Philadelphia Burning (My First Alternate History)

Aaaaaah, it's back! Poor Hudsonians and Westmorelanders. At least they've got room in Maine. Hopefully New England and Britain can come to peaceful resolutions.
 
The USA and Fredon are both involved in maritime trade, while not as much as New England it would be more than OTL since the New England maritime assets won't be as desirable as "local" bottoms for trade. This means the UK is impressing US and Fredonian sailors. While this hurts the US and Fredon less than New England, the US and Fredon have another bone with the UK which is the presence of British forces in the Old Northwest and their support of the Indians. While the USA and Fredon have their differences over who owns what, they are both agreed that it does not belong to the UK and they need to withdraw per treaty obligations. Also supporting red savages to kill innocent Fredon/Union women and children is a big no-no. While the USA, Fredon, and New England won't rejoin, they could get together to deal with the UK.

Stop impressment, stop supporting the Indians and leave the Old Northwest, and (maybe) settle the Maine/Canada border based on population on the ground could be the goals of the coalition. This might also be an incentive for the USA and Fredon to sit down and divide the Old Northwest amicably - the Ohio River to the junction with the Mississippi being a reasonable dividing line. For the USA, this gets them plenty of land (and much more suitable for slave plantations) and also removes a friction point between them and the UK/Indians - let Fredon deal with that mess. The USA has to deal with Spain, so why not get rid of one foreign power you are dickering with.

All three countries are "settler societies", although New England much less than Fredon and USA now. I can see how Fredon might not want Yankees near the Fredon-NE border, but having them in the Ohio country under Fredon authority helps support Fredon claims, and NE can't use them to seize territory like they might near the border (IMHO a non-event). It appears to me the the Fredon democracy is closer to New England than the USA with lifetime appointments, higher requirements for franchise etc and also slavery in Fredon is already on the way out for economic reasons if no others, which is more in line with the general abolitionist attitude of Yankees.
 
I agree that the Ohio river does look like it would make it nice natural border, but I can't see the United States so willing to just give that up. Fredon and the US are certainly going to battle this out, and the US with Spain over West Florida. I also can't really see any reason that the US here would stretch from Sea to Sea, I think British North America will certainly be larger.
 
@Nephi: I respectfully disagree with you. I can see the US and Fredon squabbling over the Old Northwest, but not coming to blows. The USA has a good deal of empty land up to the Mississippi, and it is closer and more accessible to them than the land north of the Ohio. Furthermore they have already had a threat to their sovereignty there with a rebellion and significant foreign meddling by a foreign power which is still in the neighborhood (Spain). There is no way they will get all of the Old Northwest, and it is the territory north of the Ohio that has the most Indian trouble and British presence. Fredon has an edge in white population, and much of the USA's white population is well away from the border and distance pre-railroad can be key. At this point in time, to the extent the settlers north of the Ohip have any affinity to one of the three entities, it is to Fredon not the USA. Additionally Fredon at this point in time has significantly more industrial capacity than the USA, even if ITTL the USA has developed some more than OTL in the relatively short time since the breakup of the "United States". This makes a war with Fredon a crap shoot on the face of it. In particular I wonder how Delaware and Maryland would feel about a fight with Fredon, large chunks of both states would be overrun quickly and should Fredon win those bits would be transferred, and how would those states "win" by getting some extra bits of the Old Northwest.

Geography counts. Fredon has excellent access from its population centers to the Old Northwest between the Great Lakes and also via rivers - the Allegheny and Monongahela join together to form the Ohio at Pittsburgh, and provide a natural highway to the Old Northwest. Access to the Old Northwest from Virginia is all overland, through the rugged territory of West Virginia, the narrow neck of Maryland is also rugged and could easily be interdicted. Furthermore in getting to OTLs Pittsburgh, Fredonian troops pass through areas much more settled than the USA approaches, meaning better availability of food and forage along the way (check how much forage horses need - its huge). OTL the "Fredon" route is how the vast majority of settlers got to the part of the Old Northwest north of the Ohio, and his how US forces went west to fight the Indians in the Old Northwest.

The folks running the USA are not fools, and neither are the folks running Fredon. The map posted earlier shows the competing claims, and the Ohio River line does a good job of splitting the difference. If Fredon and the USA get in to a serious fight, the only winners are the Spanish and the British, and perhaps Tecumseh's confederation. New England is going to sit any such fight out, although they might try and bite something off Fredon if they are weakened enough - doubtful - they certainly would not jump in as an ally of the USA in this fight.

The territory north of the Ohio is going to be relatively closely tied to the rest of Fredon. The settlers are going to need protection from the Indians, and they are too few and scattered to provide this themselves, plus between the Great Lakes and the Ohio River system communications between the new areas and back east will be decent by the standards of the day. To be honest I don't see the territory belonging to Fredon in the Old Northwest as deciding to break off. The odds of the western territories of the USA breaking off are also small, although the Spanish large presence could entice some. Yes the British are in Canada, but the population of Canada in 1800 is less than 100,000 and it is concentrated in Eastern Ontario and east - the Maritimes really don't matter. Furthermore, almost all of the Old Northwest is separated from Canada by the Great Lakes.
 
