WI: Independent Louisiana?

[thezerech]

my imagination at work ....

I don't know why Louisiana it self is so thin, but that is is a beautiful map!

As much as I love anything Francophone, this is a tough one. But, I think it can happen if France does some specific things with their population. For example, establish a penal colony in the western coast and attempt to have them move inland as much as possible. Throw some Protestant French/Germans there too, along with some estranged royals and the like. Then, try to have as many Catholic immigrants to flood there from places like Italy, Portugal, Ireland, Poland, etc. That should give you a good population for the basics. Then, just get Napoleon or someone else to create a "non-colonial Sister Republic" or something similar there to show how "free it is". The US would still be interested in expanding west, but for the time being the Louisianan Republic could prove to be a useful ally or buffer against Spain.

This sounds pretty good, perhaps have the French establish a penal colony in the middle of nowhere up north, perhaps in modern day Kansas? Also have the French encourage Huguenot immigration to Louisiana. Then have Haitian Revolution survivors flee to Louisiana, not only whites but also mulattos, who both bring a significant amount of wealth with them. They settle farther North, especially the Mulattos since I'm sure New Orleans would not be so well treating of people of a mixed racial background. If only I could shift early Irish immigration to Louisiana but I don't really know how to do that. I think if Jefferson decided it was unconstitutional, or instead if Napoleon decides to add the condition of U.S alliance with France, which Jefferson would refuse. Then Napoleon basically has no choice but to let the colony do whatever it wants to, I could see them being trying to attract immigration from Europe during a time of war, which means thousands will come, and after Napoleon is defeated (Perhaps Louisiana helps the U.S during the War of 1812), thousands of refugees come to Louisiana. Eventually it'll be pro-Bonapartist enough to declare an independent state.

 

[John7755 يوحنا]

I don't know why Louisiana it self is so thin, but that is is a beautiful map!



This sounds pretty good, perhaps have the French establish a penal colony in the middle of nowhere up north, perhaps in modern day Kansas? Also have the French encourage Huguenot immigration to Louisiana. Then have Haitian Revolution survivors flee to Louisiana, not only whites but also mulattos, who both bring a significant amount of wealth with them. They settle farther North, especially the Mulattos since I'm sure New Orleans would not be so well treating of people of a mixed racial background. If only I could shift early Irish immigration to Louisiana but I don't really know how to do that. I think if Jefferson decided it was unconstitutional, or instead if Napoleon decides to add the condition of U.S alliance with France, which Jefferson would refuse. Then Napoleon basically has no choice but to let the colony do whatever it wants to, I could see them being trying to attract immigration from Europe during a time of war, which means thousands will come, and after Napoleon is defeated (Perhaps Louisiana helps the U.S during the War of 1812), thousands of refugees come to Louisiana. Eventually it'll be pro-Bonapartist enough to declare an independent state.

New Orleans had an estimated 50,000 people of color in their city in 1860, so no, it is not like they would be rejected any more than in the north.

 

[Ameck16]

If Louisiana survives as a independent country, it would be fun to see it expand west so that it's border with Mexico is the the Rio grande river.

 

[thezerech]

New Orleans had an estimated 50,000 people of color in their city in 1860, so no, it is not like they would be rejected any more than in the north.

From what I understand New Orleans was a rather racist place in the 1800-1810s. It might make sense for those refugees with wealth to move farther North where they could get rich again on fur trade, and also escape anti mulatto sentiments. I'm not suggesting that they would have been expelled or anything. Also, in 1860, I'm sure the majority were Slaves.

 

[John7755 يوحنا]

From what I understand New Orleans was a rather racist place in the 1800-1810s. It might make sense for those refugees with wealth to move farther North where they could get rich again on fur trade, and also escape anti mulatto sentiments. I'm not suggesting that they would have been expelled or anything. Also, in 1860, I'm sure the majority were Slaves.

This narrative is not necessarily correct. Louisiane had a militia and army of integrated people of color in 1804 made up of volunteers who where free people of color. Many of which had came to Nouvelle Orléans from Hispaniola.

For brevity, many of these people of color (gens de couleur libres) where free individuals who held slaves and agricultural land in both Saint Bernard paroisse and lived in urban Orléans paroisse. It is a false narrative to paint La Nouvelle Orléans or the far southern edges of Louisiane racist as you say of Georgia or the like. It stands to reason that the oldest mulatto community in America historically has always been in Louisiane and has been there since at least the late 1700s. This relationship is more similar to Spanish and Portuguese concepts where mulattos where more privileged than actual Africans or native slaves; this can be accounted for by the Spanish occupation of the area.

 

[thezerech]

This narrative is not necessarily correct. Louisiane had a militia and army of integrated people of color in 1804 made up of volunteers who where free people of color. Many of which had came to Nouvelle Orléans from Hispaniola.

For brevity, many of these people of color (gens de couleur libres) where free individuals who held slaves and agricultural land in both Saint Bernard paroisse and lived in urban Orléans paroisse. It is a false narrative to paint La Nouvelle Orléans or the far southern edges of Louisiane racist as you say of Georgia or the like. It stands to reason that the oldest mulatto community in America historically has always been in Louisiane and has been there since at least the late 1700s. This relationship is more similar to Spanish and Portuguese concepts where mulattos where more privileged than actual Africans or native slaves; this can be accounted for by the Spanish occupation of the area.

