Kicking an open door, a more dominant Britain TL

Inspired by some of the more pro-American TLs which come our way, as well as the recent flush of similar pro-British ones in the post-1900 forum, I present this half (quarter? eighth?) finished TL. adapted from a seed I put on the map thread:

Same PoD as Decades of Darkness. The Embargo Acts don't get repealed, and secessionist sentiment reaches a fever pitch. By late 1810 the Act is being habitually violated with the connivance of the New England state authorities, and relations within the Congress and Senate are at breaking point.


North America

At this point, a north eastern convention demands the repeal of the Act, and threatens secession. The Federal government tries to fudge the incident, but it all goes wrong when Federal troops attempting to enforce the act clash with the New York militia and a prominent New York personality who attempted to mediate gets caught in the crossfire.

It all goes downhill from there. The North Eastern states declare independence in January 1813 – including New York and New Jersey, and Philadelphia declares itself neutral. Britain recognises the new Commonwealth of New England.

An uneasy peace persists for several months, and it looks like a peaceful separation will be possible. The War of the Sixth Coalition kicks off on schedule, and Napolean has greater than historical initial successes. With the British seemingly busy in Europe, and after a series of incidents between the New England militias and Federal troops who have stationed themselves in Philidelphia (to the displeasure of the locals), the US government finds a cassus beli and invades in September 1813..

Federal troops meet stiff militia resistance and it turns ugly in places, with troops bogged down defending their supply lines. Unfortunately for the US, Napolean is defeated in May 1814, and the British feel able to send significant forces across the Atlantic. Even before this had occurred, New Orleans had fallen to a British expeditionary force, and when the main Federal army was decisively defeated outside New York in September 1814, and the Philadelphia state government, still furious that their wish for neutrality had been ignored switched sides a month later, the Feds admit defeat, and ask for terms.

Before this news can reach American commanders in the field, and American armies attempts to retake New Orleans and Detroit. The attacks are repulsed, but British forces suffer heavy casualties.

The initial terms offered by the British and New Englanders are not kind, and when news reaches the Americans that Napolean has escaped from imprisonment and raised a new army, negotiations breakdown and fighting resumes during April 1815. This proves to have been a misjudgement on the Americans part.

Napolean is defeated for a second time in September 1815, and the US government requests a second ceasefire in that November.

The terms of the treaty involve:

The independence of New England, New York, New Jersey, and Philadelphia., with the border set at 40,30 in Ohio and parts West.

The renunciation of the Louisiana purchase as invalid, and its return to Spanish sovereignty.

The next interesting event that occurs in this timeline is the assassination of Ferdinand VII during 1818, and the accession his brother Carlos to the Spanish throne. Thanks to this, the Mexican conservatives remain loyal to the Spanish Crown, and the Mexican independence movement is crushed in 1820.

We now fast forwards a few years. Fewer settlers have gone to America, due to continuing tensions in the north east between New England and the United States and Britain.


In 1831, New England bans slavery.


In 1833 Spain dissolves into civil war, as liberal factions attempt to overthrow the King. This sparks chaos in the Americas, as independence movements see the chance they have been waiting for.

In Mexico, the conservatives invite the expelled King Carlos into power.

In Texas, the locals, both Hispanic and Anglo, rise up to proclaim the Republic of Texas.

In Florida, the locals proclaim the Republic of Florida and petition for access to the United States.

In the area of the old Louisiana purchase, the situation is more confused. Many call for annexation by the United States, but the region has been ungoverned (in the North), and under British control (in the South) for the best part of 20 years, so many are basically unconcerned.

The US is lead by a very hawkish president, anxious to remove the stain on the US' record brought by earlier defeat, and he feels confident in provoking Britain by demanding cessation of the purchase area and recognition of the annexation of Florida.

In short, war breaks out. The US invades New England and Louisiana, and the Texan rebels fight against Royalist forces.

Once again the US is brought to the negotiating table, although it is a much closer thing than the previous war. The US receives Florida and a guarantee of free navigation along the Mississippi. Texas is recognised as an independent state.

In 1844. Gold is found in California, and colonists begin to move there in large numbers. This means trouble. In 1850 California rises up in rebellion, again with substantial Hispanic (liberal) support. The US offers to purchase the Louisiana territory again, the liberal Spanish government accepts. But Britain vetoes the deal. Another war looks possible, but a deal is reached – the area is split between Texas (leant the money by Britain), the US, and Britain, with Britain getting everything above the 42nd parallel, Texas the East and the US the West..

The California rebellion ends with California, including all of Baja, independent, and them agreeing the 42nd parallel as the border with British North America as well.

In 1848, Texas and the US fight a brief but bloody war over their mutual borders and the rule of the lands they have gained

In 1858 the Governor of Sonora (a closet liberal) is the only survivor of an abortive coup against the new King of New Spain, who has been busy consuming the central American countries. Despite being unusually competent, the new King can do nothing when the governor invites Californian forces in.

In 1861, forces from New Spain based in Cuba take Haiti, at the invitation of the Dominicans.

