USA without the Louisiana Purchase; Canada Ascendant?

Thothian

Banned
POD: Napoleon has a flash of insight and decides not to antagonize the UK by asserting control over Switzerland. Also, Napoleon never makes his statements about the UK deserving no voice in continental European affairs, which offended George III because he was an elector of the Holy Roman Empire.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So, the Treaty of Amiens is never breached. At the same time, the Haitian Revolution succeeds as in OTL. Napoleon decides to cut his losses and sell the Louisiana territory and focus on mainland Europe and North Africa for French expansionism. To cement the peace of Amiens and show he has no further ambitions in the Americas, he sells it to the UK.

The British join OTL Canada with this territory, as well Alaska ( the Russians will still decide to sell I think, for all the reasons they did OTL) and the Oregon territory ( since without the Louisiana territory the US has no access to the Pacific Northwest and therefore no claim there).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

How will the USA develop being limited to a western border of the Mississippi River & a northern border as in OTL (assume the acquisition of Florida goes as OTL)?

Canada will be a massive nation in terms of territory and resources. I think it will attract significant immigration from Europe with offers of free land in its wide open spaces. Eventually, it's possible Canada will be TTL's hyperpower; possessing as it does the best agricultural land on Earth and colossal amounts of energy and mineral reserves. These circumstances would make it the world's largest producer of food and energy, and indeed a net exporter of both. If and when the Commonwealth of Nations becomes a thing, Canada will have a greater weight in it than the UK, I imagine.

Or maybe by TTL 2017 the world's greatest power and the guarantor of civilization is ... the United Kingdom of Great Britain, Ireland, and Canada? ( I say Ireland and not Northern Ireland because I assume that massive butterflies and being a part of the greatest power on Earth does away with the Troubles)
 
Last edited:
I think this is all but going to make sure there will be a third Anglo-American war in the future. The US is going to be terrified of being surrounded by Britain - especially if Canada becomes majorly populated.

Im sure American settlers are still going to flood into the Louisiana Territory and there may be an attempt or two to set up a *Texas type state.

Now, they doesn't mean that the US will be victorious in this conflict (conflicts?) which is going to dramatically affect the culture of both the US and this alt-Canada. Also, without the expansion into the Western lands, this is going to really change the dynamics of the slavery debate in the US.

Definitely an interesting thought!
 

Thothian

Banned
I think this is all but going to make sure there will be a third Anglo-American war in the future. The US is going to be terrified of being surrounded by Britain - especially if Canada becomes majorly populated.

Im sure American settlers are still going to flood into the Louisiana Territory and there may be an attempt or two to set up a *Texas type state.

Now, they doesn't mean that the US will be victorious in this conflict (conflicts?) which is going to dramatically affect the culture of both the US and this alt-Canada. Also, without the expansion into the Western lands, this is going to really change the dynamics of the slavery debate in the US.

Definitely an interesting thought!

I'm unsure there would be a third war. Cooler heads in America may realize that taking on Britain after this may be the death of the young republic. Perhaps it's decided that the path forward is peaceful internal development as well as a trade treaty with British NA. Almost certainly though, the USA would maintain a professional army along with significant militias to back them up.

Slavery I think would gradually fade away. It's my view that the idea of secession will sound ridiculous to all but the most blinkered Southern radicals ITTL because of their geographic situation. Maybe instead of the Louisiana Purchase, President Jefferson manages to shepherd through Congress a bill that provides for the gradual extinction of slavery by 1875.

One thing I just thought of is that given that further expansion in NA is out of the question, American freebooters (and those backing them) may get in on the Scramble for Africa.

As for Europe, I see Napoleon's ambition eventually overcoming his caution, and he takes aggressive actions that provoke an alliance against France as in OTL. But this time, about 5-10 or so years later than in OTL. I wonder how a later occurrence of Napoleon's wars would go?
 
Last edited:
I'm unsure there would be a third war. Cooler heads in America may realize that taking on Britain after this may be the death of the young republic. Perhaps it's decided that the path forward is peaceful internal development as well as a trade treaty with British NA.

Slavery I think would gradually fade away. It's my view that the idea of secession will sound ridiculous to all but the most blinkered Southern radicals ITTL because of their geographic situation. Maybe instead of the Louisiana Purchase, President Jefferson manages to shepherd through Congress a bill that provides for the gradual extinction of slavery by 1875.

One thing I just thought of is that given that further expansion in NA is out of the question, American freebooters (and those backing them) may get in on the Scramble for Africa.
Should Canada become more populous than America it won't matter how cool heads are in America, war will be brought upon whether they want it or not.
OTL Canada was able avoid American conquest because of Britain, if you reverse the balance of power so Canada is the stronger of the two no one will be able to save the Americans.
Assuming Canada remain s at least nominally loyal to the British crown.
 

Thothian

Banned
Should Canada become more populous than America it won't matter how cool heads are in America, war will be brought upon whether they want it or not.
OTL Canada was able avoid American conquest because of Britain, if you reverse the balance of power so Canada is the stronger of the two no one will be able to save the Americans.
Assuming Canada remain s at least nominally loyal to the British crown.

