The Myth of Intervention and the ACW

Saphroneth

Banned
End of the Mud
'a large force can only move and keep the field for about five months in the year. viz.,from about the middle of May to the middle of October... between the middle of December and the end of March, the intense cold forbids an army encamping, and the deep snows prevent the movement of troops... from the beginning of April to about the middle of May the state of the roads owing to the thaw of the winter snows, is such that many are impassable for an army.' (Wm. Drummond Jervois, 'Report on the Defence of Canada', 1864)



Additional reinforcements:


Firstly, on the matter of militia - an extra month and a half is long enough that the second tranche of militia is in place. The total militia + volunteer manpower of the Province of Canada is estimated at about 60,000 on land and a few thousand on the water, which combines with the dozens of extra gunboats recieved compared to OTL and means that essentially all the regulars are freed up to operate in the field.

The below is a calculation of what the end result of the reinforcement effort would be - it is NOT what I necessarily think would be in place by the thaw - but I spaced things out so that for the most part each corps is assembled by division and brigade (i.e. the 2nd Brigade of the 2nd Division is made up of troops who would arrive last) except for the Maritimes corps which is composed of the last-arriving reinforcements of all. This is, however, what the reinforcement effort is aiming to produce.



Extra troops who arrived at home over the duration of the crisis:

1/6th, 75th, 83rd

These plus the Guards battalions not in Canada and the 59th (recovering from foreign service) would be kept at home, along with perhaps a few more battalions recalled from India over the course of the general drawdown there.

Other troops possibly available are the garrisons in the mediterranean. As per plans, they were going to send volunteer militia overseas to bolster the Med and replace battalions there.

So the total number of battalions that can be split between Canada and the Maritimes is:

Pre-crisis 6 + RCR

1/17th
30th
47th
4/60th
62nd
63rd
RCR (double)

First tranche 18
1/GG
2/CG (my mistake from earlier)
2/SFG
1/10th
1/11th
2/12th
1/15th
1/16th
2/16th
2/17th
2/20th
36th
45th
55th
58th
76th
96th
1/Rifles

Second tranche 17
1/8th
2/18th
2/19th
2/21st
2/25th
26th
29th
31st
32nd
41st
49th
53rd
1/60th
61st
78th
84th
86th


Recently overseas tranche 9
2/1st
1/2nd
1/3rd
1/5th
1/24th
37th
64th
73rd
87th

Mediterranian tranche, assuming 1 battalion plus militia per island (Cephalonia, Corfu, Gibraltar, Malta) 11
2/2nd
1/9th
2/6th
2/7th
2/8th
1/25th
2/3rd
2/15th
1/22nd
2/23rd
4/Rifles

This comes to 61 plus the RCR, and is enough for five full field corps consisting entirely of regulars (that would total 60 battalions). A couple more could be obtained from Mauritius (2/5th), the West Indies (1/21st and 1/14th) and the Cape (85th and 2/11th), to form an amphibious division based at Bermuda or Halifax.


The sticking point for field artillery is probably going to be the availability of home field batteries, as there were only 25 and each corps consumes 6 - thus I assume that there'd be either heavy 4-gun 40-lber position batteriesfrom the "garrison" artillery at one per corps, or 6-gun 20-lber position batteries made up of Canadian volunteer artillery (neither of which is a field artillery job) and this means it's five field batteries per corps.


Cavalry
There were 20 cavalry regiments in Britain, and each corps would require 3. Thus:

First tranche (alerted OTL)
9th Lancers
12th Lancers
16th Lancers

Second Tranche
2/ Life Guards
Royal Horse Guards
4th Dragoon Guards
1st Dragoons
3rd Dragoons
4th Dragoons
5th Dragoons
10th Hussars
11th Hussars
13th Hussars
15th Hussars
18th Dragoons

This leaves five at home.



How much of this could be in Canada by the middle of May? Quite a lot! There's a month after the thaw on the St Lawrence at Quebec, and for some of that time the whole river is thawed (and with British gunboats basically everywhere there's plenty of opportunity to use the rivers and canals to move troops).
Assuming that most of these new troops were pre-positioned in the Maritimes ready to move with the thaw, then it's only a few days on a ship so a dozen transports taking a battalion each have time to move almost the whole force in the time available...

