I have a feeling that you could justify Maine (or at least the northern part) remaining british had things gone slightly better for the later. They could even have a local plebiscite to justify the creation of the Royal Province of Maine.
Great What-Ifs of Canadian History Pre-1900
- Thread starter sampleswift
- Start date
I have a feeling that you could justify Maine (or at least the northern part) remaining british had things gone slightly better for the later. They could even have a local plebiscite to justify the creation of the Royal Province of Maine.
would require an explanation as to why the British preferred to keep "foreign" subjects instead of "old" subjects from the British isles. The Acadians were no more likely to take the "Test Oath" than the French-Canadians did as it involved passages that attacked the catholic faith.
Problematic due to the number and spread of them which is why OTL the british went back on the policy of ethnic cleansing.
not familiar with this in a Canadian context. A penal colony for irish political prisoners ?
Would probably require completely different governors more willing to compromise with the elected assembly.
They sold it to the US *specifically* so that it wouldn't fall into british hands so that would require a better relationship between the 2 empires.
hard to do unless problems in the maritime lead to these colonies being unilaterally joined to the Province of Canada by the british colonial authorities.
Maybe the british refuses to accept responsibility to revert to colonial status and instead unilaterally transfer authority to Canada
while not impossible, a more centralised Dominion of Canada would results in a lot of internal tension potentially leading to civil conflicts.
This would require either an early recognition of the Red River Colony as a province or else the federal government *really* needing the support of Quebec for something.
Maine is a given as it was occupied during the war (becoming a Colonial Province post-bellum) but I think any further territorial gain would be an indirect result of the war. That is, a better show might prevent future US government from pushing their luck in territorial dispute with the BNA / Canada.
I mentioned before the Aroostook War as a reason to join but realistically, I feel like the US would be less likely to send troopps and rather have more chance of officially recognising the Patriotes and to a lesser degree the Reformists as Belligerents so that they could openly buy equipment in the US as well as unofficial advisors in the field.
Alaska eventually joining Canada (probably around the same time as British Columbia) would make sense though I doubt the Far East would have any chance of falling under the BNA umbrella.
not sure what they would be gaining at the time.
Last edited:
unprincipled peter
Donor
It would indeed help to have a better support base. But ultimately the French and Indian War (american theater of the 7YW) was decided by British control of the seas. Britain made the colonial sphere the center of their military boots on the ground effort (while financing their allies in Europe). France, meanwhile, could not send reinforcements (and payment supplies to keep the Natives fighting) due to British naval superiority.
Nah, the Fenian invasions were always doomed no matter what they tried. What might have been interesting was if the Fenians had allied with the Metis in the Red River Resistance. Riel actually had a Fenian sympathizer as an adviser and John O'Neill was actually trying to drum up support for an invasion of the Red River in 1870.
That one would be interesting. If Macdonald had just pushed a little more cash their way they probably would have hopped on board historically, but they instead decided to bankrupt themselves by building a railroad...
It would be interesting if the Maritime delegates, rather than being a) overawed by Macdonald or b) surly towards the proposed Union had instead investigated the political system more closely. I think Joseph Howe bears a lot of the blame for whipping up such anti-Confederation frenzy, but at the same time he could have used his influence to get a much more equitable exchange for the Maritime colonies at Quebec had he put his mind to it.
This I've heard a lot about, but I've never learned the specifics. I know there were claims that before he died John Sparrow Thompson was trying to negotiate Newfoundland joining Confederation, but for some reason I just can't find the details.
An earlier conquest of Quebec leads them to drop the idea. Also, Nova Scotia was resettled by New Englanders, not people from the isles.
"New Ireland" was a British attempt to set up a new Loyalist colony in Maine during the ARW. It was briefly revived during the War of 1812, but I'm of the opinion that that wasn't an opportune war for Canadian expansion.
