To quote McPherson himself:-
View attachment 573660
Not only that, the British were the major investors of the American economy during the Civil War. America's internal economy would be hit extremely hard and that's not counting the trade blockade.
View attachment 573662
I need not tell how fast the Union Foreign Reserves will die out due to this and how fast the Confederate Foreign Reserves would grow due to absolute wreakage of the Anaconda Plan.
At the outbreak of the American Civil War, the Union states had over three times as much money as the Confederacy, a fact that would prove vital as the war waged on.
www.statista.com
View attachment 573661
Also, the cost of the Civil War was $7 Billion, which is twice the GDP of America in 1864. With the entry of Britain, that cost balloons up, as nearly 70% of their bond marketers and the investors of the Americans suddenly vanishes. Economically, the Union would be very devastated.
Economically the simple entry of the British into the war would balloon the American Economy to very unsustainable levels. Compared to the fact that France was willing to go to war with the US as well if Britain came in, you can be sure Napoleon III would drag France against America as well. That would be the death nail to America's economy. Britain and France could not only subsidize the Confederate Economy, they would virtually destroy the Union's Economy. No bond sales, blockade, redistribution of industries, loss of 726,000 exports of Rifles to the Union, loss of gunpowder, etc would make a War Lost.
From
Navies and Nations: Warships, Navies and State Building in Europe and America by Jan Glete :-
Canadian Fleet 1862:-
At Quebec: 2x line of battle and 1x ironclad battery
Operating between Quebec and Montreal: 2x ironclad battery, 2x corvettes (noting a maximum draught of 18 ft), 2 dispatch vessels and 7 gunboats
On Lake St. Francis: 4x gunboats
On Lake Ontario: 3x ironclad battery, 4x dispatch vessels, 16 gunboats
On Lake Erie: 3x ironclad Battery, 20x gunboats
On the Richelieu River: 6 gunboats
Total for the inland seas of Canada: 2 line-of-battle, 9 ironclad batteries, 2 corvettes, 6 dispatch vessels, 53 gunboats = 72 vessels
Western North Atlantic Squadron Ships that were mobilized during the Trent Affair in case of War with the Union:-
Penobscot Bay: 2x sloops, 2x gunboats
Kennebec River: 1x sloop, 2x gunboats
Portland: 1x frigate, 2x sloops, 2x gunboats
Portsmouth, NH: 2x sloops (and notes the defences mean a mortar vessel can range on the navy yard without any return fire)
Salem and Marblehead: 1x sloop
Boston: 1x line of battle, 2x frigates, 2x sloops, 2x gunboats
Nantucket Island: 1x frigate
Narrgansett Bay: 3x sloops, 3x gunboat
Long Island Sound: 1x line of battle, 1x frigate, 2x sloops, 2x gunboats
New York Harbor (South Entrance): 2x line of battle, 2x frigates, 2x sloops, 2x gunboats (much ink is spilled over how to attack New York)
Delaware River: 1x line of battle, 1x frigate or sloop, 2x gunboats
Chesapeake Bay: 2x line of battle, 2x frigates, 6x sloops, 6x gunboats
Port Royal, SC: 1x frigate, 1x sloop
Total blockade: 7x line of battle, 12x frigates, 25 sloops, 23x gunboats = 67 vessels
This is discounting the 25 warship strong West Indies Squadron, and the 18 Warships Squadron strong South Atlantic Squadron.
The RN outnumbered the USN by 3 times in American waters alone until early to mid 1863. A Foreign intervention on part of Britain was only seriously going to happen in 1861 during the Trent Affair. From the aforementioned book, the RN had keeled and started the construction of 60 warships already during the Trent Affair for fear of War within Canada and the West Indies. Combined with the sheer shipbuilding capacity of the British Empire, the British are not only going to outpace the American shipbuilding capacity, it's not even going to be a close contest. Despite no wars, the British constructed 73 wargoing ships during 1860-65:-
RN Construction (1860-65):
2 Warrior-class broadside ironclads
Completed: 21/10/61 and 12/9/62
Displacement: 9,137 and 9,250 t
2 Defence-class broadside ironclads
Completed: 2/12/61 and 2/7/62
Displacement: 6,150 t and 6,070 t
1 Hector-class broadside ironclad (2nd completed 15/9/68)
Completed: 22/2/64
Displacement: 6,710 t
1 Achilles-class broadside ironclad
