No canadian confederation

Lets imagine that various issues gets unresolved or that Canada simply doesn't get invited to the charlottetown conference and that confederation never occurs. What then would be the aftermath ?

- Newfoundland: History would remain largely unchanged until the 1940s. Assuming they faced the same problems as in OTL, they might have decided to join the Maritime Union (see below), assume full sovereignty or remain administered by the UK ending up like the Falklands.

- New Brunswick & Nova Scotia: Since the idea of the Maritime Union was the reason for the charlotetown conference which started the confederation movement, the 3 colonies (NB, NS & Prince Edward Island) might have formed their dominion with each keeping some level of autonomy within it.

- Prince Edward Island: PEI did not join confederation right away *here*, until the 1870 it remained a separate colony and it is only when the USA showed too much interest that the Canadian government intervened so *there*, either PEI might have joined the Maritime Union or the USA.

- United Canada: 3 possibilities comes to mind:
1- Split off into 2 dominions
2- Stay together as 2 provinces
3- Stay together without into real internal divisions
The first one would appear to be the easiest and the politicians in Canada-west would probably prefer it but the anglophones in Canada-east might reject the idea as giving too much autonomy to the french-canadians. There could be a call for an autonomous Montreal (the suggestion occured in OTL) either as a territory with a special status within the dominion or a fully independent one.

The second option might work and the 2 communities would be almost evenly split population wise. In the long term though you would probably see the same call for independence as in OTL.

The last option would probably not work since you would need to either harmonise 2 different legal systems (the francophones would object) or keep both with overlaping jurisdictions.

- British Columbia: would probably have formed a Dominion of its own.

- Rupert Land and North West Territories: Without a central government to buy it, either parcels were sold to the various dominions (which could mean very different borders for the dominions then their OTL counterparts) or the UK might have decided to buy it from the Hudson's Bay Company and administer it until such time as enough settlers inhabit part of it to create new dominions out of it.
 
Wouldn't this make British North America more vulnerable to American invasion? I should hope there would be some sort of British North American Confederation that binds these Dominions together to help defend them from any American threateningness.
 
Lets imagine that various issues gets unresolved or that Canada simply doesn't get invited to the charlottetown conference and that confederation never occurs. What then would be the aftermath ?

Having read only the OP, and not the rest of the thread, I'll bite.

- Newfoundland: History would remain largely unchanged until the 1940s. Assuming they faced the same problems as in OTL, they might have decided to join the Maritime Union (see below), assume full sovereignty or remain administered by the UK ending up like the Falklands.

- New Brunswick & Nova Scotia: Since the idea of the Maritime Union was the reason for the charlotetown conference which started the confederation movement, the 3 colonies (NB, NS & Prince Edward Island) might have formed their dominion with each keeping some level of autonomy within it.

- Prince Edward Island: PEI did not join confederation right away *here*, until the 1870 it remained a separate colony and it is only when the USA showed too much interest that the Canadian government intervened so *there*, either PEI might have joined the Maritime Union or the USA.

In the long run, that would probably be the better option for *Atlantic Canada, though it would help if Newfoundland either at least participates in the Conference or at least joins within the first couple decades of it operating. In PEI's case, it would also help if PEI abolished its semi-feudal structure of land ownership early on. The economy could get a bit stronger in this regard as much of it would be locally owned - at least in the beginning. I don't think that having one bit of *Atlantic Canada joining the USA at this point would be feasible; too much would be at stake here. What could, however, be a possibility would be adding areas to the Maritime Union rather than subtracting from it. Bermuda, for example, could be a possible addition to the Maritime Union. Even well before the US Civil War, as ASB as it might sound, it could theoretically be possible for a few of the New England states to join, all things considered.

- United Canada: 3 possibilities comes to mind:
1- Split off into 2 dominions
2- Stay together as 2 provinces
3- Stay together without into real internal divisions

The first one would appear to be the easiest and the politicians in Canada-west would probably prefer it but the anglophones in Canada-east might reject the idea as giving too much autonomy to the french-canadians. There could be a call for an autonomous Montreal (the suggestion occured in OTL) either as a territory with a special status within the dominion or a fully independent one.

