Spanish-American War in the 1850's

At this time the Spanish navy still had a decent power projection capability. In the Chincha Islands War (1864-1866), they sent a very good ironclad and six very powerful steam screw frigates. Isabella's Spain also invaded and fought against Haiti and rebels in the Dominican Republic 1861-1865.

You are dealing with a country with the world's 4th navy during this era - relatively, they are much, much stronger compared to the US than they were 1898.
 
At this time the Spanish navy still had a decent power projection capability. In the Chincha Islands War (1864-1866), they sent a very good ironclad and six very powerful steam screw frigates. Isabella's Spain also invaded and fought against Haiti and rebels in the Dominican Republic 1861-1865.

You are dealing with a country with the world's 4th navy during this era - relatively, they are much, much stronger compared to the US than they were 1898.

Could the USA bring anything to bear against Spain? How large was the American fleet?
 
The US navy was in a slump when the civil war broke out - actual frigates and other large vessels that were steam-powered were small. I think the Spanish would have command of the sea in this situation, especially as they have bases in the western hemisphere, while the US lacks bases in the eastern hemisphere.
 
The US had about 40 modern vessels when the ACW began but at least half of them were recent additions within a few years of the ACW so prior to the late 1850s the US would have been even more badly outclassed.
 
Here's a list of what Spain had 1859:

Sailing vessels:
2 ships of the line
4 frigates
4 corvettes
9 brigs

Steam vessels:
3 screw frigates
5 screw schooners
3 paddle frigates
8 paddle brigs
17 paddle schooners

On the lists, I can count 15 steam vessels with long range (cruisers) before 1855.

They also had 10 sailing transports and a merchant navy of half a million tons.

Here's a nice shiplist, however, it does not state which units are steam and which are not.

http://www.armada15001900.net/navios/raesteiro.pdf
One can cross-compare to this list if one wants to:
http://oceania.pbworks.com/w/page/8470660/Spanish-Cruisers
 
Well, the United States destroyed the Spanish fleet and humiliated Spain. It was due to Spain's lack of maintenance of its fleet, but also because through all the XIXth Century, Spain suffered a severe military crysis: bad military officers, inexperienced soldiers, lack of discipline and training and macrocephalia: there were a lot of officers, regarding the officer-private ratio, just because they rarely fought, but more and more people joined the army, but those armed men wanted promotions even if they didn't shoot any weapon. While the men in Africa, the only soldiers with experience, were given condecorations and promotions, the army elsewhere just acted as a pressure tool for overambitious or overzealous motherland-saviour generals. Those men threatened the government if they were not given promotions and medals.

And there you have it: one of the most inefficient armies in Europe, untrained, overconfident (they though the American war would be a victory parade) and with very limited abilities, fighting an army being made by very efficient officers and trained by the best instructors coming from Europe, among them the famous Hussars, like the Magyar Michael Kovacs or the Polish Casimir Pulaski.

Spain lost almost every war they entered during the XIXth Century, and thank God they stood neutral during the two World Wars. Some generals tried to promote prestige wars that were meant to bring experience and discipline to the army. But essentially, the Spanish army was just a way of ensuring coups d'État and backing for a certain general (generals played an important political role until Cánovas' Restoration).

We have a song called "My grandfather" (el meu avi) in which we remember the Spanish-American war, in which many fought and died, especially grandfathers of those who wrote the song. "We blame the Americans", that's how it ends XD
 
This is 45 years earlier than the Spanish-American war, when Spain had some power projection ability, as shown by the Chincha Islands War.
 
And describing the US army of the time as a great force - in either quality or quantity - is exaggerated, to put it mildly.
 
The US Army of 1865 is an entirely different beast than the one of 1855.

And the Spanish Navy of 1855 is a totally different beast to that of 1864. All of the ships in the Spanish Peruvian War were laid down in the 1860's. Most of the ships available in 1855 were no better than the American vessels they faced.
 
