WI: British King in North America

Talk about stretching the suspension of disbelief. No that wouldn't happen. First off, members of Parliament are completely different than Parliamentarians. Also I strongly suspect that any invasion of Britain would cause a mass fleeing from any place the French are at to any place they are not. .
I meant members of Parliament, not the same guys who fought in the English Civil War. I couldn't think of another word that meant members of parliament, so my bad. Sorry.
But I believe that the MP's would have gathered to discuss their surrender to the French and what better place than Parliament. Instead of letting the French to run amok for a while, they would rather spare the country some unnecessary damage and surrender quickly, (possibly after what little land-based defences on the British Isles are brushed aside by a larger French invasion force).
But your right, with the French marching to London, the populace of Southern England wouldn't remain in the south for long.

It would be more realistic to tie Bonnie Prince Charlie in since he at least actually landed an invading/liberating force.

Bonnie Charlie was considered during the original invasion force but made a bad impression after turning up late and drunk (typical scot then :p). It is easily concievable that with more riding on such an invasion, (the almost the entire French colonial possessions), he could have been well-behaved and attentive, allowing him a viable position in the invasion.

However would the French give Charlie the entire Kingdom? or just Scotland and Ireland (they planned to make him King of Ireland in OTL) while the French King kept the English throne?

Seriously, any information you guys would be a great help. Ta.
 
It wouldn't be hard for an accident to happen. Imagine just both the Parliamentarians, Lords and French soldiers shouting at each other and in the confusion a single soldier fires his musket on accident, the other french soldiers follow suit believing their office gave the order to fire (similar to the Boston Massacre). The Parliamentarians attack the soldiers and the soldiers fight back, killing most or all.
That´s a bit impractical. The Parliamentarians would not fight. They would run, or surrender individually. Any fighting would be done by the soldiers defending Westminster Palace

The French would not be aiming to kill the whole Parliament en masse. Even if they ARE going to kill everyone they get, they are not going to do it then and there. The Parlamentarians they do kill will be kept alive a few months, subjected to show trials for high treason against James III and VIII, and hanged drawn and quartered at Tyburn, or hanged till dead or beheaded if the King wants to display mercy.

How many pardons James III was planning for in 1759 was another matter. Nearly every single politicians alive in 1688 was dead long ago - exhumation was an option (as with Cromwell, Bradshaw and Ireton), but Charles in 1660 had exhumed and executed just 3 out of 20 or so dead commissioners (and at least 2 exhumed were reburied without execution), and hanged drawn and quartered 6 out of 30 or so taken alive (the rest got the mercy of life imprisonment or better).

Anywaya logical scenario that might lead to mass fatalities of Parliament might be a botched defence of Westminster.

Westminster was unfortified as of 1759. The Lines of Communication had been demolished in 1647. The gates of City walls had been unhinged and portcullises wedged open in 1660, though they would be demolished... around 1760. Westminster Bridge was completed in 1750.

The Parliament does not plan on dying in defence of their seats. If they expect Parliament to be less safe than adjourning to flee individually overland and by boats then they will scatter to flee.

But assume that a cavalry raid does suddenly show up in the streets of Westminster, and before the Parliament can scatter, a few hundred horsemen block Westminster Bridge, Strand and perhaps the Thames embankment (again perhaps with unfavourable tide to leave by boat before the embankment is blocked). If the Parliament expects it to be a probing cavalry raid, and hundreds of infantry to be arriving from City every minute, will they surrender (inside or outside the house), or try to stay safe for these few minutes under the protection of a few tens of their infantry holding the building entrances?

And what if the Houses, while attempting to await rescue that does not come or comes too late, catch fire? Well, they are not storing gunpowder in Westminster in 1759. I expect that the palace had enough exits, and that they would attempt to surrender or try their luck for breakout rather than burn.

I'm not sure about the King and Royal family fleeing, but the closest I could refer to is the Portugese Royal Family and court moving to Brazil in late 1807. So it wouldn't be a far stretch to suggest the British Royal Family could do the same in 1759.
It is NOT British Royal Family in 1759. It is Hanoverian Royal Family.

So, they are on the run. Where?

Hanover is nearby. But who do they run with?

What are the rank and file British sailors, or officers, going to do with their ships if they are expecting an unsympathetic Jacobite restoration on the point of French bayonets?

Many will want to give up anyway and go home. How many are willing to sail for indefinite or lifetime exile? Well, Ireland in 1691 had 14 000 wild geese.

There are navigational constraints as to where the navy can go. They need ports with dockyard infrastructure for maintenance, or they will be unseaworthy rotting hulks soon.

Which ports did Hanover have, in 1759, for sea travel to England? Hanover certainly did not have a large navy. The Navy on the run in 1759 might disembark passengers in Hanover and take water and food, but it cannot remain a navy there.