The second option might work and the 2 communities would be almost evenly split population wise. In the long term though you would probably see the same call for independence as in OTL.

The last option would probably not work since you would need to either harmonise 2 different legal systems (the francophones would object) or keep both with overlaping jurisdictions.

Post-Durham Report, it would probably be easier from a Canadien POV to have the second option (which is essentially similar to OTL). Ideally, the first option would be preferred (though only as an option of an independent republic, cf. the Patriotes), but the second option would be the only realistic solution, as would having the capital as in OTL in Ottawa. United Canada, as in OTL, also has opportunities for expansion, which it would probably use to its advantage.

- British Columbia: would probably have formed a Dominion of its own.

- Rupert Land and North West Territories: Without a central government to buy it, either parcels were sold to the various dominions (which could mean very different borders for the dominions then their OTL counterparts) or the UK might have decided to buy it from the Hudson's Bay Company and administer it until such time as enough settlers inhabit part of it to create new dominions out of it.

As for the West: both would probably make sense, but as I've said it is also possible for *Ottawa and/or *Victoria to buy the lands from the HBC and work it out from there. The results are essentially the same, though the internal divisions would definitely be different.
 
Wouldn't this make British North America more vulnerable to American invasion? I should hope there would be some sort of British North American Confederation that binds these Dominions together to help defend them from any American threateningness.

Out West, oh definitely. In the East, there would be a slim possibility for United Canada, but probably not the Maritime Union as that was already happening in OTL.
 
Wouldn't this make British North America more vulnerable to American invasion? I should hope there would be some sort of British North American Confederation that binds these Dominions together to help defend them from any American threateningness.

I guess the various dominions could, militarily, have a NATO of sort and some form of mandatory National service to ensure prepardness.
 
I've got a few ideas. First of all, I think that if th Underground Railway brought the blacks primarily to United Canada, that could contribute to an interesting national identity. Second, could a worse Reconstruction bring a lot of Dixites to the Maritimes, building some hostility towards UC. Possibility of an aristocratic republic in the Maritimes. Third, we could have Mormons emigrate into Canada in the hopes of petitioning for their own dominion. Finally, if the dominions are smaller, why not kingdoms
 
Here is the begining of the timeline of events:
----------------------------------------------
- 1864: The Charlottetown conference was called by the Maritime colonies with the subject of forming an union. The conference's purpose was changed when representatives of United Canada, who had requested to attend, proposed an enlarged union that would include all of British North America.

- 1865: The Atlantic Provinces are unimpressed with the Quebec Resolutions. The legislatures of Prince Edward Island and Nova Scotia reject them outright while the Premier of New Brunswick decide to go for an election (which he loses) instead of approving them.

- 1866: Undetered by the events in the maritimes, Canadian Premier Macdonald tables 15 resolutions regarding a potential confederation. While most are passed with minor or no modifications, a sticking point arise over the rights of minorities in regard to education. Langevin, the solicitor general, propose to establish 2 superintendant in the future province of lower canada, one for each denomination. Representative Bell from Canada east proposed the same for his province but a debate explode when other members refuse to agree, stating that the catholics of upper canada had no historical claim to such rights.

Pressure was put on Bell to withdraw his bill but representatives from canada east, seeing this as a snub, threaten to vote against Langevin's bill if there is to be no reciprocity. Macdonal and Cartier at first suggest to remove both but are then faced with Minister Galt saying he will resign if the rights of the protestants are not protected by law. It is then suggested that the question be put on hold for a debate at a later date but a majority of representatives refuse to continue sitting until the matter is settled. Clearly at a deadlock and unable to continue with the work of the chamber, the event is seen as a motio0n of non-confidence, forcing new elections.

In the maritimes, the canadian tumult only exacerbate the people's negative view in regard to confederation. The locals fear that the difficulty in reaching a compromise is indicative of the instability facing the federation and that if a compromise could be reached, it might give too much power to the catholics. Maritime politicians continue with the idea of a union without canada when they meet to discuss the matter at the Fredericton Conference. Having agreed on a legislative rather then a federative union, an official petition is sent to the colonial ministry for advices on how to proceed next.