In 1865 the New Spanish government begins construction of the Nicaraua Canal, backed by Californian and British companies.

In 1869, the Texans invade northern Mexico. After careful consideration, the Californians stay neutral, and in a series of hard fought battles, the Texan invaders crumble in the face of the New Spanish defenses, under British made guns. The war lasts three years before the Texans admit defeat. In the aftermath of the victory, limited liberal reforms are put in place in New Spain.

In 1870 the British grant the Kingdom of Canada home rule within the British Empire. Several of the Maritimes vote to join New England. In the same year the British purcahse Alsaska from the Russians.

In 1873, the New Spanish government grants rights over the part constructed Nicaraguan canal to a consortium backed by the British in return for the cancellation of debts incurred during the Texan war.

During 1875, a series of border incidents between Texas and California are resolved via British mediation.

In 1878, further small liberal reforms are put in place. Land reforms are on the back burner, thanks to industrialisation begining to soak up some of the surplus labour, mollifying the conservatives.

In 1880 the US declares that there will be no new slaves in the US, anyone born from this date will be free.

In 1892 the Kingdom of Pacifica is established, containing the remaining territories in British North America, not forming part of Canada or the Caribbean.

In 1894 the New Spanish create a constitutional monarchy, although very few limits on its powers are established, after the celebrations that follow the construction of the Nicaragua Canal.


Britain

British emigration to North America is significantly reduced compared to OTL. With the continent a much more tense place, and with better protection for the natives in BNA as compared to the US, it is less attractive. Only about 2/3 of OTL's numbers go there.

1816: At the *Congress of Vienna, the British deal a slightly different hand. They gain a very slightly larger Hanover, and refuse to return the Dutch East Indies, in additon to the Cape and Ceylon, given that the Dutch had managed to offend more people in the slightly longer War of the 7th Coalition.

1819: Alexander Victor is born to Adelaide of Saxe-Meiingen, as the 2nd in line to the United Kingdom of Great Britain, and to the Kingdom Of Hanover, the day before George III died. George IV assumes the throne. He maintains support for the Tories.

1828: In collaboration with the French, the British East India Company intervene in support of Le Van Duyet, from their bases in Java. Buyet was rebelling against Emperor Minh Mang of Vietnam, and his xenophobic anti-progress, anti-missionary policies. By the end of the year Javanese company and French troops have placed Le Van Duyet's son, Le Vah Khoi on the Vietnamese throne. They have received guarantees of free trade and extra-territorial treaty ports. Le Van Khoi will follow his father's policy of Westernisation.

1829: George IV dies. William IV assumes the throne. He is a noted liberal. In the elections held after his coronation, the Liberals gain a strong majority, led by Lord Grey. (Better than OTL, as there hasn't been a recent French liberal coup)

1830: A Reform Bill is passed by the House of Commons, but rejected by the Lords. A tense stand off ensues. The Lords remains obdurate. Lord Grey tries to persuade the King to create new Peers, but (as his private papers later reveal) he vacillates about interfering so blatantly with Parliament. London gossip, however, suggests that the King has decided to do so. When the Tories put out feelers to the Royal Household, they misinterpret the result. The Tory opponents of the Bill in the Lords agree to abstain based on this erroneous impression, and the bill passes into law in 1831.

1832: The British bans slavery within its colonies. Abolitionist sentiment is at an all time high. The British East India company is reformed during this year.

1833: The Spanish Expulsion occurs. The US attempts to retake the former Louisiana Purchase (which had been under the administration of a British company) and Florida. The public are outraged, by amongst other things, the expansion of slavery. Something must be Done. The crisis escalates into war, with the US attacking New England, in defiance of the British guarantee of its security. The war ends within the year, with the US being kicked out of New England and Lousiana, but being permitted to annex Florida. The British support an independent Texas.

1837-1840: The First opium Wars - In 1837 the British force's from Java open the port of Macao to the opium trade, after their envoy is turned away by the local governor. Later in the year Chinese forces return in numbers and forcibly close the port, destroying considerable stocks and killing several merchants. The local British authorities send warships, and forces from the East Indies, arriving early 1838, and a large army from India and Burma, late in 1838. The Chinese are humiliated and are forced to agree to the Treaty of Hanoi.

1839: William IV dies. He was one of the best beloved Kings of the age, and many turn out for his funeral, thanks to what is seen as his skillfull handling of the Reform Crisis. At the age of 19 his son, the new King Alexander accedes to the throne. He proves to be liberal, like his father, by the standards of the day. He is crowned in Hanover later in the year.

1840: The Chinese Imperial government accede to the treaty of Hanoi. Hong Kong, Canton, Amoy, and Shanghai are ceded to British administration, and several other ports are opened to trade

1841: Lord Grey, who has served as Prime Minister for 12 years, retires. The Liberals still control Parliament.

1842: Gold is discovered in Australia. Over 750,000 people emmigrate there during the next decade. It somewhat takes the wind from the sales of the Californian cold rush.