Yeah, an 1855 war would be an even affair - but Spain got bases near the US, the US does not have bases near Spain. The Spanish have 15 steam-powered long-range vessels. How many do the US have 1855?
 
Yeah, an 1855 war would be an even affair - but Spain got bases near the US, the US does not have bases near Spain. The Spanish have 15 steam-powered long-range vessels. How many do the US have 1855?

How many do they need?

Cuba was only 60 miles from the keys - the ACW ships that were converted into ironclads were mostly laid down in the 1850's

Phillipines won't be a factor in this war
 
Cuba is 90 miles at the closest to the US, the US army is 16,000 strong on paper and the Union built ironclads during the ACW, only the CSA was forced to convert existing ships and with mixed results.

Of course the army and navy were seen as instruments as the federal government, something the secessionists did not like and they would be especially unhappy about an expansion of either or both...
 
Like all wars the US has fought, victory depends on rallying the public to support the war. If Spain is intelligent enough to limit the fight to the Caribbean and Gulf than it is likely that support in the North will be limited. But I view that as unlikely. First there will be, given the long period of animosity between the US and Spain over the territorial expansion of the former, the urge on the part of Spain to "teach the US a lesson. This means bombarding a port city or two. If any city North of Washington is struck than all bets are off. The Northern politicians don't want to be seen in the same treasonous light that killed the Federalists after the War of 1812. So it is likely that they will, grudgingly, support the war effort.

With Navies being nearly equal than a long term conflict will probably arise, and unlike a war against Britain this conflict gives the US the upper hand. US industry will very quickly outpace that of Spain's and we'll see earlier use of ironclads and repeaters.

Politically, the outcome will be interesting. The major powers of Europe are involved in the Crimean War and so will not want to get involved in this affair. In the US the surviving Whigs, northern Democrats and new Republicans will almost certainly come together to attach a new Wilmot Proviso to the bill that funds this war. This time it will almost certainly pass and thus guarantee that any territory acquired from Spain shall be free territory. This will infuriate the South and Pierce will probably veto the measure which in itself will lead to chaos in Congress and delay funding for the conflict. In the end its likely Douglas will lead the way for a compromise that makes the Nebraska Territory free in return for eliminating the new Wilmot Proviso.

Some possible knock on effects.

Pierce isn't dumped by the Dems and wins reelection in 1856 in a close sectional race.

Douglas angers his Northern supporters enough that he losses the 1858 Senate seat to Lincoln.

Kansas comes in as a Free State as a sop to ensure war funding.

US Navy expands a lot and a large number of future Civil War leaders get valuable on the job training and a few of them end up dead.

Dems lose even more support in the North, especially after Dred Scot goes back on the War funding agreement and essentially reopens the remaining Nebraska Territory to slavery.

Civil War occurs on schedule but US better prepared for war and with a larger navy that makes Britain a bit more nervous.

Benjamin
 
Like all wars the US has fought, victory depends on rallying the public to support the war. If Spain is intelligent enough to limit the fight to the Caribbean and Gulf than it is likely that support in the North will be limited. But I view that as unlikely. First there will be, given the long period of animosity between the US and Spain over the territorial expansion of the former, the urge on the part of Spain to "teach the US a lesson. This means bombarding a port city or two. If any city North of Washington is struck than all bets are off. The Northern politicians don't want to be seen in the same treasonous light that killed the Federalists after the War of 1812. So it is likely that they will, grudgingly, support the war effort.

With Navies being nearly equal than a long term conflict will probably arise, and unlike a war against Britain this conflict gives the US the upper hand. US industry will very quickly outpace that of Spain's and we'll see earlier use of ironclads and repeaters.

Politically, the outcome will be interesting. The major powers of Europe are involved in the Crimean War and so will not want to get involved in this affair. In the US the surviving Whigs, northern Democrats and new Republicans will almost certainly come together to attach a new Wilmot Proviso to the bill that funds this war. This time it will almost certainly pass and thus guarantee that any territory acquired from Spain shall be free territory. This will infuriate the South and Pierce will probably veto the measure which in itself will lead to chaos in Congress and delay funding for the conflict. In the end its likely Douglas will lead the way for a compromise that makes the Nebraska Territory free in return for eliminating the new Wilmot Proviso.