I've read some speculation that the Rebellions of 1837 extended the rule of the oligarchs as the defeat gutted and discredited the reform movement in both colonies, and that the British intentionally delayed the implementation of Lord Durham's proposed reforms because they didn't want to be seen cowtowing to traitors.
The Lafontaine coalition tried to pitch the idea to London, they might have stirred up some serious consideration of the idea had their negotiator not been an annexationist.
Or for it to be seized during the Crimean War.
If anything I was thinking of a less centralized one.
The Manitoba Act was passed before the Wolseley expedition set out, so that isn't too much of a point of contention. Rather I was thinking more "no execution of Thomas Scott" or "Louis Riel sticks around to accept the consequences for the execution of Thomas Scott".
We know what the British demands at Ghent were and there was a lot of physical territory that they were demanding (even when the war was a wash). Most of the northwest, a port on the Upper Mississippi, the south shore of the St. Lawrence, etc. If Britain is in a position to be seizing territory they're going to be grabbing a lot. They aren't going to go for minor gains, they'll either take nothing or take everything they want.
The province of Canada is divided into four, or possibly five, provinces rather than two.
There were plans to do this IOTL, but it was effectively re-split into two parts, corresponding to Upper and Lower Canada.
There were plans to do this IOTL, but it was effectively re-split into two parts, corresponding to Upper and Lower Canada.
Why was the 4 pieces idea abandoned? This is new, and I've never heard of it. Congrats.
I'm not sure why it was abandoned. I only found out about it myself whilst researching for a (now abandoned) TL.
Proposal for the Province of Montreal - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Proposal for the Province of Toronto - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
I think part of the problem was viability. If you split the main urban center from each province, you end up with 2 rural provinces with little heavy industry and less or equal population dominated by 2 more populous and industrialised provinces that have no natural resources.
Canada without West Coast. (BC taken by Americans.) Canada heavily more focused Montreal-St. Lawrence-Toronto corridor and a lot more regional differences. 50/50 of a Confederation, but if it fails, you may have you have serval dominions instead of one. IE...
- Dominion of the Maritimes (Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island) and maybe Newfoundland and Labrador as part
- Dominion of Canada (OTL Quebec and Ontario) maybe with Manitoba part of it.
- Dominion of the Prairies / Dominion of Alberta (Saskatchewan and Alberta, maybe with Manitoba)
- Or, if Newfoundland and Labrador is separate, then a Dominion of Newfoundland.
What a horror story. I am literally shivering with disgust and terror.
The 1895 Newfoundland-Canada Confederation Negotiations: A reconsideration by James Hiller is the best piece I've seen.
Thomas1195
Banned
Hot take: The United States includes Northern States and OTL Canada, while the Deep South becomes TTL Canada.
Some more:
Benedict Arnold succeeds in surprising and seizing Quebec City during the ARW
John A MacDonald takes up Louis Riel's offer to lead a Metis force to prevent Fenian incursions in Manitoba
Radisson and Grossiliers stick with the French (or possibly join the Dutch, which Grossilier was accused of plotting to do, although it's unlikely he really did) and the Hudson's Bay Company never gets founded. That would have long-term effects not just in the prairies, but also in BC, which was initially HBC governed.
Benedict Arnold succeeds in surprising and seizing Quebec City during the ARW
John A MacDonald takes up Louis Riel's offer to lead a Metis force to prevent Fenian incursions in Manitoba
Radisson and Grossiliers stick with the French (or possibly join the Dutch, which Grossilier was accused of plotting to do, although it's unlikely he really did) and the Hudson's Bay Company never gets founded. That would have long-term effects not just in the prairies, but also in BC, which was initially HBC governed.
More options:
1) require the NBC and NWCo. to map the lands they claim and include as part of the Royal Navy Mapping. In OTL the lack of maps is partly why lands were settled post American Revolution as nobody actually knew where they were.