If the sailors go to land in Hanover, they will spend the rest of their lives as Englishmen in a poor German speaking country where they are resented and at best pitied, but loved by nobody.

The other options for the navy are either, in Europe, allied countries (who in 1759?), which means being bumped again when the allies make separate peace - or sailing for English speaking Americas, where they can also found natural harbours and plenty of naval timbers.

Now, where will George II go? And will his chosen direction affect the decision of the navy? Is the navy willing to go to America to fight for King of Hanover who flees to Hanover? Will it make a difference for them if their King shares their exile?

(Hanoverians are used to King beyond the water.)
Also as a matter of curosity, if George III comes to the throne such as he does in OTL who would he marry in North America? The daughter of a colonial plantation owner or would he have a european noble brought over?

European royalty. No plantation owner will have any influence to be useful.

If France of 1759 succeeds in overthrowing Great Britain and imposing James III on swordpoint, expect balance of power hostility to overmighty France. The King-of-England-in-exile will be desperate for a political alliance in Europe. If they do get one... would George III settle for a Catholic Habsburg if no one else dare stand up to France? Or would they pick one of equal-birth, Protestant minor German princes dispossessed by French as ex-Hanover allies? The major Protestant rulers being Orange stadholder of United Provinces, and kingdoms of Prussia, Denmark and Sweden.
 
How do the French get past the vastly superior Royal Navy? And how can someone "accidentally" kill and entire legislature of a nation?
 
How do the French get past the vastly superior Royal Navy?

I know we like to think that the Navy was invulnerable, but the British certainly had enough problems during the Revolution, and Revolutionary France, with its gutted navy, was able to land troops in Ireland...
 
It is NOT British Royal Family in 1759. It is Hanoverian Royal Family.
Yes, a small mistake but George II dies the next year in OTL and George III considers himself more British than his German fathers.

So, they are on the run. Where?

Hanover is nearby. But who do they run with?
Why would run to a country nearer to France, nearer to Prussia which is being partitioned by Russia, Sweden and Saxony. Instead, there's a colony in North America which has just seen success after success in SWY and has no major catholic powers nearby.

The Royal Family flees with the Household Cav - the Life Guards and/or the Blues and Royals.

What are the rank and file British sailors, or officers, going to do with their ships if they are expecting an unsympathetic Jacobite restoration on the point of French bayonets?

Many will want to give up anyway and go home. How many are willing to sail for indefinite or lifetime exile? Well, Ireland in 1691 had 14 000 wild geese.
I have no idea. Perhaps they can emigrate to North America? I believe both soldiers and officers were promised land west of the Mississippi for their service in the SYW. They would have most likely taken up that offer to escape the Jacobites.

Now, where will George II go? And will his chosen direction affect the decision of the navy? Is the navy willing to go to America to fight for King of Hanover who flees to Hanover? Will it make a difference for them if their King shares their exile?
George II would most likely want to go to Hanover but if he dies earlier than OTL, a heart attack on his already weak heart caused by the invasion. Which means George III would come to the throne, who would want to flee to North America, rather than a poor German state surrounded by Catholics.


European royalty. No plantation owner will have any influence to be useful.

If France of 1759 succeeds in overthrowing Great Britain and imposing James III on swordpoint, expect balance of power hostility to overmighty France. The King-of-England-in-exile will be desperate for a political alliance in Europe. If they do get one... would George III settle for a Catholic Habsburg if no one else dare stand up to France? Or would they pick one of equal-birth, Protestant minor German princes dispossessed by French as ex-Hanover allies? The major Protestant rulers being Orange stadholder of United Provinces, and kingdoms of Prussia, Denmark and Sweden.
Would anyone ally themselves with King-of-GB-in-exile though? The entire of Europe just watched as England just get invaded by France and watched the monarchy flee the country. I suspect they would rather ally themselves with France, now the strongest power in Europe and possibly the world.
 
How do the French get past the vastly superior Royal Navy? And how can someone "accidentally" kill and entire legislature of a nation?

There are two battles, Lagos and Quiberon Bay, where the french scuppered it quite badly. They had several chances to destroy the british fleets chasing them piece by piece, as in both battles the british spilt their fleet up to find the french. It's quite easy to have the french fleets beast the divided portions of the british with ease before reinforcements arrive.
 
Got to say, this really is a neat idea. In 1759, you wouldn't have the resentment against the crown that would exist very shortly there after in OTL due to the end of the SYW. Although I think by this time the colonists really considered themselves more as "Americans" than Englishmen....well, probably more precisely as "New Yorkers, New Englanders, Virginians, Carolinians, Georgians, Marylanders, etc.."