The cavalry is trickier to get over. Because of this, the below assignments are more of a proof of concept than what would actually be in place as of the end of the thaw - instead, assume that anyone who hasn't yet arrived by the end of the thaw is being shipped into position or (in the case of cavalry) recovering from transit.



Field forces assuming no use of Canadian militia brigaded with regular British infantry.


1 Corps (London to Sarnia)
Div 1
1st Brigade
1/17th
30th
47th
2nd Brigade
1/8th
2/18th
2/19th

Div 2
1st Brigade
1/Rifles
2/21st
2/25th

2nd Brigade
1/60th
61st
78th

Cavalry:
1st Dragoons
3rd Dragoons
4th Dragoons

Artillery:
2 Batteries horse artillery
A,B,F,I,K batteries 4th Field Artillery
1 battery of position artillery


2 Corps (Toronto to Niagara)
Div 1
1st Brigade
4/60th
62nd
63rd

2nd Brigade
1/15th
1/16th
2/17th

Div 2
1st Brigade
26th
29th
31st

2nd Brigade
84th
86th
64th

Cavalry: Brigade of Guards Cavalry
2/Life Guards
Royal Horse Guards
4th Dragoon Guards

Artillery:
2 Batteries horse artillery
E,G batteries 4th Field Artillery
B,C,D batteries 8th Field Artillery
1 battery of position artillery

3 Corps (Kingston to Montreal)

Div 1
1st Brigade
1/10th
1/11th
2/12th

2nd Brigade
2/16th
2/20th
53rd

Div 2
1st Brigade
32nd
41st
49th

2nd Brigade
1/5th
1/24th
37th

Cavalry:
5th Dragoons
10th Hussars
18th Dragoons

Artillery:
2 Batteries horse artillery
B,C,E,F,H batteries 9th Field Artillery
1 battery of position artillery

4 Corps (Montreal to Quebec)

Div 1
Brigade of Guards
1/GG
2/CG
2/SFG

2nd Brigade
36th
45th
55th

Div 2
1st Brigade
58th
76th
96th

2nd Brigade
2/1st
1/2nd
1/3rd

Cavalry:
9th Lancers
12th Lancers
16th Lancers

Artillery:
2 Batteries horse artillery
D battery 4th field artillery
E,F,G,H batteries 8th field artillery
1 battery of position artillery

5 Corps (Maritimes)

Div 1
1st Brigade
73rd
87th
2/2nd

2nd Brigade
1/9th
2/6th
2/7th

Div 2
1st Brigade
2/8th
1/25th
2/3rd

2nd Brigade
2/15th
1/22nd
2/23rd

Cavalry
11th Hussars
13th Hussars
15th Hussars

Artillery:
2 Batteries horse artillery
H battery 4th field artillery
A battery 8th brigade field artillery
A,D,G batteries 9th brigade field artillery
1 battery of position artillery



Amphibious division

Brigade 1
4/Rifles
1/21st
1/14th

Brigade 2
2/5th
85th
2/11th

+ Royal Marines
+ Artillery provided by naval brigades




The result of this is that any Union attack overland is doing so against a quite large number of troops, including both fortified militia/volunteers (all armed with rifles) and agile, very-well-trained field corps of British troops well provided with artillery. The weakest point, Montreal, is also the one where two British corps can theoretically concentrate - one against either flank of the Union attacking force.

The above does not allow for the modern artillery that would also be replacing the artillery in Canadian stores, so for example it is likely there would be 110-lber guns in the Montreal forts and 20-lbers or 40-lbers in the forts covering the Richelieu.
 

Saphroneth

Banned
So I ran into this doing research, and the mental image amuses me. It's from an article about a routine reinforcement of Canada during the Civil War (during which they took over a battery, a couple of battalions, and enough troops to reinforce all the battalions in Canada to their establishment strength).

One of
these stations is Newfoundland. The last mails have
informed us that even Newfoundland has its liabilities
to political disturbance. Election riots have taken
place there, and the troops have been called out,
as in former days they used to be at home. What
was the muster of the garrison in the hour of need we
cb not know, but in March, 1859, it consisted, for
all the districts of the island, of 199 foot soldiers
and one gunner. How this artilleryman came to
to be so isolated, or what description of piece he was
expected to manage, we cannot pretend to guess.