I can't imagine why they wouldn't, unless there's an allohistorical parallel that gives southern Indiana and Illinois to the USA since it was in easy access from the Ohio River to the Appalachian-descended men that settled it in OTL versus Mid-Atlantic colonists having to cross those IN/IL foothills to it.
 
@Umbric Man : The way most settlers got to Southern Indiana and Illinois was via the Ohio River. See the geographic comments on my previous post. No matter what the settlers north of the Ohio are going to need protection from the Indians, and given the geography, getting troops from the USA to settlements north of the Ohio to protect them, and supplying those troops that are there (lots of stuff like powder, shot, etc needs to come from back east for some time to come) is way more difficult for the USA than Fredon. No matter where they come from, the settlers are going to be more interested in belonging to the entity that can best protect them, their families, and their farms rather than what flag is flying over the local fort. This is also why the Old Northwest north of the Ohio and east of the Mississippi is not going to break off from Fredon - early on they can't protect themselves, by the time they might be able to protect themselves they will be tightly bound economically and politically. Sure, some really bad policies might piss them off, but given the Fredon military will be there...
 
@Umbric Man : The way most settlers got to Southern Indiana and Illinois was via the Ohio River. See the geographic comments on my previous post. No matter what the settlers north of the Ohio are going to need protection from the Indians, and given the geography, getting troops from the USA to settlements north of the Ohio to protect them, and supplying those troops that are there (lots of stuff like powder, shot, etc needs to come from back east for some time to come) is way more difficult for the USA than Fredon. No matter where they come from, the settlers are going to be more interested in belonging to the entity that can best protect them, their families, and their farms rather than what flag is flying over the local fort. This is also why the Old Northwest north of the Ohio and east of the Mississippi is not going to break off from Fredon - early on they can't protect themselves, by the time they might be able to protect themselves they will be tightly bound economically and politically. Sure, some really bad policies might piss them off, but given the Fredon military will be there...

I am afraid your arguements are flawed sloreck. By 1790 there are already more than 100K+ settlers from from the tidewater regions Virginia/MD beyond the Appalachians in the western counties and the KY counties in the central portion of the Ohio valley. They are already there on the south shore. KY militia were the ones charged with repelling Amerindian raids from north of the river. It requires assent from Richmond of course.

The Potomac/Shenandoah and the New/Kanawha valleys give as much access to the Ohio as the Susquehanna/Allegheny. It is as easily accessable from both the tidewater and populated areas of Eastern PA. Actually I'm not certain why KY didn't access already. They have been putting motions before the Confederation Congress since 1784. In 1788 they put motions forward with Richmond's assent. But for ratification of the Constitution, then in progress they would have done so under the Articles. I presume though that it would have needed 9 States to approve,but I am not sure though. They did so again in 1789. The will of the settlers was obviously there and Richmond was by now willing so it should at least have occured when the rump US decided it's own version of constitutional reform. What actually constitutes 2/3:for ratification? Until the Northern states withdrawal is recognized by the US which probably includes terms of withdrawal. They are still part of the union. The new constitution would only be provisional until those terms are set such that what constitutes 2/3 for ratification can actually be determined. Honestly I don't see MD or Delaware actually ratifying until the status of these territories. West of the Appalachians is settled. They will be fervent supporters of of retaining the NW. MD refused to ratify the articles for this very reason. They were the last to do so I think, or one of the very last.
 
Last edited:
I am afraid your arguements are flawed sloreck. By 1790 there are already more than 100K+ settlers from from the tidewater regions Virginia/MD beyond the Appalachians in the western counties and the KY counties in the central portion of the Ohio valley. They are already there on the south shore. KY militia were the ones charged with repelling Amerindian raids from north of the river. It requires assent from Richmond of course.

The Potomac/Shenandoah and the New/Kanawha valleys give as much access to the Ohio as the Susquehanna/Allegheny. It is as easily accessable from both the tidewater and populated areas of Eastern PA. Actually I'm not certain why KY didn't access already. They have been putting motions before the Confederation Congress since 1784. In 1788 they put motions forward with Richmond's assent. But for ratification of the Constitution, then in progress they would have done so under the Articles. I presume though that it would have needed 9 States to approve,but I am not sure though. They did so again in 1789. The will of the settlers was obviously there and Richmond was by now willing so it should at least have occured when the rump US decided it's own version of constitutional reform. What actually constitutes 2/3:for ratification? Until the Northern states withdrawal is recognized by the US which probably includes terms of withdrawal. They are still part of the union. The new constitution would only be provisional until those terms are set such that what constitutes 2/3 for ratification can actually be determined. Honestly I don't see MD or Delaware actually ratifying until the status of these territories. West of the Appalachians is settled. They will be fervent supporters of of retaining the NW. MD refused to ratify the articles for this very reason. They were the last to do so I think, or one of the very last.


Well they may eventually become their own buffer State between Fredon, and the US.