1847: Ranjit Singh, Maharaja of the Sikh Empire dies. His heir signs a favourable treaty with the British, who are worried about the Russian influence in Afghanistan.

1850 Britain adopts a policy of co-existence and patronage with the Sikh Empire after a failed attempt to conquer Afghanistan backfires badly. In time the Sikhs will become key British allies in the face of Russian expansion to the North. The gradually become a British client state, but never loose self-government. It maintains a strong military, and remains a local power.

1851: The increased number of settlers leads to the discovery of diamonds in Kimberly (South Africa). This leads to a diamond rush. Over the next decade there are 200,000 immigrants. The Tories return to power for the first time in over twenty years.

1852: The British East-India company conquers Burma.

1853-1859: A series of rebellions occur across British northern India, thanks to the increasing number of kingdoms being incorporated by the Company. Although they are all put down, this increasing requires the use of Javanese sepoys, and even the support of Sikh soldiers.

1860: After a corruption scandal, and in light of the turmoil, the British government takes direct responsibility for the government of British India and Burma, and reorganise the administration.

1862: Gold is discovered in Witwatersrand. Over 400,000 Europeans arrive during the gold rush in the next five years.

1870: Canada is granted home rule and is established as a Kingdom within the United Kingdom. The Governor is made a Viceoy.

1882: South Africa is granted limited home rule and is established as a Kingdom within the United Kingdom. The Governor is made a Viceoy.

1888: The Australia + New Zealand are granted limited home rule and is established as a Kingdom within the United Kingdom. The Governor is made a Viceoy.


France

1816: Louis XVIII dismisses the French elected house, and packs the house of Peers, in order to permit the election of a Liberal government (as OTL). Unlike OTL Henri Grégoire is assassinated during the election.

1819: Maria-Thereas, wife of Louis-Antoinne, 2nd in line to the throne of France, gives birth to a son, Louis-Charles.

1821: With the Liberals proving as unmanageable as the Ultra-royalists, Louis' ministers dismiss the elected chamber again, returning a divided assembly.

1822: Charles, Duc d'Artois, leader of the ultra-royalist party, is assassinated. France hovers of the edge of civil war, and the other European powers threaten to intervene. Against the odds, a fragile compromise is established.

1824: Louis XVIII dies. Fearing Louis-Antoinne's Liberal tendencies, the Ultra-Royalists launch a coup attempt to force him to abdicate in favour of his brother, Charles-Ferdinand. A counter-coup succeeds, and his brother is exiled. Louis XIX is crowned, and cracks down on the aristocracy. He liberalises the constitution.

1828: Louis' government intervenes in Indochina in support of a pro-French rebellion. Later in the year it is forced to put down another Charlist coup, after he slashed tariffs on grain in response to a large rise in the price of gain and had intervened to protect merchant interests abroad.

1833: The French decline to intervene in the Spanish revolution, and no one else can muster the logistics.

1844: Louis XIX dies. His son, Louis XX assumes the throne, at the age of 25. Louis is a significantly more Conservative than his father, and begins to try to claw back much of the power he thinks his father squandered. This proves difficult, as the constitution is well bedded in, and most of the levers of power are unavailable to him.

1850: Tired of Louis XX's continual meddling, the Liberal French parliament take advantage of the Chaos sweeping Europe to force him to resign, installing his 7 year old son as King, and establishing a Regency Council.


Spain:

1818: Ferdinand is assassinated, and his brother Carlos accedes to the throne. Carlos is very reactionary, and rules completely arbitrarily.

1833: Spanish Liberals revolt against King Carlos. The Spanish government had made few friends on the European scene, with its spectacularly arbitrary rule. Carlos goes first to Vienna, but his bad reputation leads to him going to New Spain, at the invitation of the conservatives there. The Spanish loose control of all their American colonial possessions. After a series of threats from the other European Powers, the new Spanish government announces that they still consider Carlos, King of Spain, but that his refusal to accept the constitution of 1814 leaves him unable to fulfil his functions. They eagerly await him accepting his responsibilities.

1838-1844: A power struggle within the Spanish government escalates into civil war. Many refugees seek to leave Spain in this era. By the end of the war conservative factions end up predominant, but do not feel secure enough to immediately invite a King to return.

1850: The Spanish government invites the King of New Spain to take up his unoccupied throne, even without signing the Constitution. Liberals rise up in revolt and depose the government, kicking off the year of revolutions.


The Netherlands:

1832: The southern provinces rise in revolt against the King, partially in response to the removal of the tariff on grain. The French waver about intervening, but Louis XIIX doesn't feel secure enough to provoke the other Powers with his brother waiting in exile in Vienna. By the end of the year the rebellion has been put down.

1839: William II accedes the the throne of the United Netherlands, and grants local administration to the southern provinces. He is personally mildly conservative, but mainly uninterested in politics.

1849: William II dies, William III accedes to the throne.

1850: The Walloons stage significant protests in the southern provinces, fearing that their privileges will be removed by the new King. Haunted by the spectre of revolution rising across Europe, and fearing that the burgers of Antwerp will rise as well, the new King agrees to a broadly liberal constitution.


