Relocating the British Monarchy to the Americas

RogueTraderEnthusiast

Perhaps recognizing the incredible potential of the Americas, and determining that it would eclipse the UK as it was, the monarchy declares a series of drastic changes.

1) The creation of the Kingdom of New England, the boundaries being the lands of the colonies
2) Movement of the Royal seat to a city in the KofNE
3) Establishment of a Parliament of New England based in the new Royal Seat.
4) Depending on when, a council of 2 or three First Ministers / Prime Ministers as part of an Imperial Council, carrying the power of their respective Parliaments.

A series of questions

1) Where would the most suitable spot in the Americas be for the new capital?
2) Whilst we had a Benjamin Franklin leading a cause for an American Parliament - what support would this move have in the colonies?
3) Whilst the Monarch has moved, Parliament is still functionally the same in the UK, what impact will there be?
4) What impact will this have on the Empire in the future?
 

Incognitia

Only going to happen if the Home Islands are undergoing some form of rebellion or foreign conquest; foreign conquest is more likely, because the Civil War of the 1600s shows that in any likely rebellion the colonies will also be split rather than being a safe harbour.
 

Escape Zeppelin

Yea this seems extremely unlikely without something serious forcing the monarchy out of England but as the post above points out, that would probably split the colonies. And honestly I don't know how much support this would have even from the staunchest American monarchist. They're going to take one look at the tax increases moving the entire British government to a colony is going to cost and go "no thanks".

I think elevating some cadet branch to King and establishing a separate monarchy is more likely. Not very likely but more likely.
 
Timaeus

Timaeus

Incognitia said:
Only going to happen if the Home Islands are undergoing some form of rebellion or foreign conquest; foreign conquest is more likely, because the Civil War of the 1600s shows that in any likely rebellion the colonies will also be split rather than being a safe harbour.
Click to expand...

Unless a crown prince ends up exiled there and raises a family of his own, like in Look To The West. Still, Britain remained more important in that until the phlogistication of the royal family.
 

James XI

This would IMO almost certainly not happen. But if it did, from a European point of view, there's no question that Quebec City was the far and away most important geo-strategic point in North America, and especially for a nautical nation like the British, control of the arterial St.Laurence and therefore Great Lakes basin makes it an obvious choice.
 
Wallet

Wallet

Banned
When the colonists politely ask for less taxes, the monarchy lowers taxes. Not like OTL where they just laughed and sent troops.

Napoleon invades Great Britain. Say it's because more of the Royal Navy is in the Americas protecting New York, Boston, etc.

The Royal Family flees to the colonies.
 

Galba Otho Vitelius

This could happen if a time machine delivered George III and his ministers to the late twentieth century and then brought them back. In other words, its pretty ASB.

There are two ways to approach this. The first is to look at the one and only case where a royal European court did relocated to its colonies in the Americas. This was the Portuguese Court relocating to Rio de Janeiro in 1808. Some factors applied here that were not present in the case of the UK and its American colonies:

1. Brazil had developed significantly greater population and wealth than Portugal. This was not the case with the thirteen colonies and England, let alone Britain. The ratios of just about anything important vs the mother country and the colony were reversed.

2. The move to Brazil didn't take place until 1808, thirty-two years after the American declaration of independence. And the American revolt demonstrated that there was a real chance of colonies breaking away. The Spanish colonies had already begun the early stages of revolts or breaking away from Spain.

3. Britain was the most powerful country in at least Europe at that time, Portugal definitely wasn't.

4. Portugal was occupied by Napoleon's soldiers.

This is an illustration of what it took for something like this to happen. Also worth noting that the King of Great Britain and Ireland was much more under control of his ministers and Parliament than any king on the Continent (well sort of excluding Poland).

Its also worth noting just how laid back British control over the colonies was from 1688 until the ministers started looking for ways to plug holes in their budget in the 1760s. During this time they converted exactly one chartered or proprietary colony (Massachusetts) to a crown colony, let the colonial legislatures pay the salaries of colonial officials, let two colonies elect their governors, winked at violations at the trade laws, and did nothing to organize bishoprics. This was a huge contrast to the control the Spanish, Portuguese, and French operated over their colonies. A large reason the thirteen colonies wound up declaring independence was the shock that Parliament would actually want to, well, govern them.

So you had a situation where the British pretty much ignored the colonies for seventy years and then belatedly tried to find ways to make them pay. This is not conducive to relocating the royal court there.

What maybe could happen is that George III decides to visit the colonies. This actually could have done some good, but probably his ministers would have objected. And no member of any European royal house visited the Western hemisphere until the Braganzas showed up in 1808.
 

Emperor Constantine

Only scenario I can think of where this could happen would be the one from Code Geass: Napoleon conquers the British Isles and the Monarchy flees to the new world. Aside from this no dice. The homeland has to be fully occupied to get a metropolitan reversal a la Portugal and Brazil.
 

Jurgen Wullenwever

It seems like the 1640s and 1680s could see some fleeing Stuart prince settling in the colonies, or having the events of 1715 and 1745 being relocated.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top