The reinforcement I mention involved the use of the Great Eastern, which fitted all the above-mentioned troops. It's actually a useful strategic advantace for the British in an ACW intervention TL, as it's able to basically hold a brigade with all the trimmings and enough rifles to mean Canada has no concerns about their future needs. Or you could reduce the cargo capacity by a thousand tonnes or so and fit it with a couple of dozen 110-lber Armstrong rifles, thus making it the most insane convoy escort ever conceived of in the mid-19th century...


Anyway. Something which might be interesting would be plotting out how a British intervention would go if it was planned by the British ahead of time. The Trent affair is an example of the Union having a few weeks advantage in prep time, but what would it be like if the British cabinet decided to intervene and then made sure all their ducks were in a row first?

Does it seem likely that the Union would declare war on the British because of British troops reinforcing Canada? Ships moving to Bermuda? What about a large number of gunboats gathering at Montreal to surge up to the Lakes?

And what would the Union have spare to respond?


For now I'm willing to work with the "Alt Gettysburg" as a trigger, probably with the variant Dandan_noodles has mentioned in the past where Emmitt's corps heads up to Harrisburg and burns it before the battle, so the Army of the Potomac gets at least humiliated if not heavily damaged. Whatever the lead-in, however, the Union's been badly injured and the British (for moustache-twirling reasons, or just because of a cotton famine) have decided to intervene promptly.

So. British troops moving en masse to Canada to defend it, British ships (incl. ironclads) moving west to prepare for the battles along the coast. The Union has no rifle problems and a lot more spare gunpowder than the Trent scenario, but this time the British are fighting a war they've planned for ahead of time - and they've got four months (August, September, October, November) for supplies and troops to arrive in Canada before the freeze locks everything in place.

Should be interesting to contemplate...
 

Saphroneth

Banned
So here's the first bit of data - available troops.

Infantry battalions in Canada or North America (includes Bermuda but not the West Indies)
14 battalions + RCR
1/GrenGds, 2/ScFusGds, 1/15th, 1/16th, 2/16th, 1/17th, 2/17th, 30th, 39th, 47th, 4/60th, 62nd, 63rd, 1/Rifle, RCR (double)

Infantry battalions at Home (includes one on passage home, the 92nd)
44 battalions
2/GrenGds, 3/GrenGds, 1/ColdsGds, 2/ColdsGds, 1/ScFusGds, 2/1st, 1/2nd, 1/3rd, 1/5th, 1/6th, 1/8th, 1/10th, 1/11th, 2/12th, 2/19th, 2/20th, 2/21st, 1/24th, 2/25th, 26th, 29th, 32nd, 36th, 37th, 41st, 45th, 49th, 53rd, 55th, 58th, 59th, 1/60th, 2/60th, 61st, 64th, 73rd, 75th, 76th, 78th, 83rd, 84th, 86th, 87th, 92nd

Cavalry regiments at Home
20 regiments
1st Lifeguards, 2nd LifeGuards, Royal HorseGds, 4th DragoonGds, 5th DragoonGds, 6th DragoonGds, 1st Dragoons, 2nd Dragoons, 3rd Lancers, 4th Hussars, 5th Lancers, 9th Lancers, 10th Hussars, 11th Hussars, 12th Lancers, 13th Hussars, 14th Hussars, 15th Hussars, 16th Lancers, 18th Hussars

Infantry battalions at "quiet" colonies with no current war or unrest
22 battalions
Cape of Good Hope 4
2/11th, 2/10th, 2/13th, 96th
Cephalonia 1
2/4th
Corfu 3
2/6th, 1/9th, 2/9th
Gibraltar 5
2/2nd, 2/3rd, 2/7th, 2/8th, 100th
Jamaica 1
1/14th
Malta 6
2/15th, 1/22nd, 2/22nd, 2/23rd, 1/25th, 4/Rifle
Mauritius 2
2/5th, 2/24th

Assuming one regiment needed per quiet colony (or two for the Cape)
Total battalions to split between Home and North America:

14 + 44 + 2 + 2 + 4 + 6 + 2 = 74

Total number of Canadian volunteers (in peacetime) as of 1863 is >10 battalions foot

Assuming five army corps in Canada and the Maritimes, each of which has two battalions of volunteers (in their 2nd brigade of each division?) the number of regular battalions BNA consumes for defence = 50

24 battalions spare, of which 12 will easily suffice to defend UK

Result: without touching India and while defending Canada against any feasible threat, it is possible to put together at least one full army corps to operate against the US coast. At only 12 battalions it's probably too small to take on the largest Union army by itself, but then this does assume the largest Union army just got kicked pretty hard by Lee...