Germany

1826: The Zollverin is established between Prussia and the Grand Ducky of Hesse

1828: Hesse-Cassel joins the Zollverin, the Prussian dominated customs union.

1829: Encouraged by the accession to the throne of a King known for his liberal views, the Liberals in Hanover petition for an improved constitution. William encourages his brother Adolphus, his Viceroy to Hanover, to come to an accommodation with the Liberals, as trouble is brewing in London over the proposed Reform Bill. He settles into negotiations.

1832: A Liberal constitution is established in Hanover, giving more rights to the middle class, and some limited gains for the peasantry, paired with stronger Parliamentary control of the Royal finances. The parliament is reformed on the British model.

1833: A Liberal pro-democracy meeting in Dresden is suppressed by conservative forces. There are limited risings across Prussia and the minor northern German states, but they are quickly crushed. Many liberals flee to Hanover, where they are tolerated more than welcomed.

1834 Württemberg, Saxony, Thuringia etc join the Zollverin

1836 Bavaria joins the Zollverin.

1842 onwards: Very significant numbers of Germans emigrate, seeking their fortunes in the gold rushes that occur over the next decades, and in simple settlement, going to Australia, South Africa, California, and Canada. This was particularly true in 1846 and 1847, when the harvest failed, and some 500,000 Germans departed. This is associated with the Formation of the Royal Hanoverian Colonial Society in
1842, and its subsidy of transportation.

1850: Year of Rebellions: A wave of revolt surges across Europe. Germany is in the forefront of this movement, with no state entirely unaffected. Demonstrations range from generally peaceful and localised, in Bavaria and Hanover, to violent and widespread, in Prussia and Austria. Meterrnick resigns, and a German parliament assembles in Frankfurt. The parliament deadlocks. Austria rejects its unification plans outright, the Hanoverian (British) delegates suggest the formation of an Imperial Council. In the end, after much fruitless discussion, the Austrians withdraw their co-operation, and the Prussian King reject the offer of an Imperial Crown paired with a Hanoverian style constitution. Both the Austrians and the Prussians vigorously suppress Liberals, and many flee, once again, into Hanover, and to New England and the British colonies.
The British deploy several British regiments into Hanover, and transfer several Hanoverian regiments considered unreliable to the Dutch border, although nothing comes of it. With the break down of the parliament several small uprisings up radicals have to be put down, but most moderate Liberals support the British. The revolution succeeds in Oldenburg and Braunschweigh, and the moderates invite in British Hanoverian forces to maintain order. The Dukes of these regions eventually join the Hanoverian House of Lords.


I'm considering how the rest of the century goes outside North America. Perhaps a tense stand off over the status of the Holy Land from so, 1856 onwards, with Russia and Prussia sitting on one side of the fence, and the British (+Hanover), Austrians, and French on the other, with Bavaria and the southern German states trying to play off all sides to retain their independance. Also, who should the various figures in the TL marry, and should should be the unmentioned alt-rulers.
 
Last edited:
Alratan

Some interesting ideas and a fascinating TL. Only problem I can think of from my initial read is with the early POD. Possibly you could see the NEC breakaway after a lot of fighting but why would Britain join in? While it is a useful buffer and I could see Britain recognising it in the period while a peaceful separation looks likely I don't see why Britain would actually go to war over it? Especially since we're still very busy with a certain Corsican at the time. Also it sounds like the initial 1812 conflict has been butterflied. Might see something happening possibly if the US declares war over the disputes at the time, possibly partly in a desire to unify the country by an external enemy, or if they think Britain is behind the succession. However I don't think Britain would end up at war unless it was actually attacked.

Any reason why the decision not to return the Dutch Indies? I could see the advantage of a larger Hanover but while the Dutch colonies are potentially useful Britain is stretching itself very thin and likely to cause a lot of resentment.

Given the predominance of liberal feeling in Britain would it support a pretty reactionary monarchy in New Spain?

I think William IV may have had liberal tendencies but also heard he was heavily influenced by his wife and she was supposed to be very reactionary.

Anyway, an interesting set of ideas and looking forward to seeing how things develop.

Steve

 
Any reason why the decision not to return the Dutch Indies? I could see the advantage of a larger Hanover but while the Dutch colonies are potentially useful Britain is stretching itself very thin and likely to cause a lot of resentment.

Raffles was quite an ardent supporter of keeping Java and he wasn't the only one.

I think the company would end up in charge so there won't be much in the way of overstretch, a few civil servants a few thousand (British) troops hired by the company and a heap of native Sepoys.

If Britain decides to take the islands (which they probably should have even if only for the sake of the Indonesians) there is very little anybody in Europe can say about it and I doubt many outside of the Netherlands would care all that much.
 
Taking the NEI is actually, like India and Malaya, relieving Imperial overstretch as it is both profitable and provides a net surplus of troops, it's that amongst other things, such as moving towards economic domination of the Punjab, rather than political control, that allows Britain to to more messing about elsewhere, which is also profitable, such as moving to dominate the China trade more thoroughyl, which is also profitable. This allows them to carry the deadweight of Hanover, and (to a lesser extent), Lousiana.
 