Back in Canada, the elections, despite including a number of parties and independants, is reduced to a contest between 2 camps: the proand the anti confederation with the later garnering the most seats. Dubbed the "Unholy Alliance" by its detractors due to the diametricaly opposed opinions of its members except on the subject of confederation, this new coalition offers to form a government. Before anything is decided, the pro side sends a delegation to London in a last ditch attempt at saving the confederation ideal. Getting wind of this, the coalition sends one of their own.

The pro-confederation delegation met the colonial authorities first, their revised proposal was for a federation of 2 provinces (canada-east and canada-west) which could, in time, merge with the maritime union. This proposal was originaly met positively but some had reservation as to its stability considering the fracas over education. The anti-confederation group played on those fears and insinuating the posibility of an uprising and even annexion by the USA if it went through, they proposed instead the creation of 2 completely separate entities. After much discussion, it was this proposal that was eventualy accepted.

A formal meeting, the London Conference, was called to hash out the exact organisation of the new north american polities which resulted in the British North America Declaration.

- 1867: After passing through the parliement and receiving royal assent, Toronto, Laurentia, the Maritime Union and Newfoundland became sovereign Dominions within the British Empire.
 
I'll post a description of the country later on but here are the original (i.e. in 1867) emblems of the Dominion of Laurentia.

(mdna)-la-emblems.png
 
I'll post a description of the country later on but here are the original (i.e. in 1867) emblems of the Dominion of Laurentia.

That green leaf strikes me as rather ugly, also why not France Moderne on the arms quartered with England if you're going to have that device?
 
That green leaf strikes me as rather ugly, also why not France Moderne on the arms quartered with England if you're going to have that device?

The green leaf was the one used most commonly (and still used most commonly) in quebec heraldry as it is the colour of a live one. Canada in OTL only chose a red one because red and white were the national colours.

*here* the first arms of Quebec given by the british heraldic authorities contained in chief 2 blue fleur-de-lys on gold as it was felt that using the royal arms of a foreign dynasty would be improper. The only reason why quebec eventualy started using France Moderne in chief was due to a unilateral decision from its government (and was never accepted by the british heralds).
 
The green leaf was the one used most commonly (and still used most commonly) in quebec heraldry as it is the colour of a live one. Canada in OTL only chose a red one because red and white were the national colours.

*here* the first arms of Quebec given by the british heraldic authorities contained in chief 2 blue fleur-de-lys on gold as it was felt that using the royal arms of a foreign dynasty would be improper. The only reason why quebec eventualy started using France Moderne in chief was due to a unilateral decision from its government (and was never accepted by the british heralds).

Wikipedia tells me it was done in 1939, at which point Canada was long independent and the decision would have been done by a provincial legislature as a sovereign entity (well sort of, there was Canada above but the federal government didn't seem to protest, or is my understanding of Canadian federalism to close to the american/mexican view of things), or am I missing something?
 
The canadian heraldic authority was only established in 1988. Before that, any person or organisations was, technicaly speaking, supposed to get its arms from the college of arms of london or the court of lord lyon if you were of scottish descent (or somehow linked to scotland) if you wanted it to be "official". Obviously, anyone can (have and does) chose a coat of arms for itself but some authorities might chose to disregard them if they decide to be snotty about it.
 
The canadian heraldic authority was only established in 1988. Before that, any person or organisations was, technicaly speaking, supposed to get its arms from the college of arms of london or the court of lord lyon if you were of scottish descent (or somehow linked to scotland) if you wanted it to be "official". Obviously, anyone can (have and does) chose a coat of arms for itself but some authorities might chose to disregard them if they decide to be snotty about it.

At the same time, the provinces were not any person, but the crown, thus my rising eyebrows.
 
If it was the Lieutenant Governor who had decided on the change and then received assent from the GG, maybe a point could be made about the "crown" having decided on the change, but it wasn't, it was the lowly elected individuals.
 
Top