Part of Canada's founding myth is that during Confederation Queen Victoria chose Ottawa to be the national capital of the new country. More likely this was decided by the Queen's advisors and High Ranking Canadians consulting the Queen, then she would make the decision final. From what I understand there were several other cities being considered as well like Toronto, Kingston, Montreal, and Quebec City? Prior to Confederation the United Province of Canada had a traveling Capital City, where one site would host the National Capital between 3 and 5 years. So what city other than Ottawa is likely to get the nod as the new capital city? What ramifications does this have on Canada as a nation? Is there any chance that we'll get a rotating capital with each province hosting for a specified time?
What If Ottawa Not Chosen as Canada's National Capital?
- Thread starter brokenrobot00
- Start date
Montreal and QC are out since I doubt they'd want the capital in the Frencb speaking parts of Canada. I can't see an alternating capital work, either. I'd think Toronto would be the best option. It was already the capital of Upper Canada.
I'll throw London, ON as an alternative option. I believe it was founded to intentionally be the capital of Upper Canada and a major metropolitan area. Also because of its name.
I'll throw London, ON as an alternative option. I believe it was founded to intentionally be the capital of Upper Canada and a major metropolitan area. Also because of its name.
Any chance that they may have tried for carving a Federal District out of a western province somewhere? The opportunities for graft are sufficiently tempting to make the politicians interested.
No chance.
Prior to national railroad projects that took decades, "the west", all of which other than British Columbia, was a fiefdom of a fur trading company that Canada didn't even own let alone have infrastructure to build a capital and lines of communication in.
All provinces were promised railroads as part of Confederation, and while a coast to coast link was part of that, it wouldn't be completed in time for a capital near the beginning of Confederation. Efforts were going on in every province. This distracts funds from doing a straight shot to Winnipeg, which happened relatively quick with a 1969 annexation of Rupert's Land and a 1881 rail link.
If you somehow had rotating capitals then settled on Winnipeg for some reason, maybe.
Prior to national railroad projects that took decades, "the west", all of which other than British Columbia, was a fiefdom of a fur trading company that Canada didn't even own let alone have infrastructure to build a capital and lines of communication in.
All provinces were promised railroads as part of Confederation, and while a coast to coast link was part of that, it wouldn't be completed in time for a capital near the beginning of Confederation. Efforts were going on in every province. This distracts funds from doing a straight shot to Winnipeg, which happened relatively quick with a 1969 annexation of Rupert's Land and a 1881 rail link.
If you somehow had rotating capitals then settled on Winnipeg for some reason, maybe.
Kingston is too close to the American border, Toronto is too Anglo and Quebec City is too French. Montreal is the most probable choice. Hilariously, it probably makes the city solidly Anglo and the whole eastern townships Anglo too which is the opposite of what Quebec wants.
Ottawa probably remains a sleep lumber town.
Ottawa probably remains a sleep lumber town.
I don't think Queen Victoria would choose any place in Quebec. Not only too close to the USA, but French!
Toronto was burned and looted by the Americans, so that likely dropped it out of contention.
I honestly think that danger from the USA was a factor, so any town that was protected by distance would be in contention. That would also eliminate any town in the Maritimes. Out of the list of names submitted, Ottawa was the obvious choice, but it could just as conceivably be Cobden!
Toronto was burned and looted by the Americans, so that likely dropped it out of contention.
I honestly think that danger from the USA was a factor, so any town that was protected by distance would be in contention. That would also eliminate any town in the Maritimes. Out of the list of names submitted, Ottawa was the obvious choice, but it could just as conceivably be Cobden!
Fearless Leader
Donor
Agreed. However, the only way English Canada accepts a permanent capital at Montreal in the 19th century IMO would be for the government to transform it into a federal district with English Common Law etc. Quebec's not going to go for that, even if the English ceded certain rights in the west.
