remained minor skirmishes, particularly in the southern colonies (South Carolina and Virginia most notably), between moderates and Patriots against more fanatic Loyalists. Additionally, between New York and New Hampshire west of the Connecticut River laid the New New Hampshire Grants, which were claimed as invalid by King George III in 1764 and given to New York. New York’s claim, in turn, had been challenged since 1770 by the Green Mountain Boys militia under the leadership of Ethan Allen. Violence broke out in March 1775 when a New York judge, with New York settlers, arrived in Westminster. In what became known as the “Westminster Massacre,” angry citizens of the New Hampshire Grants took over the courthouse and two people were killed. Things continued to escalate in the summer of 1776 as a convention met in Dorset "to take suitable measures to declare the New Hampshire Grants a free and independent district." Such separation was declared on January 15, 1777, calling themselves the territory of New Connecticut (renamed to Vermont six months later).

To say King George III was unhappy with the news at Boston on March 20 was an understatement. Massachusetts was the problem child according to the King and Parliament alike. In August 1775, in response to the Siege of Boston, he had previously called the Massachusetts Rebellion to be put down at once. It hadn’t worked, so he ordered Lord North to come up with strict measures. One idea that was proposed was the blockade of the Massachusetts Bay Colony, or cutting them off from all trade with Great Britain. Parliament ultimately disapproved of this in December, seeing that the other relatively non-rebellious colonies could become rebellious in solidarity with Massachusetts if this were to happen. By March, this left the King absolutely furious. Even Parliament was stunned with confusion. Beginning in April 1776, when the British fleet under Howe arrived back in London, massive debates raged until a compromise was reluctantly reached. On May 15 and again on June 7, they looked at Galloway's Plan of Union. After a thorough examination, a draft of what became known as the Declaration of Commonwealth began on June 11. The draft was complete on June 28 before being finalized on July 2 and signed on July 4, later known as Commonwealth Day.

The details of the Declaration of Commonwealth were as follows. British North America was to be renamed the Union of American Commonwealths. There was to be a Parliament, beginning in 1780, representing the colonies of New Hampshire, Massachusetts Bay, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia. The Upper House would be known as the Senate, with two Senators per colony who would serve terms of six years and could be re-elected through state legislatures, and the lower house would be the House of Commons, with the number per state determined by each colony’s population and elections held every three years. The number of representatives in the Lower House would be updated every 20 years. Slaves would be counted as half a person for representation purposes, satiating the South. It would be led by a General President appointed by the King who would serve until the mandatory retirement age of 75. There was also to be a crown-appointed head of state from Britain known as the Governor-General. The one condition would be that the Massachusetts Bay Colony would compensate for the tea damaged in Boston Harbor in 1773 and accept a Crown-appointed governor, which would be the case in the other colonies too. Virginia was the first colony to ratify the corresponding Constitution Act of 1777, doing it on December 16, 1777. It was followed by South Carolina, New York, Rhode Island, Connecticut, Georgia, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts (with some coaxing including a Bill of Rights), North Carolina, and New Jersey in 1778, Delaware in 1779, and Maryland in 1780. The new British North America was beginning to take shape.
 
Last edited:
Now that the present-day USA is still with the British Empire, what should happen to Australia and New Zealand since they are no longer needed as a penal colony here? I won't be writing about it yet but relatively soon and it's one of the first major butterflies. New poll:
 
Now that the present-day USA is still with the British Empire, what should happen to Australia and New Zealand since they are no longer needed as a penal colony here? I won't be writing about it yet but relatively soon and it's one of the first major butterflies. New poll:
One of the gripes Americans had IOTL was that Britain sent penal colonists there. Several colonial legislatures tried to ban it, but they were overruled.

 

Gabingston

Kicked
Now that the present-day USA is still with the British Empire, what should happen to Australia and New Zealand since they are no longer needed as a penal colony here? I won't be writing about it yet but relatively soon and it's one of the first major butterflies. New poll:
I'd have the British colonize Eastern Australia, while Western Australia and New Zealand are colonized by someone else (likely the French or Dutch).
 
I'd have the British colonize Eastern Australia, while Western Australia and New Zealand are colonized by someone else (likely the French or Dutch).
Or someone else as a butterfly wild card. Another interesting option is that Australia could get used as a Liberia equivalent! “We need to ship the slaves somewhere, why not this continent we own where no one (or no one British) lives”
 
I don't think having America necessary means Britain isn't going to get Australia and New Zealand. They will STILL be the dominant naval more, more than OTL.

And now, the Americans can send their OWN prisoners to Oceania too.
 

Gabingston

Kicked
Or someone else as a butterfly wild card. Another interesting option is that Australia could get used as a Liberia equivalent! “We need to ship the slaves somewhere, why not this continent we own where no one (or no one British) lives”
A German Australia or New Zealand (likely Prussian or Austrian) would be interesting. I wanted a German settler colony in my TL, but my readers voted against it, so seeing it here would be a nice twist. Other choices would include Spain, Portugal, Denmark, Sweden, Japan or one of the Italian states.
 
A German Australia or New Zealand (likely Prussian or Austrian) would be interesting. I wanted a German settler colony in my TL, but my readers voted against it, so seeing it here would be a nice twist. Other choices would include Spain, Portugal, Denmark, Sweden, Japan or one of the Italian states.
All of them except Spain and Portugal are unrealistic.
 
Last edited:
Sweden almost colonized australia otl so they are a high probability. The colonial flotilla headed for australia was turned back when Gustav III found out that Great Britain claimed the entirety of australia, not wishing to get into trouble with Britain.
 
Sweden almost colonized australia otl so they are a high probability. The colonial flotilla headed for australia was turned back when Gustav III found out that Great Britain claimed the entirety of australia, not wishing to get into trouble with Britain.
They will most likely get ejected by the British in some war or actually sell it to them.Sweden cannot realistically fund and profit from such a venture in the long run.
 
They will most likely get ejected by the British in some war or actually sell it to them.Sweden cannot realistically fund and profit from such a venture in the long run.
they were actually looking to a place to dump criminals and went in with more funds allocated to the potential colony than what the British invested. I agree however that a Swedish controlled australia (all of it at least) is not possible. A Swedish Tasmania and New Zealand however is possible and was raised by Britain otl alongside a royal marriage to cement a national alliance. A Swedish NZ and Tasmania is more sustainable than the entirety of all Australia me thinks.
 
they were actually looking to a place to dump criminals and went in with more funds allocated to the potential colony than what the British invested. I agree however that a Swedish controlled australia (all of it at least) is not possible. A Swedish Tasmania and New Zealand however is possible and was raised by Britain otl alongside a royal marriage to cement a national alliance. A Swedish NZ and Tasmania is more sustainable than the entirety of all Australia me thinks.
I didn’t know about the Swedish. But wasn’t Sweden fighting a war with Russia at the time (1788-1790), causing them to withdraw colonization plans and let Britain have Australia and New Zealand all to themselves?
 
@PGSBHurricane what are you going to do if none of the poll options have a majority? That's the case right now, the top option only has about 40%.
I will give it a few more days and if the top option still has less then 50%, I will eliminate the two least popular opinions since one of them has no votes and will set up another poll between the top two options. Kind of like the IOC does with Olympic bidding (they’ll still happen in this TL).
 
I didn’t know about the Swedish. But wasn’t Sweden fighting a war with Russia at the time (1788-1790), causing them to withdraw colonization plans and let Britain have Australia and New Zealand all to themselves?
The public reason given to the people and government was that the war stopped any colonial expeditions. The real reason was that the British reacted badly to the idea. Sweden didn't want to fight Britain and Russia at the same time.
 
Top