Completed: 26/11/64
Displacement: 9,829 t
3 Prince-Consort-class wooden broadside ironclads
Completed: 1 in April, 1864, 2 in July, 1865
Displacement: 6,832 t
Royal Oak wooden broadside ironclad
Completed: April, '63
Displacement: 6,366 t
Royal Alfred wooden central battery ironclad
Completed: 23/3/67
Displacement: 6,707 t
Research wooden central battery ironclad
Completed: 6/4/64
Displacement: 1,743 t load, 1,900 full load
Enterprise composite central battery ironclad sloop
Completed: 3/6/64
Displacement: 1,350 t
Royal Sovereign coast defence turret ship
Completed: 20/8/64
Displacement: 5,080 t
Scorpion-class masted turret ships
Completed: both 10/10/65
Displacement: 2,751 t
HMS Orlando (last of 6 of Walker's large wooden screw frigates)
Completed: Dec, '61
Displacement: 5,643 t
2 Immortalité-class wooden screw frigates
Completed: Nov, '60 and Oct, '75 (2 others in '70 and '74, a fifth never completed)
Displacement: 3,984 t and 3,996 t
4 converted Fourth Rate sailing frigates (note these are not new builds, but conversions of older ships)
Undocked: 26/3/60, 11/4 and 9/8/61 and 15/4/62
Displacement: 3,826 t, 3,832 t, 3,708 t and 3,786 t
2 wooden screw frigates (not classed)
Completed: Dec, '60 and Nov, '63 (a third Sept, '66)
Displacement: 3,535 t and 3,498 t
6 Jason-class wooden screw corvettes (these ships each mounted a single 110pdr Armstrong pivot-mounted BL which was withdrawn in '64 following accidents)
Completed: Nov, '60, Sept & Oct, '61, Aug & Sept '62, and Apr, '64
Displacement: 2,431 t, 1,720 t (on trials and before being masted), 2,365 t, 2,431 t, 2,302 t, and 2,424 t
7 Rosario-class wooden screw sloops
Completed: 17/10, 10/11, & 29/11/60, 17/10 & 14/12/61, 2/4 & 14/2/62
Launched: 927, 849, 896, 811, 918, 858 & 913 t
7 Cameleon-class wooden screw sloops (ok, giving up on the individualised tonnages before my fingers do! I'll list the total tonnage for the class instead.)
Launched: 23/2, 26/3, 9/7 & 13/11/60, 9/2 & 21/8/61, 18/3/62, (an 8th 29/3/66)
Displacement: 9,297/7 (8th=1,365 t)
2 Amazon-class wooden screw sloops
Launched: 23/5 & 16/11/65 (4 more in '66)
Displacement: 3,122/2 (6,339/4 for the post-war ones)
19 Philomel-class wooden gunvessels (launched 1859-62, a 20th in '67)
Displacement: 570 t each
8 Cormorant-class wooden gunvessels (launched 1860-7)
Displacement: 877 t each
The American Navy built 157 Warships from 1860 - 65 (discounting auxiliaries, and patrol ships, these are real warships):-
1 Screw Frigate (USS
Franklin)
Launched: 1864
Displacement: 5,170 t
1 Screw Corvette (sloop) (USS Richmond)
Launched: 1860
Displacement: 2,604 t
New Ironsides broadside ironclad
Launched: 10/5/62
Commissioned: 21/8/62
Displacement: 4,120 t
Dunderberg broadside ironclad
Launched: 22/7/65
Commissioned: Not by USN - sold to France 1867, commissioned by her for a few weeks in 1870, stricken 1872
Displacement: 7,800 t
Monitor
Launched: 30/1/62
Commissioned: 25/2/62
Displacement: 987 t
10 Passaic-class Monitors
Launched: 30/8, 27/9, 7, 9 & 27/10, 5/11, 6 & 16/12/62, 17/1/63, & 14/11/64
Commissioned: 25/11/62 - 24/5/65 (details available on request)
Displacement: 1,875 t
Roanoke monitor
Date of Conversion: May, '62 - April, '63
Commissioned: 29/6/63
Displacement: 4,395 t
Onondaga monitor
Launched: 29/7/63
Commissioned: 24/3/64
Displacement: 2,551 t
4 Miantonomoh-class monitors
Launched: 19/3 & 15/8/63, 23/3 & 6/5/64
Commissioned: 5/5 & 18/9/65, 4/10/64 & 12/10/65
Displacement: 3,400 t
Dictator monitor
Launched: 26/12/63
Commissioned: 11/11/64
Displacement: 4,438 t
Puritan monitor
Launched: 2/7/64
Commissioned: Never completed, broken up '74-5
Displacement: 4,912 t
9 Canonicus-class monitors
Launched:1/8/63, 13/4/64, 17/5/64, 18/12/64, 14/10/63, 21/5/64, 16/12/63, 12/9/63, 22/12/64
Commissioned: 16/4/64, Never (completed 10/6/65), 22/9/64, 1/1/71 (completion 27/9/65), 6/6/64, Never (completion 10/6/65), 7/4/64, 19/4/64, ? (completion Dec, '65)
Displacement: 2,100 t
4 Kalamazoo-class monitors
Launched: Never. Laid down Between Nov, '63 and early '64
Commissioned: Never launched, broken up '74 (1) and '84 (3)
Displacement: 5,660 t
4 Milwaukee-class shallow draught monitors
Launched: 4/7/63, 4 & 10/2 & 12/3/64
Commissioned: 27/4, 27/8, 10/5 * 8/7/64
Displacement: 1,300 t
20 Casco-class shallow draught monitors