Attached is my 1863 Stations of the Army, which has been cleaned up substantially from the format it's available in online.
 

Attachments

  • 1863Dat.txt
    13.2 KB · Views: 209

Saphroneth

Banned
So for the purpose of this analysis (specifically, making it interesting) I'm going to cheat just a little and assume that the five army corps mentioned above use one battalion of militia/volunteers per brigade. This reduces the defence requirements for BNA to a total of 40 regular and 20 militia battalions, plus whatever is in the defence scheme (about another 50 militia battalions, est.) - I think this is quite feasible with British gunboats all over the rivers and lakes.

Thus there's enough regular infantry knocking about for a two-corps army, including the Brigade of Guards, to operate against the US coast. This is roughly 30,000 troops of all arms.

So, the first question is - where do they go?
I see several options.


1) New England.
Here they would be acting in concert with the army corps operating from the Maritimes, and probably aiming to threaten the rail lines into Canada (and thus neutralize any danger from US forces that might go after Canada). Picking a good port to land is fairly tricky, but I'd be inclined to say Providence - it's an easy target to take out the defences of, because the forts there don't cover all the entry routes into the bay.

2) New York.
Fairly simple - land the army on Long Island and use them in concert with the Navy to blast open the route to New York. This by itself has the potential to do a huge amount of damage to the US economy.

3) Baltimore.
Land troops around Baltimore and capture Washington Junction, thus cutting Washington off from the rest of the Union. Then go after the Washington forts - Fort Lincoln, Thayer and Saratoga don't look too tough between them, not to a 40-lber Armstrong siege train, and between them that renders an arc of a mile (at one end of the defensive arc to the northeast, to boot) out of commission.

4) Just Stop Pretending.
This one involves landing the army in the south, and joining the two-corps army to Lee's Army of Northern Virginia. The result dramatically multiplies the capabilities of the AoNV.

5) Straight up the Potomac.
Not as silly as it may sound - OTL there were real worries about whether the Potomac was defensible against ironclads, and that was post-Gettysburg.
 

Saphroneth

Banned
Also, a couple of quotes from the NY Times.

Nov 30 1861:
Our Government will not be alarmed at the belligerent attitude of these military chiefs at Quebec. It is not likely that they will be permitted by their Government to take any step either hostile or offensive to the United States. Their resolution to put the frontiers of Canada in a state of defence is absurd on the face of it, and doubly so at this season, when all military operations and movements are necessarily arrested by the severity of the climate.


Jan 1 1862:
We are told that, in spite of the peaceful solution of the MASON-SLIDELL difficulty, the war preparations of England will still go on. An impression seems to prevail in the British mind that a war between the two countries will inevitably spring from the present troubles, and as long as such an impression exists, it would be extremely unwise on our part, if we failed to prepare ourselves for the struggle that may or may not come. The surest way to avert a war is to be fully ready to meet it. Great Britain is acting on this principle. We have pointed out the great preparations that both the Imperial and Provincial governments are making; and the law of self-preservation compels this country to imitate their example, and neglect nothing that can contribute to the proper defence of our frontiers and our coasts.

The contrast amuses me.
 

Saphroneth

Banned
So for that 1863 intervention, my planning date is going to be October 1, 1863. Let's have a look at the Union fleet and the British one on that date, using ironclads only; the British wooden fleet is so much more potent than the Union one that it seems only fair to restrict the consideration to ironclads.

Union fleet in commission:
New Ironsides
Passaic
Montauk
Nahant
Patapsco
Weehawken
Sangamon
Catskill
Nantucket
Lehigh
Roanoke

Of these, most are Passaics (hence with all the weaknesses of the monitor). Of the remaining ships, New Ironsides and Roanoke, the former is basically equivalent to a Crimean-style ironclad (i.e. best for bombardment) and the latter is a fairly passable ironclad frigate. It's the Roanoke which means I'm not sure of the ability of a single British ironclad frigate like Royal Oak or Black Prince to defeat the whole US ironclad navy at a stroke; I think however that a combination of two of them would be able to effectively handle the Union's ironclad fleet if need be.

