[North America AH] - Long Term Impact of Maine and Michigan as Canadian Provinces?
- Thread starter Droman
- Start date
Notes on Maine:
- Intended to be the home of British Loyalists expelled from America, project was later abandoned when Maine joined the Union.
- Also intended to be settled by Irish immigrants and dubbed New Ireland.
- One of the most influential states in the paper and textile industries.
- The first state to support the anti-slavery Republican Party.
- Contributed more Union soldiers per population than any other state.
- Dominated by the Republican party since the Union.
- In the 50-year period 1861 to 1911 (when Democrats temporarily swept most state offices) Maine Republicans served as Vice President, Secretary of State, Secretary of the Treasury (twice), President pro tempore of the Senate, Speaker of the House (twice) and Republican Nominee for the Presidency.
- Home to Ford Motor Company and the birthplace of much of the automotive industry.
- Heavily Unionist and contributed greatly during the American Civil War.
- Strong Republican stronghold since the inception of the party and voted for Reagan, Bush and Trump.
- Detroit was the fourth largest city during the 1920s in all of the USA.
- Michigan manufactured 10.9 percent of total United States military armaments produced during WW2, second behind New York.
- With almost ten million residents, Michigan is a large and influential state, ranking tenth in population among the fifty states.
- Home state of President Gerald Ford.
Keeping these as territories of British North America is imaginable, I suppose, at least for some time. Will there be revanchism?
One obvious consequence is that there will be two fewer free states in the Union. This would change the dynamics of the free/slave controversies, but I don't know how.
One obvious consequence is that there will be two fewer free states in the Union. This would change the dynamics of the free/slave controversies, but I don't know how.
I wonder if Massachusetts is split to keep the balance of free states and slave states... Only Western MA is the location of the new state, not Maine.
I wonder what the lake Michigan border would look like, and how it would impact the ports.
Georgie777
Banned
C-canadian cars?
Though in all seriousness US industry would have to either be reduced or moved. Meanwhile Canada gets a lot of boosts.
Though in all seriousness US industry would have to either be reduced or moved. Meanwhile Canada gets a lot of boosts.
The big consequence for the US is 2 fewer free states, which could mean an earlier conflict between the north and south. Actually I suspect a bigger difference, since west of Michigan the border would probably be somewhere between 42 and 45 N, most of OTL Wisconsin and Minnesota are likely also British/Canadian. The US likely still gets the whole Louisiana purchase though. Possibly this means its the North or New England that ultimately attempts to secede instead of the South which is more dominant in this scenario.
Canada is bigger and stronger meanwhile.
Canada is bigger and stronger meanwhile.
Nephi
Banned
I don't think Maine would still be called that, yes New Ireland or perhaps by now Maine might be the name of a part of it that split off and became its own province.
Massachusetts would have bitched and moaned about loosing it for a while.
Michigan might not be called that, then again it might.
I think it's settlers would have been more like those in Ontario and it would be kinda similar to it too. Canadas capital city might be Detroit or whatever they call what they found there.
Massachusetts would have bitched and moaned about loosing it for a while.
Michigan might not be called that, then again it might.
I think it's settlers would have been more like those in Ontario and it would be kinda similar to it too. Canadas capital city might be Detroit or whatever they call what they found there.
Michigan retains the name Michigan, though Detroit probably ends up being the provincial capital. Maine might get attached to new Brunswick, or be named New Ireland, but it looks similar to New Brunswick. Canada gets the Transcolonial RR in 1855.
Unless the border west of Lake Michigan is shifted I'd say that this new Canada looks eerily similar to OTL Canada, except this one has an extra Maritime province and an extra central Canadian province. There MIGHT be a push for provincially appointed senators with the two additional provinces, but a lot of that depends on the specifics of how the Confederation talks go.
Unless the border west of Lake Michigan is shifted I'd say that this new Canada looks eerily similar to OTL Canada, except this one has an extra Maritime province and an extra central Canadian province. There MIGHT be a push for provincially appointed senators with the two additional provinces, but a lot of that depends on the specifics of how the Confederation talks go.