Some possible knock on effects.

Pierce isn't dumped by the Dems and wins reelection in 1856 in a close sectional race.

Douglas angers his Northern supporters enough that he losses the 1858 Senate seat to Lincoln.

Kansas comes in as a Free State as a sop to ensure war funding.

US Navy expands a lot and a large number of future Civil War leaders get valuable on the job training and a few of them end up dead.

Dems lose even more support in the North, especially after Dred Scot goes back on the War funding agreement and essentially reopens the remaining Nebraska Territory to slavery.

Civil War occurs on schedule but US better prepared for war and with a larger navy that makes Britain a bit more nervous.

Benjamin

The Civil War does seem on schedule, but weren't most of the Federal military supplies and ships in the South siezed by the CSA at the outbreak of the war? This increase in the number of Naval vessels, which would be placed near Spain, could actually give the CSA a bigger Navy depending on how things go.
 
There weren't that many federal ships to begin with and very few were seized by the south, most of them being ships which were unable to sail or steam north for various reasons. As in OTL any ships which can go north will certainly do so.

benjamin, it's very doubtful the expansion of the USN will reach a point that gets the British nervous. To defeat Spain I wouldn't be surprised if the USN doesn't even rank in the world's top five fleets at the end of the war. The British may even laugh as this will likely leave the US with a larger and more expensive wooden fleet just as ironclads become the smart investment.

The question is going to be the army. Enlisted men went overwhelmingly for the Union OTL so if the North has tens of thousands more trained regulars, some of them even combat veterans, at the start of the war...and since there was a marked preference for Southern officers in the army pre-ACW it seems quite possible that some of those officers do not live to see this TL's ACW.
 
benjamin, it's very doubtful the expansion of the USN will reach a point that gets the British nervous. To defeat Spain I wouldn't be surprised if the USN doesn't even rank in the world's top five fleets at the end of the war. The British may even laugh as this will likely leave the US with a larger and more expensive wooden fleet just as ironclads become the smart investment.

The question is going to be the army. Enlisted men went overwhelmingly for the Union OTL so if the North has tens of thousands more trained regulars, some of them even combat veterans, at the start of the war...and since there was a marked preference for Southern officers in the army pre-ACW it seems quite possible that some of those officers do not live to see this TL's ACW.

Perhaps but it is equally likely that Ericsson presents the US government with his plans for a turreted iron clad warship as he did to France in Sept. 1854 per OTL. Even if he is spurned perhaps James Eads or others could fill in. The concept of ironclad warships was already well known and would have at least been given a chance.

You are right that the British will still have overwhelming naval superiority, but in local waters an improved US Navy with a growing fleet of ironclads will put them to pause. A war against Spain, fought in the open and island filled waters of the Caribbean, West Pacific and Atlantic will give the US more experience in modern steam/ironclad naval warfare than Britain's limited naval combat during the Crimean or Indian Rebellion. Even if the fleet built during the conflict is quickly outdate the US will gain valuable insights and experience.

I imagine that many of those fighting in the Spanish-American War (or Cuban War or even possibly Soule's War as his actions will be instrumental in provoking war in the first place) will be first generation immigrants. Their contribution to the war, especially if it lasts for over a year and sees some hard fighting, will probably put paid to the American "Know-Nothing" Party as these veterans will demand and receive more equitable treatment. It's possible that in order to prevent unrest and nativist vs. immigrant rioting in the post war years that Pierce will finally support a Homestead Act to move immigrant veterans out west. This will have its own consequences. Cheap land will bring more immigrants. More movement from eastern cities to the western territories will raise wages in the East. More people in the western territories will increase the push for statehood in Nebraska and elsewhere. These immigrant veterans will be strongly free-soil oriented. Shortly after the war the sectional debate over slavery will return with a vengeance.

Benjamin
 
Top