The British ironclad stable at this point is roughly Thunder, Warrior, Defence, Resistance, Black Prince, Royal Oak, Aetna, Erebus, Thunderbolt, Terror, with an option to purchase Rolf Krake (a two-turret ironclad being built for Denmark) and the theoretical possibility of quickly arming Prince Consort (which had been launched 16 months prior prior) or Caledonia (one year prior).
If option (3) or (5) above was selected, then it'd actually be quite likely for the entire Union ironclad fleet to battle the British force - Roanoke was at Hampton Roads and the rest of the Union fleet not far south from there. It'd be a fun battle to write, anyway - if I were doing it I'd say there'd be Terror, Aetna, Thunder, Black Prince and Royal Oak, with the former three intended for bombardment work and inshore work but also used in battle. If it was a situation where the British were getting a bit whizz-bang instead of sticking strictly to their OTL deployment of various weapons, we could by this point see the appearance of the Palliser shell - which would be very bad news indeed for monitors.

As for the results of the "Second Battle of Hampton Roads" - well, the monitors listed above all have guns which can damage any of the British ironclads, albeit at close range in most cases. Their 11" guns would all bounce/shatter, but the 15" and 8" Parrot are at least theoretically able to penetrate.
Given rate of fire, I'd expect the Crimean ironclads to take quite a pounding as they're much more vulnerable to the 8" rifles; the bigger two are vulnerable to penetration by the 15" Dahlgrens at close range but the said guns also fire very infrequently.
 
Last edited:
Also, a couple of quotes from the NY Times.

Nov 30 1861:



Jan 1 1862:


The contrast amuses me.
and yet... Lincoln didn't seem to worry too much about the possibility of war with the UK... I've never read that he took any special steps to prepare for it. He seemed focused completely on defeating the Confederacy. Makes you wonder if he had some quiet back channel talk with some of the Brit representatives over here...
 

Saphroneth

Banned
and yet... Lincoln didn't seem to worry too much about the possibility of war with the UK... I've never read that he took any special steps to prepare for it. He seemed focused completely on defeating the Confederacy. Makes you wonder if he had some quiet back channel talk with some of the Brit representatives over here...
Well, Seward convinced him that the British actually would declare war over anything but a climbdown, during Trent, and Lincoln promptly did climbdown.

I think it's more that Lincoln never intended to fight, but didn't realise at first that Trent was something the British considered worth a fight.
 
Well, Seward convinced him that the British actually would declare war over anything but a climbdown, during Trent, and Lincoln promptly did climbdown.

I think it's more that Lincoln never intended to fight, but didn't realise at first that Trent was something the British considered worth a fight.
true, but I was thinking more of the post-Trent comment in that second article you quoted... even if the Brits were continuing to prepare for war, Lincoln didn't seem to think it would happen...
 

Saphroneth

Banned
true, but I was thinking more of the post-Trent comment in that second article you quoted... even if the Brits were continuing to prepare for war, Lincoln didn't seem to think it would happen...
Yes. But then, the British view of Trent was some kind of grand plan to provoke a war, let the CSA go and annex Canada. This is partly because the NY Herald, the most-sold paper in the world, kept suggesting it.
 
Yes. But then, the British view of Trent was some kind of grand plan to provoke a war, let the CSA go and annex Canada. This is partly because the NY Herald, the most-sold paper in the world, kept suggesting it.
and luckily, both sides seemed to have gotten over it, and the US was able to concentrate on winning the war against the CSA...
 
and luckily, both sides seemed to have gotten over it, and the US was able to concentrate on winning the war against the CSA...

Well the key thing is neither side really wanted war. Britain was prepared to fight if she had to, but was more than happy to not fight an expensive war when it became clear the Union wasn't spoiling for a fight at that particular moment.
 

Saphroneth

Banned
I happened to notice an attachment to one of Mike Snyder's posts (the one quoted below) and on inspection it turned out to be a poorly formatted list of 2,950 books. I'm not sure what the reason for posting it is - most of them are presumably history books, but others are on everything from Bushido to the authorship of the Bible.
It was so odd I thought I'd mention it - especially as it seems to miss out on actual US-British/Canadian relations (Bourne's Britain and the Balance of Power in North America, or Foreman's A World On Fire).

