A population of 400,000 (give or take 10,000 or so) would make this territory more populous in 1840 than New Jersey or Missouri, but less so than Maryland.
As promised, here's the map:
View attachment 810660
As mentioned in the footnotes here, OTL's London, Ontario is called Kent-Strathearn. They'll be keeping the name out of lingering affection for the old Prince-Viceroy, who tried to do right by them up to a point.
Speaking of names, I've come up with a bunch of possible names for this state and I don't love any of them, and I don't think they'd go with "Upper Canada" or "South Canada" after they just left Canada. So I've decided to poll my readers.
It would be interesting to see the impacts of this border on the border of ITTL provinces of Canada (Just realized the northern part of the IOTL Ontario/Quebec border follow the 79'30"W parallel.), since I do not think this state would influence much the border of the neighbouring US states.

I had to say that I agree with the Niagara naming suggestion that the others proposed.
 
Depending on Mackenzie's popularity with the seceding Canadians, they may name it after him. A good "rebel" name might play well with the population and cut ties with the old regime... for now.

While this new "golden horseshoe" region is small, I'm actually surprised how little of OTL Ontario it is, and it still gives Britain a big chunk of the Saint Lawrence and Lake Ontario shoreline.

Interesting room for development.
 
Depending on Mackenzie's popularity with the seceding Canadians, they may name it after him. A good "rebel" name might play well with the population and cut ties with the old regime... for now.

While this new "golden horseshoe" region is small, I'm actually surprised how little of OTL Ontario it is, and it still gives Britain a big chunk of the Saint Lawrence and Lake Ontario shoreline.

Interesting room for development.
How little in *land*, but not in where the population ended up iOTL Canada. My *honest* guess is that from 1840 to today, that area includes more than 25% of Canadian Population (and even more than *that* at confederation)
 

SuperZtar64

Banned
How little in *land*, but not in where the population ended up iOTL Canada. My *honest* guess is that from 1840 to today, that area includes more than 25% of Canadian Population (and even more than *that* at confederation)
By my rough calculations the area the US annexed has a population of about 11 million today, give or take a half a million or so. Canada today has a population of 40 million.
 
By my rough calculations the area the US annexed has a population of about 11 million today, give or take a half a million or so. Canada today has a population of 40 million.
And given the growth in Alberta and British Columbia, that percentage is probably lower than it has been since Confederation. Far worse than (for example) trying to have a "Germany" without Prussia. More like having an Italy without Rome. or a Chile without Santiago...
 
It seems like Canada has lost something like 300k people out of something like 1.5m people since Upper Canada had about 400k at this point, about a third of the population, and most of that would be in the region lost. So that's a fifth of the current population of the territory that would become Canada OTL or maybe a bit more, and most of the population of Upper Canada along with half of the territory of Upper Canada. I imagine this will speed up consolidation of British North America, and end up turning it into a sort of greater Quebec.
 
It seems like Canada has lost something like 300k people out of something like 1.5m people since Upper Canada had about 400k at this point, about a third of the population, and most of that would be in the region lost. So that's a fifth of the current population of the territory that would become Canada OTL or maybe a bit more, and most of the population of Upper Canada along with half of the territory of Upper Canada. I imagine this will speed up consolidation of British North America, and end up turning it into a sort of greater Quebec.
Trying to determine territory losses gets a bit tricky since Ontario grew twice after confederation. I'm not sure I've seen a definition of the exact boundaries of upper Canada before confederation relative to Rupert's land.
 

SuperZtar64

Banned
Trying to determine territory losses gets a bit tricky since Ontario grew twice after confederation. I'm not sure I've seen a definition of the exact boundaries of upper Canada before confederation relative to Rupert's land.
I dug up the text of the Quebec Act of 1774... it said the northern border of the Province of Quebec was
...Northward to the Southern Boundary of the Territory granted to the Merchants Adventurers of England, trading to Hudson's Bay;
Which is the Hudson Bay drainage basin. So at least notionally, all the British possessions south of the HBC land were part of Canada.
1676577784375.png
 
Alright then, time to unpack some stuff as he war ends.

Britain

How will Britain see this wars outcome? Minor defeat having lost land to the USA? mostly a victory? Wellington won't be pleased the Empire lost land despite his victories I expect.

Will Britain be more committed to their NA holdings now or will there be a desire to just hold the line in favor of expansion elsewhere? How will the success of the diverse Florida colony affect Imperial and racial policy going forward,compared to the revolt of a settler colony culturally close o the mother country? The second time that happened, after the American Revolution, I might add.

Louisiana:

Time For celebration in the republic. The small nation has weathered the storm an emerged with its borders intact and most of the country not ravaged by invaders. Wellington will no doubt be seen off with a hero's celebration with a square named for him and a statue likely planned.