You think the UK would seek the aggressive reconquest of the former Colonies after so many years of independence? I'm unsure. They would face a grinding and bloody guerrilla style war for many years if they attempt it, I think. I would think the British would be content to let the USA remain a regional power so long as they seek no further expansion. Which anyone short of a madman wouldn't, given the circumstances of TTL.

Interesting points, everyone.
 
You think the UK would seek the aggressive reconquest of the former Colonies after so many years of independence? I'm unsure. They would face a grinding and bloody guerrilla style war for many years if they attempt it, I think. I would think the British would be content to let the USA remain a regional power so long as they seek no further expansion. Which anyone short of a madman wouldn't, given the circumstances of TTL.

Interesting points, everyone.
If Canada is that Strong they would have the Ability to act on their own, they wouldn't need Britian to dispute the maine boundary for example they would just take care of it themselves, Britain's options would be nominally go along for the ride or deal with a very angry colony.
 
Last edited:
If Canada is that Strong they would have the Ability to act on their own, they wouldn't need Britian to dispute the main boundary for example they would just take care of it themselves, Britain's options would be nominally go along for the ride or deal with a very angry colony.

Canada might well decide to be more bullish in any boundary disputes, but there's a big difference between that and trying to conquer the US. IOTL Britain's preferred policy after 1789 was to cultivate good trading relations with America, which brought them many of the same economic benefits direct control would but without all the costs. TTL that would still be the case, and given that the US wouldn't be strong enough to threaten Canada-Louisiana there would be no strategic imperative to take it over either.
 
Canada might well decide to be more bullish in any boundary disputes, but there's a big difference between that and trying to conquer the US. IOTL Britain's preferred policy after 1789 was to cultivate good trading relations with America, which brought them many of the same economic benefits direct control would but without all the costs. TTL that would still be the case, and given that the US wouldn't be strong enough to threaten Canada-Louisiana there would be no strategic imperative to take it over either.
I'm not necessarily saying out right conquest would be the case just that Canada is going to flex its muscles and take what it wants because no one who can do anything about it is going to and that there will almost certainly be war as I don't expect the Americans to just roll over and take it.
 
POD: Napoleon has a flash of insight and decides not to antagonize the UK by asserting control over Switzerland. Also, Napoleon never makes his statements about the UK deserving no voice in continental European affairs, which offended George III because he was an elector of the Holy Roman Empire.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So, the Treaty of Amiens is never breached.

Is the UK going to withdraw from Malta, Egypt and the Cape Colony? They didn't OTL.
 
Is the UK going to withdraw from Malta, Egypt and the Cape Colony? They didn't OTL.

Britain withdrew quite quickly from Europe. But you are right when you underline that Britain quickly sought any reason for resuming war against napoleonic France.
 
Totally changes the dynamics of things throughout North America. Population's hard to determine, but certainly the United States can't be too far behind. Assuming there is no Civil War/it goes as in OTL. Cuba or Santo Domingo might end up part of the US.

One thing is that you're moving the center of power in the British Empire to North America. British Empire together is a hyperpower, but British North America/Hyper-Canada alone isn't. Still, all that oil alone is incredible, to not even speak of the Western minerals. The US does have the consolation prize of its own section of the Gulf (maritime dispute, I think so).

It will be interesting to see the development of Hyper-Canada's ports. New Orleans obviously, but then later Texas Gulf ports. In the north, what might suffice to help bring in all these immigrants and export all these crops, resources, etc.
 
I think many readers are underestimating just how vital control of the Mississippi is to the Americans during this era - or, at the very least, how much it was in their mindset of the time.

I'm guessing that we see an Alt-War of 1812 developing. Now, assuming that the Americans fair no better in this war than in OTL, they are still going to make a bee line for New Orleans and try to knock Louisiana out of the British sphere as soon as possible. They aren't stupid and are going to definitely see the potential for British settlement in the region.

Now, if the war comes to a draw, I could see John Quincy Adams (still one of the greatest diplomats the Republic has) negotiating passage for Americans on the Mississippi. This will calm some tensions, but not all. The US is still going to feel encircled and threatened - and it won't matter if the British go out of their ways to appear nonthreatening. You can also bet that British Louisiana will become a safe harbor for native tribes in the Western US to seek sanctuary from American pressure as well as a place to fall back to after raiding. This is going to cause western settlers to agitate against Britain even more than on OTL. Especially if Britain is smart and tries to limit/block American emigration into the region.

I wouldn't be entirely surprised for a third war in the 1830s or 1840s to develop as the Americans make one last attempt to drive the British from the region. A Jackson figure would certainly push for this. The fact that such a war would likely decimate the New England economy also needs to be made a factor.

Even if we suppose that cooler heads prevail, somehow, a British Louisiana is going to dramatically impact internal developments in the United States. I would imagine a push for an even more extensive canal system to help link the interior to the east coast. In OTL the Mississippi played a huge part in the settlement and commerce of the interior during this period.