Last edited:
On the potatoe famine:

With a POD in 1810, by 1849 the butterflies will have totally changed the evolution of potatoe blights.

I'm tempted to have the Irish clearances begin in the mid 1840s, as an analogue of the eariler Highland ones, with the big landlords evicting all their tenants. This would then lead to massive emmigration, significantly larger than OTL, with millions of Irish going to South Africa, Canada, Australia, and California, rather than dying off in the famine. This emmigration would also be sustained, as the source population wouldn't suffer the fertility crunch that is the hangover of a famine. A major blight would occur, say, in around 1860, but by then the overppoulation would have ended, and the agricultural system substantially reformed.

As a side note, there would be minor blights during this period, and in 1848/1849 the harvest would be very bad, as it was all over Europe, but the long Whig ascendancy in parliment ensures that the Corn Laws were repealed in the 30s, so they were nowhere near as bad.
 
The next interesting event that occurs in this timeline is the assassination of Ferdinand VII during 1818, and the accession his brother Carlos to the Spanish throne. Thanks to this, the Mexican conservatives remain loyal to the Spanish Crown, and the Mexican independence movement is crushed in 1820.

We now fast forwards a few years. Fewer settlers have gone to America, due to continuing tensions in the north east between New England and the United States and Britain.

(...)

In 1833 Spain dissolves into civil war, as liberal factions attempt to overthrow the King. This sparks chaos in the Americas, as independence movements see the chance they have been waiting for.

If Fernando VII dies before the born of his only daughter Isabella (1830), the civil war in 1833 its totally unlikely (impossible, I'll say). Carlos V (OTL Pretender Carlos María Isidro, 1788-1855) is still alive, María Cristina is not regent and has not any power to support the liberals, the moderates remains in the Carlist side and there are not British veto to French intervention. In OTL Spain could be a Monarchy in any result of the First Carlist War, but ITTL? I don't think that all the European powers could do nothing while a new Republican Revolution occurs in Spain.

Well, now America. Most of the Latin American revolutions had never the intention to change anything. Actually, many of the "libertadores" wanted to assure the dictadure of the criollos over the indian and mestizo population that was threatened by liberal governments in Spain (first Joseph Bonaparte, then the liberals of Riego between 1820 and 1823). In fact, the fathers, mentors or the own "libertadores" were the same people that crushed a true revolutionary uprising in Peru in the 1780s, that wanted the reborn of the Inca Empire under Tupac Amaru II and the liberation of the indians and blacks under white rule.

By the way, it's quite illogical that Mexico becames a conservative monarchy while California is still governed from an enemy liberal Spain.
 
On the potatoe famine:

With a POD in 1810, by 1849 the butterflies will have totally changed the evolution of potatoe blights.

I'm tempted to have the Irish clearances begin in the mid 1840s, as an analogue of the eariler Highland ones, with the big landlords evicting all their tenants. This would then lead to massive emmigration, significantly larger than OTL, with millions of Irish going to South Africa, Canada, Australia, and California, rather than dying off in the famine. This emmigration would also be sustained, as the source population wouldn't suffer the fertility crunch that is the hangover of a famine. A major blight would occur, say, in around 1860, but by then the overppoulation would have ended, and the agricultural system substantially reformed.

As a side note, there would be minor blights during this period, and in 1848/1849 the harvest would be very bad, as it was all over Europe, but the long Whig ascendancy in parliment ensures that the Corn Laws were repealed in the 30s, so they were nowhere near as bad.

Alratan

Just a quick question on the last point. Why would repealing the corn laws make harvests better? Or do you mean that with the resulting removal of tariffs on imports the prices drops? May occur in good years but likely to make any problems worse, especially in Ireland. A lot of the problems there, once the blight hit, were made worse by the non-interventionist attitude of the government.

Steve
 
The early removal of the corn laws would do two things to affect it, one direct, and one indirect.

The first is that the price of wheat would be significantly lower, so the line of absolute poverty would be noticably lower.

The second is that industrialisation would be noticably more advanced. Wages in the British industrial cities would be significantly lower, so industry would be more profitable, and hence more money availiable for investment, including in agricultural improvements (clearances), and in industry itself, bringing far more Irish over to Britain in the first place.

The Whigs may also have reformed the Poor LAws earlier, although thats a bit of a long shot.

I agree that in particualry bad years the Corn Laws don't help (although i don't think they hurt, as the Corn Laws don't cap prices), however in years where there are minor blights and local crop failures, the cheaper grain cushions its effects.