But there won't just be revels. President Roman and others will be looking ahead and back. This war cost them many lives, Malaga in particular; another victory like this cold ruin them. As it is the status quo Roman was elected into cannot be reasonably maintained. The Afro-Louisianian irregulars cannot be ignored, and the fresh debts to abolitionist Britain place renewed pressure on slavery as an institution. And while the Republic is intact the loss of upper Canada's heartland is a clear sign Britain is not invincible along with the events of Mount Hope.

The union has been held in check, but it has advanced; and it is most likely they will be back for more. And signs indicate the union will be stronger next time with their rail network growing along with their industry and military might. Even if Britain remains committed the Republic can't hope for the likes of Wellington to be sent to their aid again.

The Republic cannot fight the next war like the late one and hope to survive. Roman won't be in office much longer which he may be grateful for but both parties will have to face how Louisiana can and will change to face a looming future. And how they will spend the reparation money.

Florida:

May see the least policy changes. This colony acquitted itself grandly handing the enemy numerous defeats and remaining united in turmoil. The biggest change here may be social, with the birth of a grater Floridian identity connecting the many peoples. Additionally we may see a renewed disdain among "White" Floridians for America.

An increased support militias and the like could also occur as war came once and so it may come again.

Canada:

Things have to change here.

One of the most populous regions has been lost and the Compact political establishment has been humiliated and lost one of their most important strongholds. And there is no reason they should think the USA will be sated. America wants to diminte the continent as ther misadventure in New Sapin attests too. They'll be back for the rest, and likely stronger than last time.

With Quebec it will hing on what accord Brougham and Papineau reach. Quebec may be elevated, ignore or stand as the dominant but not domineering force in a new order in Canada.

The Maritimes are not likely to be thrilled at potentially being dominated by Quebec, but the invasion of new Brunswick shows they share the fate of being targeted with their neighbors.

That said, I'm fairly certain that in this context no one cared much what the reality of the Iroquoian names was, and I'm a little concerned for the future of the Ontario Iroquois, frankly. So while they're objectively great names, they wouldn't become the name by merit, but more likely by fluke. Then a century later I suppose the etymology could be dusted off and enjoyed.

Might they relocate to the remainder of Canada? It sounds like peopel are thin on the ground; and ater the sucess in Florida a case could be made of vultivating string ties with ayives as bulwarks against America. One can hope it will lead to a fairer,(thoughp orably still unfair) policy towards the native peoples as Wesdtward Expansion continues.

Another investment one could hope to see in Canada would be a railroad liking the Eat and West now that America rules over too much of the Great Lakes.

Yes this is birth of a nation times for Canada with loss and the fires of war driving revelation ad reorganization that set the stage for generations I expect.

I'll give my thoughts on America later.
 
It will be remembered as an American victory, for that is what it is. Not that they know it but Canada is dead, annoying bits down south will be overwhelmed in time. Sad
 

Admiral Matt

Gone Fishin'
Canada:

Things have to change here.

One of the most populous regions has been lost and the Compact political establishment has been humiliated and lost one of their most important strongholds. And there is no reason they should think the USA will be sated. America wants to diminte the continent as ther misadventure in New Sapin attests too. They'll be back for the rest, and likely stronger than last time.

With Quebec it will hing on what accord Brougham and Papineau reach. Quebec may be elevated, ignore or stand as the dominant but not domineering force in a new order in Canada.

The Maritimes are not likely to be thrilled at potentially being dominated by Quebec, but the invasion of new Brunswick shows they share the fate of being targeted with their neighbors.



Might they relocate to the remainder of Canada? It sounds like peopel are thin on the ground; and ater the sucess in Florida a case could be made of vultivating string ties with ayives as bulwarks against America. One can hope it will lead to a fairer,(thoughp orably still unfair) policy towards the native peoples as Wesdtward Expansion continues.

Another investment one could hope to see in Canada would be a railroad liking the Eat and West now that America rules over too much of the Great Lakes.

Yes this is birth of a nation times for Canada with loss and the fires of war driving revelation ad reorganization that set the stage for generations I expect.

Don't know why I didn't get this sooner: This outcome makes Canada (and the larger Canada-to-be) much more like the rest of America's neighbors. Rather than simply a larger than OTL Canada, its fate is to be a more diverse state and with more equality between provinces. The economies of the maritimes will do better here - confederation brutalized them by putting Ontario's industry inside the tariff barrier. It'll be less dominated by one large English-speaking province, and weirdly the takeaway lesson for the second British Empire is that developing loyal colonies is easy enough... so long as the colonists aren't English!