But until the bases on the other side of the Atlantic were prepared, the fleet could not effectively operate against the US coast. Finding crews would be the most difficult part, though as I pointed out, the British guns aboard their warships would be useless against armored ships with turrets wrapped in eight 1" plates or fortifications built of granite.
We've already covered how the bases were already supporting the fleet, and in addition I should mention that the Peru sailed during the Trent affair with munitions for the Pacific Squadron.
Leaving aside the question of armour penetration for now, fortifications built of granite (i.e. masonry) are precisely the kind that are vulnerable to British rifled artillery - artillery which was being rolled out to the fleet at the time, and which was in the possession of ships ranging in size from the Warrior to little Clown-class gunboats.
The penetration of British weapons into masonry is as follows, in tests against a ten-foot-thick Martello tower wall at a range of 1,000 yards:

32 pdr shot and shell (i.e. 6.4" round shell) penetrated 1 ft 4
68 pdr shot and shell penetrated 1 ft 8-9
40 pdr Armstrong put shot and shell 4 ft 1 into the wall
70 pdr Armstrong put shot 7 ft 6 into the wall and shell 4 ft 3
110 pdr Armstrong put shell 3 ft 8 into the wall

The 32 and 68 pounders would need multiple hits on the same location to do much damage, but the Armstrong shells would penetrate deeply and then detonate with plenty of tamping. Since most US fort walls were about six feet thick, the expected result is that there'd be shell bursting halfway through the wall (thus badly damaging them, especially with the big 110-lber with bursting charge of 10 lb 5 oz) or shot punching right through and sending a spray of shattered rock into the far side (much like cannister).
Thus it seems fairly clear that contemporary British weapons would not be "useless" against granite forts; on the contrary, they'd be immensely destructive.




With squadrons in the South Atlantic, Asian, Pacific and African waters, the USN could disperse and do to the British merchant marine what Confederate raiders like the Alabama did to US merchant marine.
I'm still waiting to hear what these squadrons are, especially the ones in the South Atlantic and in African waters...


As far as Britain's fleet of steam ships of the line, without a US battle line, what mission did they have?

The more important question is "without a US battle line, what can the US oppose them with?" Battleships provide sea control, which is something the US has no way of obviating.

In 1862, their armaments would have been ineffective against US fortifications, while even the US 32pdr and 42pdr smooth bores, much less the 8" and 10" "Columbiads" and the rifled 32pdrs and 42pdrs would inflict severe damage on them.
As already noted, many of their guns would have been effective against US fortifications - enough to cause the forts to be heavily damaged easily and maybe even collapse them. As for 32-lber smoothbores, Dahlgren noted that the Long 32 (the heaviest kind of 32-lber) could not penetrate a ship of the line's wooden sides at 1,000 yards with shot, and that the 8" columbiad is similarly not able to penetrate with shell at that range.

10" guns would be more effective, but there's not nearly enough - nor could they be fitted in most forts, the weight difference is considerable and the 10" gun's tube weighs between 30% and 60% more than the 8" gun.
This is why fitting 15 inch or 20 inch Rodmans into forts is such a difficult thing, most of the forts are built to handle 32-lbers or 8" shell guns or similar. Going from a gun of 50-60 cwt to a gun of 445 (15") or 1020 (20") cwt means essentially rebuilding the fort.
 
A while back I decided to sort out some provisional battalion assignments for the Canadian militia service companies that might have been put together in the Trent War. The volunteer battalions are particularly well documented, but the sedentary militia distinctly less so. You can also use these for the whole Trent war, if you assume they would have kept the flank companies grouped rather than splitting them up when they called out more militia.

It's based on one company per battalion, for the following number of battalions:
Lower Canada: 197 militia battalions = 20 provisional battalions
Upper Canada: 267 militia battalions = 26 provisional battalions
Nova Scotia: 48 militia battalions = 4 provisional battalions
New Brunswick: 34 battalions = 3 provisional battalions

There's no good information on precedence, so I decided it by drawing lots. This was what they did in Britain: when the militia were embodied, there would be an annual ballot to decide precedence. This ended in 1833, when they had one final ballot that set the numbers until the militia were merged into the big territorial regiments by Childers.