If Fernando VII dies before the born of his only daughter Isabella (1830), the civil war in 1833 its totally unlikely (impossible, I'll say). Carlos V (OTL Pretender Carlos María Isidro, 1788-1855) is still alive, María Cristina is not regent and has not any power to support the liberals, the moderates remains in the Carlist side and there are not British veto to French intervention. In OTL Spain could be a Monarchy in any result of the First Carlist War, but ITTL? I don't think that all the European powers could do nothing while a new Republican Revolution occurs in Spain.
To clarify. I agree that I'm stretching things a bit here. However: I understand that the restored Spanish monarchy was rather... irrational at times. Totally arbitrary and not very competent. Carlos was also far more absolutist than his brother, and would have irritated the liberals far more There is also the European question to consider. Both France and Britain have Liberal-leaning governments, so they aren't particualry eager to intervene, indeed, France just put down its own conservative Charlist revolt a couple of years ago. The way I consider it, this civil war started as an attempt by the moderates, sick of arbitrary rule, to extract a limited constitution from Carlos, which failed and it all went south from there. As I say in the Spain section, the moderate regime offers Carlos the opportunity to return if he swears by the consitution, but he refuses. Would it be better
to have the moderates try to put the child Francis de Assisi de Bourbon on the throne as a child king, when Carlos refused to return and swear the constitution, rather than leave the offer hanging.

Well, now America. Most of the Latin American revolutions had never the intention to change anything. Actually, many of the "libertadores" wanted to assure the dictadure of the criollos over the indian and mestizo population that was threatened by liberal governments in Spain (first Joseph Bonaparte, then the liberals of Riego between 1820 and 1823). In fact, the fathers, mentors or the own "libertadores" were the same people that crushed a true revolutionary uprising in Peru in the 1780s, that wanted the reborn of the Inca Empire under Tupac Amaru II and the liberation of the indians and blacks under white rule.
How about changing it so that the South and Central American colonies declare independance when it looks like the Liberals have won in Spain, and New Spain stretches from Mexico all the way down South America.

By the way, it's quite illogical that Mexico becames a conservative monarchy while California is still governed from an enemy liberal Spain.
All the North American possessions remian under the control of the "Mexican" monarchy, except for lower Lousina, which the British have been administering on behalf of the Spanish for a couple of decades. The only reason that stays nominally part of European Spain is the convoloutions of the peace treaty between the US, New England, Spain, New Spain, and the Britain, at the end of the North American War.
 
Last edited:
I'm currently unsure. I'm considering having Brazil approximately follow OTL.
Argentinia and Peru become independant as per OTL, but the Viceroyalty of New Granada stays loyal, so there is no Gran Colombia. In 1833, the area accepts the rule of King Carlos and seccsion from Spain, but rebels in the 1850s, and attempts to become independant. New Spain reconqueres it in the late 1850s.
 
The early removal of the corn laws would do two things to affect it, one direct, and one indirect.

The first is that the price of wheat would be significantly lower, so the line of absolute poverty would be noticably lower.

The second is that industrialisation would be noticably more advanced. Wages in the British industrial cities would be significantly lower, so industry would be more profitable, and hence more money availiable for investment, including in agricultural improvements (clearances), and in industry itself, bringing far more Irish over to Britain in the first place.

The Whigs may also have reformed the Poor LAws earlier, although thats a bit of a long shot.

I agree that in particualry bad years the Corn Laws don't help (although i don't think they hurt, as the Corn Laws don't cap prices), however in years where there are minor blights and local crop failures, the cheaper grain cushions its effects.

Alratan

You may have noticed there is an IF here, that lower food prices don't as you suggest, lead to lower wages. If so then the line of poverty would be basically unchanged.

High profits may improve industrial development, provided not too much of the money goes in luxury spending or security [i.e. keeping the population under control]. If this increases the flow of Irish to Britain this may ease the problems in Ireland, although I think population growth rates had already declined dramatically by about 1820, presuming due to so many being on the breadline.

What I meant about potentially making the matter worse was that the anti-corn law agitation was mainly passed by the growing supporters of free trade and laissez-faire policies and that did have a detrimental effect in Ireland. When the famine 1st hit the Tories were in power and by maintaining a small stock of food that they would sell if prices got too high, and making this public, they prevented hoarding. However shortly afterwards the Liberals came to power and dropped this policy or, for quite a while, any intervention. Ultimately they came up with various make-work schemes, road building and the like to enable funding of a lot of the population but by that time a lot of the damage was done.

By reforming the Poor Laws do you mean the abandonment of the Speelham (sp) system and introduction of the workhouses, rather than the much later, ~1910 repeal of those measures by the Liberals then?

Steve
 
Some interesting ideas and a fascinating TL. Only problem I can think of from my initial read is with the early POD. Possibly you could see the NEC breakaway after a lot of fighting but why would Britain join in? While it is a useful buffer and I could see Britain recognising it in the period while a peaceful separation looks likely I don't see why Britain would actually go to war over it?

The British want to see the end of the Embargo Act, which is severly harming British trade. There would also have to be some cassus belli, like the US attempting to blockade British trade into NE, and generalybeing uppity.
You may have noticed there is an IF here, that lower food prices don't as you suggest, lead to lower wages. If so then the line of poverty would be basically unchanged.