The historiography of that one racist Oregonian historian (Crown/Constitution) suggests to me a separatist statehood for the Pacific coast there, based on shared white anglophony and a story of out-of-touch metropoles. Poor Chinook. But if that happens, London will have lost the loyalty of 3 settler colonies in a century, while the Muskogee, free blacks, Cajuns, Quebecois, East Indians, and diverse others act as indispensable lynchpins for surviving with a US neighbor.

How they tell that story to themselves will be interesting to see.

On Indians, it would be little surprise if they emigrated east towards the other Iroquois communities in Canada.

On the railroad... you don't know maybe how high an aspiration that is. The space between east Ontario and Manitoba is incredibly poor country for railroad construction. They will do it, given time, but it will be a slow nightmare to do.
 
Last edited:
On the railroad... you don't know maybe how high an aspiration that is. The space between east Ontario and Manitoba is incredibly poor country for railroad construction. They will do it, given time, but it will be a slow nightmare to do.

Ah, apoloies I did not comvey that idea clearly. I was not speaking of the Praire, but connecting the remnant of Ontario better with Quebec/the Maritimes via rail now that the USA rules rules Lake Erie.
 
I'm most interested in how what's to come is going to affect the political situation in the US, which we know is about to be in for some very "interesting times" (in the Chinese sense).

It's been confirmed that the annexed lands from Canada are going to become a state by 1840. Which is going to do interesting things to the internal power balance in the Congres. If I'm remembering correctly, there's currently 13 free states to 12 slave (same as OTL, minus Louisiana); and of those, Missouri is basically only nominally a slave states (no new slave imports, and children born to slaves are free). When Niagara (or whatever we end up going with) joins - and I see no reason why they wouldn't want to join as soon as possible - that'll jump to 14 against 12. And the South has basically run out of new slave states, and is extremely unlikely to get any more in the next decade. Meanwhile I'd expect *Iowa and *Wisconsin, at least, to be preparing for statehood by that time.

I'm sure old John Berrien, John Calhoun, and all the rest of that crew will have absolutely no problems with this and just accept that another free state is being admitted...

...oh, come on, who am I kidding? You know as well as I do that is *not* happening. Not that I expect it to fail in Congress or anything, but there'll be grumbling, that's for sure.
 
Okay, Niagara has four votes in comments. I think that's enough for me to justify adding it to the poll, since multiple votes are possible. I'm surprised I didn't think of it myself.
 

The big news leading up to the next election I'd say is the crisis oi the Quids.

Crockett showed up to twist Berrien's arm, so now with the war over I don't think he will waste time with no more call to rally to the flag as it were. In the next months maybe just weeks I see Crockett crossing the aisle to become the Reform Parties first US senator, and taking a contingent of Quid representatives with him. Likely we'll see similar defections at the state level too.

After that we likly see some more defections this time to the DRP. Like the previous defectors they'll have their official reasons, but I 'd say the most pragmatoc motivation is with the Quids losing even their House minority leader and several Hoise seats befire the next election this lot want to desrtrt the sinking ship to the likely winner, the DRP.

Things won't be cozy in the reduced TQ party either. Berrien wants to run again, and even Calhoun suggested he resign before Dagett died. Calhoun wasn't willing to throw Berrien under the bus with impeachment, but I am guessing Calhoun will tap John Tyler as the next Quid candidate for the big chair. Tyler secured the peace treaty, ending the ongoing immedite threats the SOuth daced and securing the North's prize; so Calhoun figures if any Quid can carry the national ticket its him. Berrir though I don't see being deterred and he'll be angry at another betrayal with Calhoun backing Tyler who he sees as traitor. So the convention will be divided between Pro and Anti Berrien camps.

If Berrien wins out somehow I'd say there will be more defections and the Quids will only last as long as he does as a party of any relevance. If Berrien loses, I think he will give his sour support to Tyler if only because he hates Webster and the Reformists that much. But Berrien won't go away in that event I expect he'll go home to Georgia looking to rebuild his pwoerbse for a return later or to be able to sponsor a "worthy successor." Maybe he'll join the pogroms against the Cherokee to build publicity for another run as governor? In that case the Quids will go on for awhile though Berrien remaining actie with them will continue to sap strength.

For the Reformists this boost will create a crisis similar to when Randolph and Calhoun aligned. The old guard having to deal with an influx veteran poltician entering all at once and a sudden elevation in national regional politics. A new dynamic where they will face leadership shake-ups, and a need to reevaluate their stances and their interactions with the other parties.

The Populists I expect to continue to see growth. The State that Hath No Name likely falls into their camp this round at least; best fit for the rebels anti-oligarch politics it seems. That said I don't see them unseating the DRP yet but they may edge out the Quids to become the second party.

