What if Canada didn't built the Trans Canada railroad in 1885?

The Trans Canada railroad was completed in 1885 to connect British Columbia and the Western territories to central Canada. This was considered a vital project by the Canadian government to assert Canadian sovereignty over what would become the prairie provinces and to fulfil an agreement with British Columbia as a condition for B.C. to join Canada.

There was a great deal of political objection to the government funding of this project due to the huge expense and the legality of some of the business dealings associated with the project. However the backing of the building of the railroad was secured largely based on the premise that it was necessary to forestall American encroachment into the prairies.

Was this true? If the opposition had got their way and the Trans Canada railroad not been built would the Americans have eventually annexed the agrable areas of the prairies? What would this have meant for British Columbia and Canada?
 
Well...
BC would likely not be part of Canada if the promise isn't made, and no serious attempt is made.
It probably stays it's own colony/Dominion like Newfoundland.

The other interesting knock-on is what happens to the prairies.

The Second Riel Rebellion was crushed by Canadian forces that travelled along the partially built RR. If that work hadn't been done already, it would likely have been impossible for Canada to project military power West like that.

If Riel's statelet succeeds, it might just get recognized by the US. Not, of course, that the US had any love for aboriginal peoples, but they might well figure on puppetizing them firstly, and then swallowing them afterward.
 
Was this true? If the opposition had got their way and the Trans Canada railroad not been built would the Americans have eventually annexed the agrable areas of the prairies? What would this have meant for British Columbia and Canada?

The United States would've annexed the Prairies and BC definitely, in this situation.
 
BC likely becomes its own dominion and the Red River Colony becomes a quasi-independent Republic of Assinioba. I'm not sure the US would really recognize it - I think its more likely the Americans would the prospect of diplomatic leverage to extract some kind of concessions from the British (perhaps regarding the Alaska dispute or Samoa). The Red River Colony could end up becoming a North American Boer equivalent. Recognition and annexation would just bring all sorts of headaches.

Fun fact - North Dakota has the highest rail density in the western hemisphere. Why, you might ask? Because of all the railroads that serve as the prairies' main outlet to the outside world via US ports at places like Duluth and Minneapolis.

Still, its also possible that if there's no railroad the prairies might just get linked to BC as a dominion (if not made into their own dominion). The original plan for a trans-Canada railroad was to have it go along the Northern Sasketchewan River and go through the Yellowhead Pass. Assuming the British are fairly interested in holding onto their backup route to pacific trade (which Canada was quite important as), I think it's more likely make the prairies part of BC and settle the place from the west (ergo migrants arrive in Vancouver or Prince Edward and take a train east). Maybe Churchill becomes a much bigger port here. If the Brits are desperate for settlers to keep the place away from the Americans, maybe they take in more Chinese and Indians? There historically were quite a few Chinese migrants to the American interior west (Idaho was a third Chinese early on) so it's not like they had to stick to the coasts.
 
To stop the railroad, like with most things regarding Canada after 1860, you've probably got to kill John A. Macdonald. Though there were other drivers for the annexation of Rupert's Land (largely in Ontario) you probably have a harder time getting the RR built on schedule or even in a timely fashion without Macdonald's wheeling and dealing. Some sort of rail line will most likely end up built eventually, but perhaps only to Red River.

If say there is no RR built, you probably have BC becoming its own Dominion, while Rupert's Land might end up bought by Canada anyways. However, without a railroad you have a hard time connecting these separate pieces, and perhaps Canada is split down the middle somewhere, with BC taking over what might be Alberta.

The big question is why anyone else but Canada is going to look seriously at this largely uncharted wilderness north of the 45th Parallel? The US has lots of land to consume, and the British are already established north of the border. I grant that in the event Victoria and BC instead decided to join the Union this could change.
 
The point about the US already having enough empty space to fill is a very good one - not to mention that the US already got all the good land in North America for the most part. The only space further north the US was really interested in was BC because of trade and whatnot. Alaska was just easy pickings/a potential stepping stone to taking BC.

There was real talk in the 1870s about BC and Vancouver Island joining the US, but I'm skeptical Britain allows it. An independent dominion is more likely.
 
A separate British Columbia state makes the most sense to me.

As for Rupert's Land, as much as independence might be the least bad outcome for its peoples, I suspect it will get swallowed up into Canada eventually. How this happens is hugely important.
 
RR1880.jpg

RR1890.jpg


Maybe Sir John A. Macdonald was right about the necessity of building the CPR to assert Canadian sovereignty over Western Canada. These maps show the expansion of the U.S. railway trackage from 1880 to 1890. Most notable are the new railways just South of the border running through North Dakota, Montana and Idaho. Branches from these lines could easily be extended North into the Southern portions of Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta. The geography there is not very difficult for railroad building.

These regions and in particular Southern Saskatchewan were the best farming and ranching lands of the Canadian Prairies including the Saskatchewan wheat belt later becoming known as the bread basket of Canada. But if easier access by the Canadian railroad didn't exist then access using the American railroads might have occurred instead.

If the mass importation of immigrant settlers from the 1890s onward to farm these regions had come in over U.S. railroads and their access to markets and supplies been conducted over these same railroads where would the allegiances of these mostly immigrant farmers have been?

The North-West Rebellion would possibly have seen the establishment of a quasi-independent Metis nation in the Northern part of Saskatchewan and Manitoba since I don't think the Americans would have been agreeable to the transportation of Canadian troops via their railway lines to suppress the rebellion. This would further weaken control by the Canadian government of the Prairie regions.

I think Sir John A. made the right call from a Canadian perspective.
 
Well...
BC would likely not be part of Canada if the promise isn't made, and no serious attempt is made.
It probably stays it's own colony/Dominion like Newfoundland.

The other interesting knock-on is what happens to the prairies.

The Second Riel Rebellion was crushed by Canadian forces that travelled along the partially built RR. If that work hadn't been done already, it would likely have been impossible for Canada to project military power West like that.

If Riel's statelet succeeds, it might just get recognized by the US. Not, of course, that the US had any love for aboriginal peoples, but they might well figure on puppetizing them firstly, and then swallowing them afterward.

If there aren't settlers pushing into Metis lands and threatening their land title they probably don't rebel.
 
Top