The price of grain is the determinant of urban wages, as it sets the minimum cost of living in a city. In rural areas of Ireland we almost don't have a complete money economy, more susbsitance+cash. This means that the poverty line will be lower in the country, as their wages aren't changed. It will tend to impovirish the grain-growing British aristocracy, and increase the power of the industrial middle class.

High profits may improve industrial development, provided not too much of the money goes in luxury spending or security [i.e. keeping the population under control]. If this increases the flow of Irish to Britain this may ease the problems in Ireland, although I think population growth rates had already declined dramatically by about 1820, presuming due to so many being on the breadline.
Historically, the early industrialists did reinvest quite significantly. The main effect is that high profitability encourages capital to move into the sector, from other soruces, that went elsewhere in OTL. There shouldn't be be any more relative spending on security, as faster growth should hopefully keep a lid on unemployment.

What I meant about potentially making the matter worse was that the anti-corn law agitation was mainly passed by the growing supporters of free trade and laissez-faire policies and that did have a detrimental effect in Ireland. When the famine 1st hit the Tories were in power and by maintaining a small stock of food that they would sell if prices got too high, and making this public, they prevented hoarding. However shortly afterwards the Liberals came to power and dropped this policy or, for quite a while, any intervention. Ultimately they came up with various make-work schemes, road building and the like to enable funding of a lot of the population but by that time a lot of the damage was done.
It's true that a severe blight will be noticably worse effects, but minor blights would just accelerate population transfers to the cities, which are more able to emply the immigrants.

By reforming the Poor Laws do you mean the abandonment of the Speelham (sp) system and introduction of the workhouses, rather than the much later, ~1910 repeal of those measures by the Liberals then?
Yes. An earlier introduction means the system can evolve to a better state.
 
Last edited:
East Asia


1826: (Historical) Siam signs the Treaty of Amity and Commerce with the United Kingdom.

1828: In collaboration with the French, the British East India Company intervene in Indo-China in support of Le Van Duyet, from their bases in Java. Buyet was rebelling against Emperor Minh Mang of Vietnam, and his xenophobic anti-progress, anti-missionary policies. By the end of the year Javanese company and French troops have placed Le Van Duyet's son, Le Vah Khoi on the Vietnamese throne. They have received guarantees of free trade and extra-territorial treaty ports. Le Van Khoi will follow his father's policy of Westernisation.

1833 –1835: Vietnam and Siam go to war over disputes in partitioned Cambodia. The Vietnamese receive substantial French support, and with the British state busy in North America, and the East-India Company ambivalent about the result, Siam receives no British aid.

1835: The British lean on the French, who lean on the Vietnamese, parts of whose government is happy to have an excuse to leave a war that that is leaving them increasingly overstretched. Vietnam ends up in control of Isan (north east Siam), Cambodia and Laos.

1837-1840: The first Sino-British War - In 1837 the British force's from Java open the port of Macao to the opium trade, after their envoy is turned away by the local governor. Later in the year Chinese forces return in numbers and forcibly close the port, destroying considerable stocks and killing several merchants. The local British authorities send warships, and forces from the East Indies, arriving early 1838, and a large army from India and Burma, late in 1838. French and Vietnamese forces also invade. The Chinese are humiliated and are forced to agree to the Treaty of Hanoi.

1840: The Chinese Imperial government accede to the treaty of Hanoi. Hong Kong, Canton, Amoy, and Shanghai are ceded to British administration, and several other ports are opened to trade. Hainan is ceded to Vietnam (France), due to internal French politics (part of the fragile compromise the King has established between the Conservatives and the Liberals was to refrain from direct colonisation, which the former disapproved of, instead operating through a client state).

1843: In Siam, an anti-Western coup is attempted. Realising their precarious position, the government suppresses it brutally.

1846-1851: With France distracted by internal issues, the new Vietnamese King claws back significant amounts of power the French had gained in the past 20 years, although he does not do anything to reverse Westernisation or missionary activity, aware of the trouble that would cause. At the end of this period, with the Liberals once more in the ascendancy in France, and looking outwards once more, he wisely pauses the process.

1852: The British East India Company conquers Burma. In Siam, a fourth anti-Western coup attempt succeeds, and institutes an anti-Western/Christian pogrom. British company forces invade from the West, and Franco-Vietnamese from the East.

1857: Ships from Nuevo-Espana's Pacific Squadron based in the Philipenes force Japan and Korea open to external trade.

1860: The low level revolt in north west China explodes into open revolt

1861- 1864: The second Sino-British War begins after the Manchus tortured a British delegation which had come to demand compliance with the terms of the treaty of Hanoi.

1861: The (vaguely British aligned) Sikh Empire invades Tibet. The British don't particularly approve, but don't have the leverage to prevent them.