Ah, okay. Thanks for correcting me. However, would it not stand to logic that many immigrants/refugees from Haiti would settle in the North? If we change certain things?



Also, one way we could affect this change would be to have Haiti be reconquered by the French. This keeps Napoleon from wanting to rid himself of Louisiana. From that point we can change a great many things. Perhaps the British move into New Orleans and are repelled like Buenos Aires, which has the same affect of showing the people of New Orleans that they do not need France. Then have Britain try and conquer Haiti instead, another slave revolt, chaos, then, thousands of refugees to Nouvelle Orleans. I'm trying hard here to do 2 things at the same time, raise Louisiene National Consciousness while increasing Francophone population.

Another idea, maybe Spain never 'loses' New Orleans, instead it is kept under Spanish control? Napoleon simply believes a North American Empire worthless, and decides to let the Spanish keep it.

 

[John7755 يوحنا]

Ah, okay. Thanks for correcting me. However, would it not stand to logic that many immigrants/refugees from Haiti would settle in the North? If we change certain things?



Also, one way we could affect this change would be to have Haiti be reconquered by the French. This keeps Napoleon from wanting to rid himself of Louisiana. From that point we can change a great many things. Perhaps the British move into New Orleans and are repelled like Buenos Aires, which has the same affect of showing the people of New Orleans that they do not need France. Then have Britain try and conquer Haiti instead, another slave revolt, chaos, then, thousands of refugees to Nouvelle Orleans. I'm trying hard here to do 2 things at the same time, raise Louisiene National Consciousness while increasing Francophone population.

Another idea, maybe Spain never 'loses' New Orleans, instead it is kept under Spanish control? Napoleon simply believes a North American Empire worthless, and decides to let the Spanish keep it.

The Spanish option seems the best in my opinion.

 

[funnyhat]

Ah, okay. Thanks for correcting me. However, would it not stand to logic that many immigrants/refugees from Haiti would settle in the North? If we change certain things?

I'm not sure why refugees from Haiti would settle in the north when most were connected to the tropical plantation economy in some way. You can establish sugar plantations in southern Louisiana, but not further north.

 

[Ameck16]

If Louisiana survives after Napoleon, it can expect 3 waves of Catholic immigrants.
1. The Irish 1840-50s
2. Germans 1850-90s
3. Italians 1890s-1920s
All these people especially the Irish and Italians are from the rural areas and would more likely settle in the North. Since they would more likely come from tenant farming background where the land is owned by a absentee landlord that charges a extortionate rent fee, and thus a culture where land ownership brings prestige to oneself.

 

[Malta]

Hmmm. I am of the thought that any independent Louisiana could be independent in the southern region but it would not be so in the more expansive northern territories. The United States is coming west and it is going to eventually take what it can get. Especially with the expansive network of canals being developed they are going to move down the Ohio and onto the Mississippi. The best territorial size I could potentially see them maintaining is as east as the Alabama river and as north as Arkansas and Western Tennessee. However, that does give them options to move into Texas and Oklahoma. Potentially even Kansas and Colorado.

 

[Wendell]

Hmmm. I am of the thought that any independent Louisiana could be independent in the southern region but it would not be so in the more expansive northern territories. The United States is coming west and it is going to eventually take what it can get. Especially with the expansive network of canals being developed they are going to move down the Ohio and onto the Mississippi. The best territorial size I could potentially see them maintaining is as east as the Alabama river and as north as Arkansas and Western Tennessee. However, that does give them options to move into Texas and Oklahoma. Potentially even Kansas and Colorado.

So, perhaps a border between the U.S. and Louisiana on the Arkansas River?

 

[Malta]

So, perhaps a border between the U.S. and Louisiana on the Arkansas River?

Yes, it is a possibility. It is the best geographic feature in the area until you hit the Rockies. From my previous post I am thinking maybe the Louisianan and US governments come to an exchange. Louisiana getting most of the Mississippi territory to the Alabama river in exchange for the Louisiana purchase north of the Arkansas river.

 

[Wendell]

Yes, it is a possibility. It is the best geographic feature in the area until you hit the Rockies.

[https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/27/Arkansasrivermap.jpg]

Now if only their western border was the Rio Grande.....

 

[thezerech]

I'm not sure why refugees from Haiti would settle in the north when most were connected to the tropical plantation economy in some way. You can establish sugar plantations in southern Louisiana, but not further north.

I'm not sure either, however unless there is Northern Francophone migration U.S annexation of Kansas/Nebraska is inevitable.