Lower Canada
1st (Richelieu, Yamaska and Drummond) Provisional Battalion of Lower Canadian Militia
2nd (Argenteuil and Ottawa) Provisional Battalion of Lower Canadian Militia
3rd (L'Islet, Rimouski and Kamouraska) Provisional Battalion of Lower Canadian Militia
4th (Montreal) Provisional Battalion of Lower Canadian Militia
5th (Bellechasse and Dorchester) Provisional Battalion of Lower Canadian Militia
6th (Vaudreil and Montreal) Provisional Battalion of Lower Canadian Militia
7th (Rimouski, Gaspe and Bonaventure) Provisional Battalion of Lower Canadian Militia
8th Provisional Battalion of Lower Canadian Militia (Montmorency, Saugenay, Quebec, Chicontimi, Charlevoix)
9th (Vercheres and Ste. Hyacinthe) Provisional Battalion of Lower Canadian Militia
10th (Beauharnois and Mississiquoi) Provisional Battalion of Lower Canadian Militia
11th (Pontneuf, Quebec and Champlain) Provisional Battalion of Lower Canadian Militia
12th Provisional Battalion of Lower Canadian Militia (Dorchester, Lotbiniere, Megantic, Beauce)
13th (Terrebonne and Two Mountains) Provisional Battalion of Lower Canadian Militia
14th (Chambly and Rouville) Provisional Battalion of Lower Canadian Militia
15th (Missisquoi and Huntingdon) Provisional Battalion of Lower Canadian Militia
16th (Leinster and St Lawrence) Provisional Battalion of Lower Canadian Militia
17th Provisional Battalion of Lower Canadian Militia (Nicolet, Compton, Arthabaska, Wolfe)
18th Provisional Battalion of Lower Canadian Militia (Shefford, Stanstead, St. Hyacinthe, Richmond)
19th (Berthier and St Maurice) Provisional Battalion of Lower Canadian Militia
20th (Quebec) Provisional Battalion of Lower Canadian Militia

Upper Canada:
1st (Simcoe and Peel) Provisional Battalion of Upper Canadian Militia
2nd (Norfolk, Haldimand and Wentworth) Provisional Battalion of Upper Canadian Militia
3rd (Prince Edward and Peterborough) Provisional Battalion of Upper Canadian Militia
4th (Waterloo and Grey) Provisional Battalion of Upper Canadian Militia
5th (Elgin and Middlesex) Provisional Battalion of Upper Canadian Militia
6th (York) Provisional Battalion of Upper Canadian Militia
7th (Halton and Peel) Provisional Battalion of Upper Canadian Militia
8th (Wellington and Grey) Provisional Battalion of Upper Canadian Militia
9th (Middlesex, Oxford and London) Provisional Battalion of Upper Canadian Militia
10th (Hastings, Belleville and Trenton) Provisional Battalion of Upper Canadian Militia
11th (Toronto) Provisional Battalion of Upper Canadian Militia
12th (Oxford, Waterloo and Brant) Provisional Battalion of Upper Canadian Militia
13th (Durham and Victoria) Provisional Battalion of Upper Canadian Militia
14th (Dundas, Stormont and Russell) Provisional Battalion of Upper Canadian Militia
15th (Bruce and Perth) Provisional Battalion of Upper Canadian Militia
16th (Northumberland and Victoria) Provisional Battalion of Upper Canadian Militia
17th (Kent, Essex and Chatham) Provisional Battalion of Upper Canadian Militia
18th (Lanark and Renfrew) Provisional Battalion of Upper Canadian Militia
19th (Grenville and Carleton) Provisional Battalion of Upper Canadian Militia
20th (Lincoln, Haldimand and Welland) Provisional Battalion of Upper Canadian Militia
21st (Frontenac, Addington and Lennox) Provisional Battalion of Upper Canadian Militia
22nd (Leeds, Renfrew and Brockville) Provisional Battalion of Upper Canadian Militia
23rd (Simcoe and Ontario) Provisional Battalion of Upper Canadian Militia
24th (Glengarry, Stormont and Prescott) Provisional Battalion of Upper Canadian Militia
25th (Kent, Middlesex and Lambton) Provisional Battalion of Upper Canadian Militia
26th (Huron and Bruce) Provisional Battalion of Upper Canadian Militia

Nova Scotia
1st Battalion: Annapolis, Digby, Shelburne, Yarmouth, Queens, Lunenberg
2nd Battalion: Halifax, Hants, Kings
3rd Battalion: Guysboro, Sydney, Cape Breton
4th Battalion: Colchester, Pictou, Cumberland

New Brunswick
1st Battalion: Kings, Queen’s, Charlotte, Sudbury, York
2nd Battalion: Westmorland, Albert, Kings, St Johns
3rd Battalion: Kent, Northumberland, Gloucester, Restigouche, Victoria, Carleton
 
Top