1863: The Khanate of Kokand invades and conquers Zungharia and the Tarim Basin (OTL Zinjiang). The (French backed) Kingdom of Vietnam invades China

1864: The second Sino-British War ends with the Treaty of Peking, after Indian and East Indian troops strengthened by a core of British regulars and artillery take the capital and capture the Emperor. The terms are very one-sided – the Chinese cede all of the costal provinces from Shanghai south – Zhejiang, Fujian, Guangdong, Taiwan, and the eastern ¼ of Guangxi to the British. Yunnan and the remainder of Guangxi is ceded to Vietnam, and Tibet to the Sikh Empire.

1865: The Chinese government looses effective control of its remaining Eastern provinces of Sichuan, Gansu and Qinghai as the governors revolt. The mandarins and generals in Peking have the Emperor confined from this point. A cabal of aggressive reformers take power.

Witnessing the dismemberment of China, both the Japanese and Koreans begin also rapid modernisation programs. Both had been engaged in low-level civil war since their opening by Nuevo-Espana, but this was the final straw. Powers, looking for influence in the Far East, get involved. The Dutch get back in the game after fifty years, advising Japan, whilst Nuevo-Espanea gets involved in Korea, whilst the Chinese modernisers accept a Prussian delegation

East Asia as of 1865:

 
1869 – 1873: The Great War.

The Great War was the confluence of the struggles associated with Italian and German nationalism and the Imperial rivalry between Russia and Great Britain.

On one side:

Britain, Austria, the Ottoman Empire, and the Sikh Empire at the beginning of the war, and the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies, Sweden and Denmark towards the end.

And the other:

Prussia, Russia (and its client, the Khanate of Kokland), China, and Sardinia

The war began after the Russians pressed the Ottomans for concessions, and the British intervened to prevent it. It snowballed from there, The Prussians attempted to unify Germany by force, but the Austrians proved unexpectedly resilient, partially thanks to French (non-military) support. The initial theatre of the war is the Black Sea, Germany, and between proxies in Central Asia

The Chinese get in on the act towards the end of the year, and remove the stain on their honour by expelling the British. They have some initial success, but Indian, British Chinese, and East Indian troops resist them. In the next year, the arrival of British North American troops turns the situation around.

In the second year of the war, Sardinian backed revolts break out across northern Itlay, attempting to throw out the Austrians whilst they are engaged to the north. After a surprise defeat for the Royal Navy, the Russians take Constantinople towards the end of 1871. The Ottoman government escapes intact, and carries on the fight from Anatolia.

In 1872 Russia suffers two defeats. China is knocked out of the war by the fall of Peking in June, and then they loose Constantinople in September.

The War ends in 1873, The Prussians are defeated in March, allowing the Austrians to put down the Italian rebellion, and then move to threaten Russia. The Swedes declare war and invade north-west Russia in the same month. With its capital threatend and its armies bogged down, the Tsar seeks terms in June. The French take advantage and move forces into northern Italy "to restore order".

1873: The Second Congress of Vienna. The Powers gather in Vienna, to redraw the map of Europe once again.

Results of the Great War in the East:

Britain annexes all of China south of the Yangtze, and the formerly rebellious Sichuan province.

China regains control of Gansu province.

The Khanate of Kokand gains Qinghai, but has to pay substantial tribute to the Sikh Empire.

Results of the Great War in the West

Formation of the Empire of Germany, with its capital in Vienna. It comprises Austria, plus all of historical Germany, excluding Hanover (comprising OTL Hanover, Oldenburg, and Westphalia) which remain in personal union with Britain, Alsace-Lorraine, which goes to France, and Holstein and Schleswig which remain Danish.

This is partially due to British insistence that no more Powers may have ports on both the North Sea and Mediterranean.

The Kingdom of Hungary was constitutionally separated from Austria, although it remained united with Austria in the person of its King, who was also the Emperor of Germany.

Poland was reconstituted as an independent Duchy with a Hapsburg prince.

Rumania was acknowledged as a independent Principality with a Romanov prince.

With the exception of the rump Papal States, Italy is unified under the King of the Two Sicilies, who also gains Tunisia.

Sweden gained the Grand Duchy of Finland and Karelia, which they had taken in the last year of the war.

The Ottomans acceded to North Africa falling under European rule, although they retained nominal sovereignty. The exception was Tunisia, which was formed as an independent Sultanate, under British influence.


Map of Europe in 1875 (I think everyone can guess the colour scheme):



Map of the East in 1875:

 
Last edited:
So what do people think of the plausibility of this, and of nothing major happening in Europe for fifteen years?

How do we think the British are doing with Balance of Power, or have they created a monster with this new super Germany + client/allied states in Poland and Hungary?

What are the British going to do about Hanover. The British government must be hearily sick of the place, and the cost it represents by now, so how are they going to get rid of it? Or, do they see it as a spoiler and tripp wire in Europe, particularly now it is industrialising. Things have got to late to be able to palm it off to the Netherlands as a dowry (which was my first thought), and they're really not going to want it to go to Germany.

On the other hand, how much effect will 60 years of liberal British rule have had on Hanover whilst the rest of Germany has been under conservative rule - will the Hanoverians want to join an undemocratic German Empire?

Here's a map of America in 1900 in this TL:

northamerica4bcli1.gif
 
Last edited:
Top