Also, how do you think the British will settle Louisiana? I'm guessing New Orleans becomes the preeminent Port in *Canada - but there is also the chance that settlement patterns come in from the North and move South. Could we see an earlier emergence of *Saint Paul and *Duluth?
 
I'm not convinced that "Canada" (I doubt that name would be used) will be stronger than the USA. Even if it achieves successful federation, which is by no means certain, most of the industrial potential is east of the Mississippi, and Louisiana does not include California and Texas. Someone else can add up the GDPs of the different states, but I suspect Louisiana will be a fraction of that of alt-USA.
 
I was looking at a new map in one of the Map Threads where Canada was an independent republic, holding Louisiana and the Oregon Country, with a couple independent countries East of the Mississippi under their sway. When I looked at the map I was thinking... How would it be managed? Heck, would this even be called Canada? It was the American Civil War that pressed Confederation of Canada, and I doubt that will be as big an issue on their politics here. I don't think that this vast, awkward chunk of land would come into being as one country. Maybe the lower Mississippi becomes a colony, but I see an enormous Indian Protectorate in the north, in the areas thought of as the Great American Desert. And these various areas will be settled by Americans, by they farmers or ALT Forty-Niners. New Yorkers and New Englanders did the same in Ontario. Let them have a their local elections, militias, and large tracts of land and they don't mind who is in charge too much. This does open up some interesting scenarios though, if this Greater Canada we are thinking of is split into colonie for Oregon, Upper Louisiana, Lower Louisiana, Plains, Upper Canada, Lower Canada, Maritime, Arctic etc. I imagine that it being called British North America would last longer. Perhaps instead of being a Dominion (I think that was back when Canada was just in the East though) the British use the style of Kingdom. Buuuut they might still not want to annoy the people whose colonial charters said their borders went to the Pacific Ocean, and who can be rather land hungry. Now they would have to go North or South to expand. This could all lead to some interesting things, if thought of indepth.
 

Thothian

Banned
Is the UK going to withdraw from Malta, Egypt and the Cape Colony? They didn't OTL.

My idea is that in Europe, Napoleon is more cautious for awhile, seeking to avoid provoking the UK while he gathers strength and takes what he can. He seeks favorable trade treaties with his neighbors to the north and east, while perhaps provoking a war with Spain, intending to take most of the Iberian peninsula (minus the UK's ally of Portugal, of course), the Canary and Balearic islands, and eventually Morocco/Algeria/Tunisia.

Eventually, his ambition will get the better of him, and Britain goes to war. Essentially, my idea is that Napoleon pursues a more cautious course after the Treaty of Amiens, and this delays war with the UK to about 5 or so years later than in OTL.

Interesting comments on the NA situation, everyone.
 
Last edited:

Thothian

Banned
I think many readers are underestimating just how vital control of the Mississippi is to the Americans during this era - or, at the very least, how much it was in their mindset of the time.

I'm guessing that we see an Alt-War of 1812 developing. Now, assuming that the Americans fair no better in this war than in OTL, they are still going to make a bee line for New Orleans and try to knock Louisiana out of the British sphere as soon as possible. They aren't stupid and are going to definitely see the potential for British settlement in the region.

I think, in that case, the US would get its hide torn off. And there would be many Americans who would realize that ahead of time. I could see the Adams (John & JQ) speaking out about " Pride goeth before a fall" and urging peace and trade treaties with "Hyper-Canada" .
 

Jasen777

Donor
U.S. settlers are already there, with more coming. It will take a war and a major long-term commitment to stop them, Britain isn't likely to have the interest in doing so and maybe not even the ability. They could hold New Orleans and the coast (which could easily cause a war at some point), but control of say Missouri is a different issue.
 

Jasen777

Donor
I think, in that case, the US would get its hide torn off. And there would be many Americans who would realize that ahead of time. I could see the Adams (John & JQ) speaking out about " Pride goeth before a fall" and urging peace and trade treaties with "Hyper-Canada" .

It won't be "Hyper-Canada" for several decades, if they can get it settled with loyalists. The U.S. will have a much larger population for quite some time.
 
U.S. settlers are already there, with more coming. It will take a war and a major long-term commitment to stop them, Britain isn't likely to have the interest in doing so and maybe not even the ability. They could hold New Orleans and the coast (which could easily cause a war at some point), but control of say Missouri is a different issue.
I don't know where this idea of American settlers definitely holding onto their identities and eventually revolting to rejoin America comes from, this is the British Empire not Mexico, otl American settlers in Canada assimilated quite quickly.
 

Jasen777

Donor
I don't know where this idea of American settlers definitely holding onto their identities and eventually revolting to rejoin America comes from, this is the British Empire not Mexico, otl American settlers in Canada assimilated quite quickly.

It's a different situation, early on you had loyalists moving, and later the people immigrating recognized that the land had a government, that's not the case here. Britain can try to assimilate them if they allow a high degree of local control, it will be a tricky balance. They don't necessarily have to want to rejoin the U.S. to not react well to British government.

In any case, it's going to be a while before "Hyper-Canada" has the population to be the equal of the U.S. (not counting Britain whose support they would presumably have if there was a conflict of course).
 
Top