That being said, there were proposals to include Montreal in the colony of Upper Canada in the first half of the 19th century. In fact, the entire splitting of Upper/Lower Canada went far beyond what English Canadians wanted. In their appeals to Lord Melbourne what they really wanted was essentially the creation of a "state within a state" from what I can understand. Had Melbourne granted their request rather than split the Canadas, Montreal remains the political and economic capital of a united colony of Canada. Though I agree that this development would lead to it becoming majority Anglophone. That being said, the potential for an earlier development of a Canadian canal system could lay the foundation for a truly massive city with complete cultural hegemony.
Just looking at the map is there a chance that as a concession to Francophone Canadians that both Ottawa and its neighbor across the river in Quebec the City of Gatineau are incorporated into a new Federal District to serve as the new Capital of Canada. Would this new metropolis still be called Ottawa or would it have a new name to reflect the merger of the two towns that existed before? Perhaps with the Parliament and Senate buildings facing each other across the river or instead of Parliament Hill we get Parliament Island where the current Victoria or Chaudiere Islands are today?
Fearless Leader
Donor
There would need to be some additional political pressure from French Canada in TTL to make this happen as it would be a substantial concession on the part of English Canada. Not impossible, but tricky IMO.
Given the geographic realities of the region, and the importance of the river to trade in the 19th century, I doubt they'd stick the parliament in the middle of the river. Never mind John A MacDonald's noted problem with using bridges
The logic is sound as it's still between Ontario and Quebec, but being at the edge of the world might make everyone pause. But if that's what London says who are the Canadians to argue?
Plus it forms a nice triangle between Montreal, Toronto, and Mattawa so it must be for aesthetic reasons.
The birth of this timelines stereotype of Canadians being just too polite lol. Though Mattawa is interesting in the fact that it's also on Algonquin Nation Land. Almost a perfect compromise if somehow First Peoples and French Canadians gained a little more political power in ttl.
The Canadians would flip out, they'll never go for a location not in Canada. Plus, PEI didn't even join the original confederation so it's out of the question.
I wonder how long the alternating capital system could have been kept up if Queen Vicky ducked the issue in '67- I agree that it's unlikely that such a system could last forever, but if they just kept the pre-existing system of rotating between cities for only a few extra decades there are a lot of possible butterflies. Would more cities get added to the roster as more provinces join the confederation? Would some of the federal agencies end up scattered in different cities? What about the effects on transport and communication links between the cities parliament rotates through? And of course, where the capital ends up will be determined by one hell of a bruising political fight ITTL since without the Queen picking as a neutral third party Parliament will have to figure it out- presumably after kicking the issue down the road a couple of decades based on all other Canadian Parliamentary precedent.
I'm wondering if World War One is the situation that creates a permanent capital. It's a crisis that forces the government to centralize things to responds in an efficient manner. Whatever city the capital happens to be in during the outbreak of war just sort of becomes permanent at that point and sometime after the war they make it formal.
It will happen long, long before that. People complained about all throughout its tenure as it was happening and the only reason it didn't happen was because of the French-English debate. The costs were rising from moving everything all the time and government was getting increasingly inefficient. There's no way it survives past Confederation.
I have always thought Winnipeg would be a good capital for the country - particularly today. It is comparatively central (and might help ameliorate some it the “West wants in” issues); plus it has a history of bilingualism (albeit not all good news on that front).
It is obviously not possible at the time of confederation and it is only in the last 40 years that the West has come into its own, so query whether it would have been practical.
It is obviously not possible at the time of confederation and it is only in the last 40 years that the West has come into its own, so query whether it would have been practical.
See, I view the fact that it was unpopular for such a long time but everyone was unable to solve it until they were able to have the Queen herself step in (thanks to Confederation) as a sign that if the Queen had refused to settle upon a capital the rotating system might have lasted at least a few decades- Confederation didn't resolve the French-English question, after all, and more provinces just leads to more stakeholders who want the capital in their preferred city. It's obviously unsustainable, but I agree with @brokenrobot00 that it might take a major event- like WW1- to break the system's inertia and get a permanent capital chosen. Of course, if I'm right it's hard to predict which major city would end up the capital since which site was occupied when a crisis breaks out is essentially random.