Something like.
Delmarva, the result of them having lost a war and having to agree upon the Ohio River. The terms were pretty light, concessions the US had to make was a demilitarized zone along the Potomac River, Delaware and Maryland found themselves set up as an independent state.
 
OTL the northern border of Maine was under dispute until 1842, when the treaty more or less split the difference between the maximal Biritsh claim and the maximal US claim. The area ITTL is still pretty unsettled, you might see more "Yankees" settling in this empty area if they feel less inclined to go west in to Fredonian territory. If the NEC and the UK are on friendly terms and more commercially entwined the British, given the facts of more Yankees on the ground would br more than happy to give up some empty land that might be "Quebec/French" might settle the border further north of OTL.

I would expect that at some point as it becomes more populous and perhaps less "Puritan" than Massachusetts, Maine would become another state like OTL.

You know this territory in the St. John valley as well as points west to the St. Croix were settled by loyalists.... Right?
 
I should also point out that St. Croix River was established as the border between British Nova Scotia and Mass. At the Treaty of Paris ending the ARW.


You are also going to need to deal with the debts accumulated by the individual states and the Confederation government, which are quite substantial. 56million for the confederal government and some 21million more by the the individual states in total. 6.1 collectively for the New Englanders, 11.2 for the state's south of the M-D line. And 4.2 for the state's in between. How do you intend to address this? The sale of lands in the western territories with the extinguishment of the native claim was supposed to in part off set these. One of the reasons Mass. Held on to the right to extinguish native land title in western New York even though they yielded sovereignty claims to NY was for this very reason. Is this the basis by which NE claims were transferred to NY in the NW?

NY'claims appear to be tied to the declaration of the Iroquois being a protectorate of the colony of NY at the height of economic competition with New France during the 17th Century. This ignores of course that the six nations ceded all their claimed territories. " By right of conquest" directly to the crown at the beginning of the 18th. Treaty of Nanfan I think. The wording of legislation for New York is couched in terms delineating where its boundaries lay, not so much in what it was relinquishing.
 
The USA and Fredon are both involved in maritime trade, while not as much as New England it would be more than OTL since the New England maritime assets won't be as desirable as "local" bottoms for trade. This means the UK is impressing US and Fredonian sailors. While this hurts the US and Fredon less than New England, the US and Fredon have another bone with the UK which is the presence of British forces in the Old Northwest and their support of the Indians. While the USA and Fredon have their differences over who owns what, they are both agreed that it does not belong to the UK and they need to withdraw per treaty obligations. Also supporting red savages to kill innocent Fredon/Union women and children is a big no-no. While the USA, Fredon, and New England won't rejoin, they could get together to deal with the UK.

Stop impressment, stop supporting the Indians and leave the Old Northwest, and (maybe) settle the Maine/Canada border based on population on the ground could be the goals of the coalition. This might also be an incentive for the USA and Fredon to sit down and divide the Old Northwest amicably - the Ohio River to the junction with the Mississippi being a reasonable dividing line. For the USA, this gets them plenty of land (and much more suitable for slave plantations) and also removes a friction point between them and the UK/Indians - let Fredon deal with that mess. The USA has to deal with Spain, so why not get rid of one foreign power you are dickering with.

All three countries are "settler societies", although New England much less than Fredon and USA now. I can see how Fredon might not want Yankees near the Fredon-NE border, but having them in the Ohio country under Fredon authority helps support Fredon claims, and NE can't use them to seize territory like they might near the border (IMHO a non-event). It appears to me the the Fredon democracy is closer to New England than the USA with lifetime appointments, higher requirements for franchise etc and also slavery in Fredon is already on the way out for economic reasons if no others, which is more in line with the general abolitionist attitude of Yankees.
Why is the Ohio river the "logical border". The southern territories were not the ones in dispute, and would be resolved subsequent to this entire affair in piecemeal fashion with the individual states involved without overlapping claims.
 
One other thing to point out that probably should be borne in mind. Much of western NY and Pa is largely still virgin wilderness. Prior to improvements to transportation, which would not occur until the 1830's and paid for by the federal government. There were only three natural routes west over the Appalachians, sufficient for the movement of people, livestock and wagons carrying commerce or supplies were the Wilderness Road from SE Virginia to the Kentucky valley, the upper Potomac from Me, giving access to both the Monagehela and Youghiogheny and then Ft. Pitt on the Ohio. this is the most direct route from Philadelphia. The last being the upper branches of the Susquehanna north to NY and West to the Allegheny and thence the Ohio.
 
[QU"Nephi, post: 16880051, member: 101443"]I guess its all in whoever settles it first then.[/QUOTE]
Yes, and there are already several 10's of thousands in eastern Ky co. In Virginia. Logistics and men and material already favour the rump US.
 
I just started reading this, so forgive me for commenting on the first post, but...

Can I just say that "Due, of course, to the Pennsylvania State House Fire" is like my favorite PoD (punchline of divergence) of all time?

I may end up hating this timeline, but I love it for right now.
 
Top