2) Greater emphasis on local supply for fur trade posts. By the late 1800's cattle farms and wheat farms where part of the HBC infrastructure but prior to that relied heavily upon imported supplies and/or local game populations. Helps to prove agriculture potential, more year round employment and reduces pressure on local game populations reducing impacts on FN's.
3) Work to claim the fur trade posts of the Upper Mississippi valley as established by France. This is critical to avoiding the Canadian shield around Lake Superior and opens up access into the Red River Valley much sooner.
4) greater immigration from Ireland earlier. Irish were not desired settlers until the late 1800's. There are only so many Scots/Orkneymen/Englishmen to settle new lands.
5) Look at an earlier version of the Veterans Homesteading Act where British soldiers/sailors in good standing are granted lands in exchange for term of service. One big potential source may be the Kings Hessian soldiers post ARW. In OTL this was established for Boer War and later WW1 and WW2 Veterans.
6) Work on road network from Halifax to Fort Niagara. Reduces many of the logistics issues.
7) Earlier expansion of militia units to recruit from FN's similar to French model but as organized units. A more "civilized" army reduces much of the American propaganda.
8) In response to the British East India Company creating wars and adding to obligations of the RN impose more crown control on the HBC. This includes a need to develop infrastructure for access, promote education, and an more formal set of courts/governorship. The crown could highlight that the HBC is in trade and that opportunities exist with settlers in addition to plain furs. In exchange the RN invests more money in small ships infrastructure along the Great Lakes and West Coast.
9) Build Fort Prince of Wales on the right river for the fur trade. Ooops. Allows for a Northern access node and command post.
10) Greater expansion of the Royal Engineers with the purpose of recruiting by merit. Colonial recruitment is emphasized as is the mission to map land, resources, and identify key infrastructure needs for the British Empire to expand. Allows not just Canadian unit expansion but across the empire where purchase commission system may be tough to fight.
1) require the NBC and NWCo. to map the lands they claim and include as part of the Royal Navy Mapping. In OTL the lack of maps is partly why lands were settled post American Revolution as nobody actually knew where they were.
2) Greater emphasis on local supply for fur trade posts. By the late 1800's cattle farms and wheat farms where part of the HBC infrastructure but prior to that relied heavily upon imported supplies and/or local game populations. Helps to prove agriculture potential, more year round employment and reduces pressure on local game populations reducing impacts on FN's.
3) Work to claim the fur trade posts of the Upper Mississippi valley as established by France. This is critical to avoiding the Canadian shield around Lake Superior and opens up access into the Red River Valley much sooner.
4) greater immigration from Ireland earlier. Irish were not desired settlers until the late 1800's. There are only so many Scots/Orkneymen/Englishmen to settle new lands.
5) Look at an earlier version of the Veterans Homesteading Act where British soldiers/sailors in good standing are granted lands in exchange for term of service. One big potential source may be the Kings Hessian soldiers post ARW. In OTL this was established for Boer War and later WW1 and WW2 Veterans.
6) Work on road network from Halifax to Fort Niagara. Reduces many of the logistics issues.
7) Earlier expansion of militia units to recruit from FN's similar to French model but as organized units. A more "civilized" army reduces much of the American propaganda.
8) In response to the British East India Company creating wars and adding to obligations of the RN impose more crown control on the HBC. This includes a need to develop infrastructure for access, promote education, and an more formal set of courts/governorship. The crown could highlight that the HBC is in trade and that opportunities exist with settlers in addition to plain furs. In exchange the RN invests more money in small ships infrastructure along the Great Lakes and West Coast.
9) Build Fort Prince of Wales on the right river for the fur trade. Ooops. Allows for a Northern access node and command post.
10) Greater expansion of the Royal Engineers with the purpose of recruiting by merit. Colonial recruitment is emphasized as is the mission to map land, resources, and identify key infrastructure needs for the British Empire to expand. Allows not just Canadian unit expansion but across the empire where purchase commission system may be tough to fight.