The DRP will be in high spirits Clay expecting a return to power with Webster as president. Their main promise I expect is a return to normalcy after the chaos brought by replacing them with men who arent experienced with governing. Care for the machine and the machine will care for you. Clay will be working to persuade Quid figures to return to their mother party, and selling their line to Southerners as the party of reconciliation between the regions. Webster for the North will be playing up his Anti Berrien credentials and support for Northern expansion.

And I see it working for the DRP, while they will lose some ground to the Populists and the populists get the new state, between their holdouts and Quid voters flipping to them and some populist voters wanting normalcy more than anything the DRP carries the presidency again and slightly increase their opposition in congress with the other three parties unable to unite against them.

But Clay's dreams of return to a well ordered Dead Rose Era America come crashing down before they begin with some incident in 1840 kicking off the Troubles.
 
I'm most interested in how what's to come is going to affect the political situation in the US, which we know is about to be in for some very "interesting times" (in the Chinese sense).

It's been confirmed that the annexed lands from Canada are going to become a state by 1840. Which is going to do interesting things to the internal power balance in the Congres. If I'm remembering correctly, there's currently 13 free states to 12 slave (same as OTL, minus Louisiana); and of those, Missouri is basically only nominally a slave states (no new slave imports, and children born to slaves are free). When Niagara (or whatever we end up going with) joins - and I see no reason why they wouldn't want to join as soon as possible - that'll jump to 14 against 12. And the South has basically run out of new slave states, and is extremely unlikely to get any more in the next decade. Meanwhile I'd expect *Iowa and *Wisconsin, at least, to be preparing for statehood by that time.

I'm sure old John Berrien, John Calhoun, and all the rest of that crew will have absolutely no problems with this and just accept that another free state is being admitted...

...oh, come on, who am I kidding? You know as well as I do that is *not* happening. Not that I expect it to fail in Congress or anything, but there'll be grumbling, that's for sure.
I'm not sure whether iTTL the Trail of Tears has happened. If not, then you *might* be able to squeeze one more slave state out of the portion of OTL Oklahoma that is on the US side of the border right now. What it comes down to is that the area that was between the Appalachians and the Mississippi that the US got in the Treaty of Paris splits about equally for natural slave area and natural free area. The Louisiana Purchase *doesn't*.
 
I'm not sure whether iTTL the Trail of Tears has happened. If not, then you *might* be able to squeeze one more slave state out of the portion of OTL Oklahoma that is on the US side of the border right now. What it comes down to is that the area that was between the Appalachians and the Mississippi that the US got in the Treaty of Paris splits about equally for natural slave area and natural free area. The Louisiana Purchase *doesn't*.
IIRC there's a sizable escaped slave population in that area of OTL Oklahoma. So, no, that's not happening. It's far likelier that a border state or two tries to abolish slavery than any new slave states getting created.
 
IIRC there's a sizable escaped slave population in that area of OTL Oklahoma. So, no, that's not happening. It's far likelier that a border state or two tries to abolish slavery than any new slave states getting created.
At this point, *really* small butterflies in Delaware would do it. There were at *least* two efforts in the Legislature to get rid of slavery that came within a few votes of passing and (From Wikipedia)

By 1810 three-quarters of all blacks in Delaware were free. When John Dickinson freed his slaves in 1777, he was Delaware's largest slave owner with 37 slaves. By 1860, the largest slaveholder owned 16 slaves.
 
I'm not sure whether iTTL the Trail of Tears has happened. If not, then you *might* be able to squeeze one more slave state out of the portion of OTL Oklahoma that is on the US side of the border right now.

Well, the Cherokee have remained in their homeland, living in Georgia and Alabama. The Alabama Cherokee last we heard were doing well their territory including three thriving fishing towns with Cherokee language newspapers and allies like Sam Houston. Until Berrien was elected they had a special arrangement serving with the US Army in the region established by JQ Adams.

Georgia though started a race war effectively under Berrien trying to not only drive the Cherokee out to steal their land and gold, but by trying to shame Alabama for not doing the same. Berrien had a big project in trying to get rid of them before the war gave him other fish to fry. Twigg's thoughts indicate Berrien was aiming for genocide outright for them. He may return focus to that priohect with the war over.

The Choctaw and Chickasaw are in Western Louisiana running their own parishes and sending assemblymen to New Orleans. Their numbers are getting something of a boost with native refugees from Tejas as that region gets hot emigrating there and voting in general to support the established 'native' politicians. I seem to recall they have also been cozying up to the Catholic Church as an ally with young men joining the clergy.

It remains to be seen how the war will affect their status in the Republic. Though the Ichacq who have ben dealt with very badly in defeat were promised citizenship for service in the late war

Hmm, I'd be rather interested to see how outsiders view the Republic policy toward Native Americans.

And most of the Creeks are in British Florida these days I believe.
 
Top