WI Louisiana=Quebec

WI Louisiana rises in parity of population to Quebec? Firstly how could this have happened? However it happens lets say Louisiana has something like 60,000 residents circa 1750. Would France have surrendered Louisiana to the Spanish to compensate for her loss of Florida to the British.
 

Valdemar II

Banned
WI Louisiana rises in parity of population to Quebec? Firstly how could this have happened? However it happens lets say Louisiana has something like 60,000 residents circa 1750. Would France have surrendered Louisiana to the Spanish to compensate for her loss of Florida to the British.

Quite likely, but the population would have stayed French and if we use the America population growth by tripling the population every twenty years Louisiana would have 560000 people in 1790 and 1680000 in 1810 which would have sabotage A American takeover. Beside that we would likely see the French population spreading out into Texas. So the result would likely have been a French speaking country west of Missisippi North of the Rio Grande and East of the Rockies.
 
Well I don't think we can go by American oppulation trends as a lot of that was immigration from all over Europe rather than just Britain. Quebe stayed as small as it did because immigration was restricted as was settlement. I'm thinking that lifting the immigration and settlement restrictions would give Louisiana time to catch up, but I don't think you'd see that kind of huge population growth.
 

Valdemar II

Banned
Well I don't think we can go by American oppulation trends as a lot of that was immigration from all over Europe rather than just Britain. Quebe stayed as small as it did because immigration was restricted as was settlement. I'm thinking that lifting the immigration and settlement restrictions would give Louisiana time to catch up, but I don't think you'd see that kind of huge population growth.

I think you would, much of the American growth was a result of natural increase*, beside if they had so large population in 1750 in Louisiana they would have to have been more emigration friendly from the start.

*Without any immigration the population would likely still have doubled every generation (twenty years).
 
Okay so in 1810 there are roughly 1.6 million Louisianians on the Mississsippi, Ohio, and Missouri and nearly 8 million Americans most of which are east of the Appalachian Mountains. Probably a lot of tension in the Ohio river valley over encroaching American settlement.
 
A very important question, of course, is where did these 60,000 France come from, and where aren't they in comparison to OTL. 60,000 is no small number, especially considering the backwater swamp that was New Orleans at a time when France has other interests and more profitable possessions.
 
A very important question, of course, is where did these 60,000 France come from, and where aren't they in comparison to OTL. 60,000 is no small number, especially considering the backwater swamp that was New Orleans at a time when France has other interests and more profitable possessions.

D the Young has a very valid point. Louisiane has only recently been settled by the French but avoid the collapse of the Mississippi company and you might be able to raise it a bit but it would be a stretch.

Quebec's own population only managed to double in this same time period and there was little immigration, its almost all natural increases of that by 1790 you might have an equivalent population there of around say 240,000 and just under .5 million by 1810.

As to would they have given it to Spain...the answer is yes...the whole point was to prevent France from losing it to the English as well. At least giving to Spain kept it in the Family. Of course, if the population is that high, it begs the question would the Br. strategy have been the same during the seven yrs war having probably to campaign more vigourously in the Gulf coast region. Would the French have actually faced the prospect of losing both their colonies to les Anglais. Would the French in Quebec have held out or rebelled if the French still held Louisiane. It would change the character of the Napoleonic wars with a largely French derived population inhabiting Orleans Province and spreading up the west side of the Mississippi to St. Louis. Spain is more likely to keep it than retro-cede it if there is a militia base to defend the place. But if the Spanish colonies declare independence at some point it will yes, probably be a French speaking Republic in the middle of the continent. Whether it endures is another matter. With the backing even if only passively because of Trade interests by France and Britain (post Napoleon of course) then it could survive. It depends on if they have the interest. A balkanized North America is in their interests to some extent in the context of 19th C politics. It could also be a source of friction.

Here's a thought though, should events transpire in the aftermath of the Napoleonic Wars were the restored Bourbon's have shored up the regime of Ferdinand AND Spain has never retroceded to Napoleon...It may be Bourbon France that has Louisiane, retroceded to it not Napoleon around 1820 or so. Obviously more active intervention in the Americas is a given by the colonial powers. Perhaps its even a haven for French royalist Emigres when Napoleon is at his heights
 
Last edited:
Top