WI the US had to repurchase the Louisiana Territory from Spain after the war of 1812

And has an enemy for the next hundred years, in addition to setting an awful precedent.

I've never bought that argument. Britain and America fought two wars within forty years of each other and then never fought again. America isn't going to hold a grudge for a century over a piddly five million dollars. Everything Britain wanted was heavily contested and barely inhabited by Americans, they aren't going to have a century long chip on their shoulder over a few thousand Frenchmen and Indians. Especially with the spectre of slavery rising and the Federalists still kicking around.
 
Why not just have America pay more gold to Spain in exchange for more territory in the Treaty of Adams-Onis? It accomplishes the same thing, and makes more sense.
 
I've never bought that argument. Britain and America fought two wars within forty years of each other and then never fought again. America isn't going to hold a grudge for a century over a piddly five million dollars. Everything Britain wanted was heavily contested and barely inhabited by Americans, they aren't going to have a century long chip on their shoulder over a few thousand Frenchmen and Indians. Especially with the spectre of slavery rising and the Federalists still kicking around.
Five million dollars was a big deal back then, and no country takes insults to their sovereignty well.
Not really when you consider that the power and influence of the US in 1812 was nothing like it is today.
The Monroe Doctrine was enforceable because of the royal navy, but was itself valuable to the British because good relations with the United States was basically required for British foreign policy goals in the same era.
 
I don't see them being able to do this, nor wanting to do it. Besides, if they reverse those various treaties, then they are going to have to remove the Bourbons form Tuscany, which they were given as part of the deal.
are you referring to the territory Spain was supposed to get in return for giving Louisiana to France? If so, I believe it was Parma, and they never got it. Napoleon reneged on it, just as he reneged on his promise not to sell the territory to anyone but Spain.
 
Five million dollars was a big deal back then, and no country takes insults to their sovereignty well.

The Monroe Doctrine was enforceable because of the royal navy, but was itself valuable to the British because good relations with the United States was basically required for British foreign policy goals in the same era.

Five million dollars was a big deal, but if Britain was at the point where they're making America pay it, then America is going to pay it. The army was losing more men than it was enrolling, the last roll-out of bonds had gone largely unsold and they were hauling gold across the Appalachians just to keep the country running. This was in OTL when Britain wasn't decisively winning. Both sides know that once peace returns the economy will pick up and normalize. So if America has to pay it, they'll do it.
 
Five million dollars was a big deal, but if Britain was at the point where they're making America pay it, then America is going to pay it. The army was losing more men than it was enrolling, the last roll-out of bonds had gone largely unsold and they were hauling gold across the Appalachians just to keep the country running. This was in OTL when Britain wasn't decisively winning. Both sides know that once peace returns the economy will pick up and normalize. So if America has to pay it, they'll do it.
They may pay it, but none of that negates the points I've raised.
 
The Monroe Doctrine was enforceable because of the royal navy, but was itself valuable to the British because good relations with the United States was basically required for British foreign policy goals in the same era.
See, this is why I always hate stories where the US and Britain fight each other. It's in each other's worst interests to fight each other, since they always balanced each other out well: with the Monroe Doctrine the British helped (or in the first few years, by themselves) enforced it. In the ACW, while some British elites may have favoured a stalemate, most of Parliament and Public Opinion firmly supported favouring the Union (unlike the French, the favoured American ally in alternate history, who actively favoured a divided nation to distract the Americans from their... um... venture in Mexico).
 
Yeah, might makes right, but Britain wasn't all that concerned with an indemnity. What they wanted was physical land, they didn't feel at Ghent they needed extra cash, it never came up OTL. But this would just be a bonus for Spain and an embarrassment for America for literally no effort on Britain's part.
More land is always better than indemnity,but Britain is in tremendous debt at the end of the Napoleonic war and the war with the US.If it was actually in a possible to force the US to make a massive payout,they would have used the leverage on making the US cede land to themselves or actually make them pay the money to themselves.They wouldn’t have spent the money on enriching the Spanish,that would be political suicide for the government of the day.The British public would simply be outraged at the prospect that the government’s spending British blood and treasure on the enrichment of Spain,who hasn’t even done anything for the war,rather than making more gains for Britain.The British public most certainly wouldn’t have thought of the government’s actions as funny.
 
Last edited:
Five million dollars was a big deal, but if Britain was at the point where they're making America pay it, then America is going to pay it. The army was losing more men than it was enrolling, the last roll-out of bonds had gone largely unsold and they were hauling gold across the Appalachians just to keep the country running. This was in OTL when Britain wasn't decisively winning. Both sides know that once peace returns the economy will pick up and normalize. So if America has to pay it, they'll do it.
We should keep in mind how a large portion of the purchase price came from the Americans assuming the liabilities of the French government, who had been seizing hundreds of American ships.
 
What would make Florida attractive? Its strategic location?

It's trees might be worth having, in particular white oak and southern live oak.

These were good for shipbuilding as they were highly resistant to cannon fire. Frex, the USS Constitution was made from these woods, and their durability earned it the nickname "Old Ironsides".
 
It's trees might be worth having, in particular white oak and southern live oak.

These were good for shipbuilding as they were highly resistant to cannon fire. Frex, the USS Constitution was made from these woods, and their durability earned it the nickname "Old Ironsides".
It also represents a more secure southern border.
 
Top