Launched: 5/5/64 - 21/12/65
Commissioned: only 9 completed, delivered and commissioned by end Dec, '65
Displacement: 1,175 t
Galena armoured ship
Launched: 14/2/62
Commissioned: 21/4/62
Displacement: 738 t
Keokuk armoured ship
Launched: 6/12/62
Commissioned: Mar, '63
Displacement: 677 t
Several USN vessels were laid down during the war but weren't commissioned for some years thereafter. For example, 5 Wampanoag-class wooden screw frigates were laid down in '63, but were launched only in '64-5, and had their trials '67-8. Displacement: 20,466 t/5. Other such vessels: USS Chattanooga (wooden screw frigate), 3,043 t; USS Idaho (wooden screw frigate), 3,241 t; 8 Java-class (wooden screw frigates), 3,953 t; 4 Contoocook-class (wooden screw frigates), 3,003 t; 1 Alaska-class (wooden screw sloop), 2,394 t; 4 Swatara-class (wooden screw sloops), 1,113-1,129 t;
4 Ossipee-class wooden screw sloops (includes the famous USS Housatonic)
Launched: 16 & 20/11/61, 22/2 & 20/3/62
Commissioned: 6/11 & 29/8/62, June, '62 & 4/12/62
Displacement: 1,934 t
4 Sacramento-class wooden screw sloops
Launched: 28/3, 10/7, 28/4, & 8/12/62
Commissioned: 1/8/62, 15/1, 7/1 & 20/6/63
Displacement: 2,526 t
2 Ticonderoga-class wooden screw sloops
Launched: 9/8 & 16/10/62
Commissioned: 8/1 & 12/5/63
Displacement: 2,526 t
4 Kearsarge-class wooden screw sloops
Launched: 11/9, 20/11, 24/8 & 10/10/61
Commissioned: 24/1 & 28/2/62, 5/12/61, 3/3/62
Displacement: 1,457-1,488 t
23 Unadilla-class gunboats
Launched: Various times in 1861 from August
Commissioned: '61 - late Feb, '62
Displacement: 691 t
8 Kansas-class gunboats
Launched: June, '63-March, '64
Commissioned: Sept, '63 - Nov, '64
Displacement: 836 t
12 Octorara-class side-wheel gunboats (good for rivers and coastal service, but "much less satisfactory for sea service")
Launched: Jan, '61 - May, '62
Commissioned: Jan-Jul '62
Displacement: 981-1,210 t
27 Sassacus-class side-wheel gunboats (a 28th failed her trials)
Launched: Feb-Dec, '63
Commissioned: 2 in '63 (July and Oct), 2 never, remainder Mar-Dec, '64
Displacement: 1,173 t
4 Mohongo-class side-wheel gunboats (2 commissioned 1866)
Launched: various dates in 1864
Commissioned: Jan-Oct, '65
Displacement: 1,370 t
Spuyten Duyvil spar-torpedo vessel
Launched: 1864
Commissioned: Prob Nov, '64
Displacement: 207 t
Now you can add the other 50 or so ships the RN laid down during the Trent Affair which would not be converted ITTL, plus the other shipbuilding capability of the British Empire.
You can also read this book
Conway's All the World's Fighting Ships, 1860-1905
by Robert Gardiner to keep things at a perspective.
You can read this book as well:
https://books.google.com.np/books?id=BkgoAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA20&dq=lead+production+1860&hl=en&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=lead production 1860&f=false
The British economical effort to the Union was war-winning. You take that away, the Union would be incapacitated man walking. If Napoleon III got into the fun, then the Union was dead man walking (and if Britain intervenes, then 9/10 times, France is also going to intervene).
I'm sorry, but it's not a contest. I could bring the French as well, but that's useless. Economically, and Militarily, the Union has already lost the moment British enter the war. It could be a limited war of course in which the British regain their pride and get a hefty sum from the Union for it. That would be the best case scenario for the Union. If that fails.......well, I need not state how things will go should I?
However if Britain wins this war (really its like 9.5/10 that Britain will win), This is a huge detriment in the future. It makes the possibility of Germany winning in 1917-18 very likely; though it would probably be a pyrrhic victory.
Now really, I am open to counter-
facts, but really if you fail to bring out the facts which support your statements , I am not even going to engage in Whataboutism, for there is no point.
@History Learner and I have butted heads multiple times in past threads, and often they have been pretty petty and heated, however we stick to the facts to debate; provide proof and facts, there is no harm in debating, debating in whataboutism rather than solid facts is very baseless and grasping at straws.