I would love to see what America would look like with the Royal Family fleeing Britain and relocating to the colonies. Especially permanently. Would the King and the Court relocate to Boston, or New York, or Philadelphia? or to somewhere else entirely. Would the King reform Parliament? what would that look like? Really does open up a whole ton of cool possibilities :)
 
The exilic domination of North America is based on the fact that there were only 50,000 French colonists in the whole of North America compared to 1 million British colonists in 1759; add an extra flood of exiles from the British Isles and any attempt by any other power to control any part of eastern North America is a joke, no matter how powerful they are elsewhere.

Hrm. On the other hand, any European power should be able to control the seas pretty easily, no?
 
Got to say, this really is a neat idea. In 1759, you wouldn't have the resentment against the crown that would exist very shortly there after in OTL due to the end of the SYW. Although I think by this time the colonists really considered themselves more as "Americans" than Englishmen....well, probably more precisely as "New Yorkers, New Englanders, Virginians, Carolinians, Georgians, Marylanders, etc.."
At this time, they would be considered by foreigners as Englishmen/British but amongst each other, they would be Virginians, Carolinians etc etc but possibly just to show where they came from, rather than any meaningful division between themselves.


I would love to see what America would look like with the Royal Family fleeing Britain and relocating to the colonies. Especially permanently. Would the King and the Court relocate to Boston, or New York, or Philadelphia? or to somewhere else entirely. Would the King reform Parliament? what would that look like? Really does open up a whole ton of cool possibilities :)
It all depends on the biggest and best city in North America, I could easily see a new capital being built later on, sort of an OTL Washington but built somewhere a bit further north.
If the MP's in Britain are killed or whatnot, a new parliament would be formed in North America. The Commons would be more of the wealthier plantation owners and richer exiles from Britain. There would be more voting as well, since voting in Britain depended on owning land. In Britain, there was only 300 odd voters! :eek: While in North America less than ten percent lived in the cities and owned no land.
The House of Lords would be made up of mostly military men - British commanders and colonist who have proven themselves as suitable material. We could even see a Lord Washington sitting next to 1st Baron Amherst and a Lord Wolfe in the House of Lords in the butterfly's allow it.:cool:

Hrm. On the other hand, any European power should be able to control the seas pretty easily, no?

Most likely, France or Spain would have the largest fleet. France would have made up the naval power vacuum while Spain didn't loose their fleet until the Neopolonic era. The Dutch Republic wouldn't be top-dog but it wouldn't lose its fleet in the 4th Anglo-Dutch War, although thats not to say something similar wouldn't happen between the dutch and the french.

Also with the British, effectively trapped in North America, what would happen in India? Maybe the French will gain control and we could see a French India? And how would a Jacobite England act? Presumably, a Catholic monarch would treat the Irish better?
 
If such a situation did become plausible, how much of the English/Scottish/British population would try and relocate to the Americas?

The nobility would obviously try, but would you think the lower classes such as the gentry, peasants and perhaps bourgeoisie would also try and go?
 
How do the French get past the vastly superior Royal Navy? And how can someone "accidentally" kill and entire legislature of a nation?

Actually, it was during this war that the Royal Navy became vastly superior. It only had a slight advantage at the beginning, and its certainly possible things could have gone the other way.

Having said that, landing an army in Britain and keeping it well supplied to be a successful occupation force are very different things. The British population would also not be very happy about having Catholics coming back to rule them, it would likely develop into a quagmire. Not to mention the fact that other powers (probably the Habsburgs) would be very willing to bring down France a notch from their over mighty position.

At this time, they would be considered by foreigners as Englishmen/British but amongst each other, they would be Virginians, Carolinians etc etc but possibly just to show where they came from, rather than any meaningful division between themselves.

The English certainly wouldn't have viewed the colonists as foreigners. Indeed, several high ranking members of the armed forces refused to fight in the ARW because they didn't want to fight against their compatriots. You had strains of Tory thought that believe the colonists had become contaminated by foreign influence, but this was largely developed as an explanation for their rebelliousness rather than a pre-existing idea.

The colonists thought the same as well: one of the complaints was that the King had used "foreigners" in Hessian mercenaries, showing that they didn't consider the British regulars as foreign - and this was twenty years later, after an American identity had sprung up.

During the Seven Year's War, colonists would have had a dual - and non-conflicting - identity as e.g. Virginian and British, with possibly a triple one among New England states.

Most likely, France or Spain would have the largest fleet. France would have made up the naval power vacuum while Spain didn't loose their fleet until the Neopolonic era. The Dutch Republic wouldn't be top-dog but it wouldn't lose its fleet in the 4th Anglo-Dutch War, although thats not to say something similar wouldn't happen between the dutch and the french.

Also with the British, effectively trapped in North America, what would happen in India? Maybe the French will gain control and we could see a French India? And how would a Jacobite England act? Presumably, a Catholic monarch would treat the Irish better?

France would have increasingly dominated Spain in this period. Likely the Austrian alliance would break, and an alliance of Austrian-led German states, the Dutch, Swedes, Danes and British rebels would attempt to stop Franco-Spanish hegemony.
 
Top