So, Spain retains New Orleans as Napoleon comes to the decision that N.A is worthless. Napoleon leaves T. L'Ouverture in charge of Haiti hoping to send back LeClerc for war in Europe. LeClerc's army helps evacuate Haitian refugees, who arrive in Nouvelle Orleans and begin to settle. Some move to the North to get rich on the fur trade. LeClerc's Army is now stuck in Nouvelle Orleans, as the British have it under Naval Blockade. The British launch a naval invasion of NO, hoping to capture the city. However French troops and local militia manage to repel the British assault. General LeClerc is a hero to the Louisianans for saving Nouvelle Orleans. He is stuck in Louisiana for the remainder of the war, him and his 30,000 troops. They are stationed in an around Nouvelle Orleans. However the city is still technically under Spanish control. When Napoleon invades Spain (still unable to transport his brother in law or his army out of N.A) LeClerc is now in an very awkward position. General LeClerc and his Army quickly gain control of much of Louisiana including the city of Nouvelle Orleans and St. Louis. Aswell as parts of Eastern Texas. The U.S declares war on Britain during the War of 1812, Louisianan forces and U.S forces cooperate though they do not officially ally. The U.S sells supplies to the Louisianans. However in 1814, the war is over and the Bourbon's reinstated in France and the government of Spain trying to retain control of her former colonies. In response to this, General LeClerc declares Louisiana an independent state from the Kingdom of France, "L'Empire de Louisiana". He continues to fight small Spanish incursions and Native unrest. The U.K recognizes Louisiana, during the Congress of Vienna, Louisianan independence is recognized by the Great Powers, and Spain officially acknowledges it, realizing that they have more important territory in Peru and Nuevo Espana. Ostensibly the Emperor of Louisiana was to be Napoleon Bonaparte, with LeClerc governing as Governor-General, then after the surrender of Napoleon, 'regent'. However, after the commencement of the hundred days, LeClerc maintains his positions and launches no attacks nor issues any special decrees, as he has yet to issue anything contrary to Napoleon's legitimacy as Emperor of France and Louisiana. However after the defeat at Waterloo, LeClerc officially declares himself Empereur de Louisiana.

^What do y'all think? I wrote it up real quick, so forgive me if I missed any important factors. What else should I include? Also, any ideas where it aught to go?

 

[Malta]

Ah, okay. Thanks for correcting me. However, would it not stand to logic that many immigrants/refugees from Haiti would settle in the North? If we change certain things?



Also, one way we could affect this change would be to have Haiti be reconquered by the French. This keeps Napoleon from wanting to rid himself of Louisiana. From that point we can change a great many things. Perhaps the British move into New Orleans and are repelled like Buenos Aires, which has the same affect of showing the people of New Orleans that they do not need France. Then have Britain try and conquer Haiti instead, another slave revolt, chaos, then, thousands of refugees to Nouvelle Orleans. I'm trying hard here to do 2 things at the same time, raise Louisiene National Consciousness while increasing Francophone population.

Another idea, maybe Spain never 'loses' New Orleans, instead it is kept under Spanish control? Napoleon simply believes a North American Empire worthless, and decides to let the Spanish keep it.

I did start and stall on a TL where Toussaint and Napoleon actually do come to an agreement. In exchange for remaining a French protectorate the economic interests of France cannot be damaged. This leads to Hatian troops under the French flag putting down factions in New Orleans opposed to Napoleon. This also sparks a massive slave revolt across all of the Caribbean territories that Hatian freedom fighters are happy to help with. This also leads to a revolt in the United States and fears of Napoleonic Janissaries invading the United States which sparks a war with the US and France.

It was called By His Order: Napoleon's America.

 

[thezerech]

Yes, it is a possibility. It is the best geographic feature in the area until you hit the Rockies. From my previous post I am thinking maybe the Louisianan and US governments come to an exchange. Louisiana getting most of the Mississippi territory to the Alabama river in exchange for the Louisiana purchase north of the Arkansas river.

Doesn't that cost them St. Louis? I think it is a little too far South, it should encompass more of Kansas, ideally. Most of Nebraska maybe, after that the rest northward should go U.S.A. ideally.

 

[Malta]

Doesn't that cost them St. Louis? I think it is a little too far South, it should encompass more of Kansas, ideally. Most of Nebraska maybe, after that the rest northward should go U.S.A. ideally.

I believe it is too far north for Louisiana to reasonably consolidate. Perhaps at the confluence of the Mississippi and Ohio rivers but the Americans are going to gun it for the Missouri river. A lot of it may fall along with the Louisiana and US governments dealing with the natives of the territory. Either defeating them, buying the land and each other recognizing their purchase/seizures.

 

[thezerech]

I believe it is too far north for Louisiana to reasonably consolidate. Perhaps at the confluence of the Mississippi and Ohio rivers but the Americans are going to gun it for the Missouri river. A lot of it may fall along with the Louisiana and US governments dealing with the natives of the territory. Either defeating them, buying the land and each other recognizing their purchase/seizures.

How about the Des Moines up to around Des Moines it self, with everything North being divided along a straight line from Des Moines.

 

[candycosmonaut]

Lots of interesting maps ....

 

[Malta]

How about the Des Moines up to around Des Moines it self, with everything North being divided along a straight line from Des Moines.

Could work. Also who is in power at the time? Is it Jefferson? He may be willing to work with an allied Republic if he was still on about yeomen republics from coast to coast.