Yeah, after I made my second post I went back and start looking at maps. Wound up mentally adding in Washington, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Wyoming, Idaho, the Dakotas, Oregon and Alaska to spread the border line across relatively straight, but that just seemed insane in terms of the amount of butterflies it would create. I also had to edit the borders of between this different USA and Canada.
Last edited:
The Red River flows deep into Minnesota and North Dakota, though. It got cut off at the 49th OTL, but it's still fairly long. The Columbia river makes sense though, especially if you adjoin "Washington" to British Columbia. Though Oregon Country was contested fiercely by both sides.
How much of Michigan? One needs to remember that the UP did entirely go to the Territory of Michigan initially. In fact some of the Statehood proposals specifically rejected it. Say Canada via Britian winds up with the Lower Peninsula. Wisconsin's* analog ITTL winds up with the UP. ITTL The Union is short probably some regiments but not the 40+ Michigan raised. But they still get the oriinal 90% of Uniom copper production in the 1860s. Plus the iron ore. Plus the bonus gold and silver that came out of the iron mines. The iron and copper that came out of the UP were worth more than the gold out of California. ITTL Wisconsin also gets the NE corner of Minnesota. Iowa extends another 100+ miles north. Iowa and Wisconsin wind up with a lot of the settlers that go to Michigan. The automotive industry long with associated rubber, machine tools, glass, steel, tool & die shops, parts suppliers, etc get centered on an arc between Michigan City, Indiana and Green Bay. On the political side the US is much or inclined to push for something equivilant to 54°40'
* Possible names 1) Ouisconsin, 2) Keewauna, 3) Coppernia
* Possible names 1) Ouisconsin, 2) Keewauna, 3) Coppernia
More populous Canada, though I'm not sure if either Maine or Michigan especially would have the same population as they do in OTL. On the other hand, it might attract more immigration to Canada since there's more open farmland and potentially more industry. However, if the UP and Minnesota and their critical mines remain outside of Canadian territory, then it's likely Michigan industry will be less than OTL (and correspondingly less people). Instead, I think Michigan would draw off people from the Golden Horseshoe area meaning a slightly more dispersed Canadian population.
One interesting thing I've noticed is that all along the Maine-Quebec border, the Maine side is mostly wilderness whereas the Quebec side has more substantial rural populations and even decent-sized towns. If Canada owns all of Maine, will this population be more evenly spread and you see Maine being more populated (and Francophone?).
Why would Iowa extend so far north TTL? Plus Ouisconsin is literally the same as Wisconsin, so why wouldn't it be Anglicised? Although I do like the older form Meskonsin which is more true to the original American Indian word that inspired the name.
One interesting thing I've noticed is that all along the Maine-Quebec border, the Maine side is mostly wilderness whereas the Quebec side has more substantial rural populations and even decent-sized towns. If Canada owns all of Maine, will this population be more evenly spread and you see Maine being more populated (and Francophone?).
Why would Iowa extend so far north TTL? Plus Ouisconsin is literally the same as Wisconsin, so why wouldn't it be Anglicised? Although I do like the older form Meskonsin which is more true to the original American Indian word that inspired the name.
With both Michigan and Maine Britain is far more entrenched in North America with a much less assailable position, they're likely to respond to Union goading in Oregon much less favourably.
Losing territory in the War of 1812 might well lead to a far more agressive US foreign policy in later years. The lessons of 1812 will take a while to sink in. Overall the US preformed poorly on land. IMO this was due to large degree in the trusting to the militia system . I think you would see an expanded US regular army. In the 1820's the US Army averaged about 6,000 Officers, enlisted and cadets. I could see this becoming up to four times that. The early Hall breech loaders would need to be improved. Or better yet replaced with a falling block type rifle. I personally question why muzzle loaders continued to dominate as long as they did. The advantages of a rifle that can be employed and loaded from a postion other than standing should be obvious to just about any one. The one technology that no country stumbled on in the 19th century was of course the mortar. Not the huge cast iron monsters but the light infantry support weapon. A relatively light tube in comparision to a cannon delivering high trajectory explosive shells. Capable of firing 4 or 5 shots a minute. Doable by the 1840s?