Without the British "impressing" the US

I do wonder however how willing the British would have been to concede all of the continent to American rule. If anything, I thought that Hudson's Bay Company would inexorably expand, giving the British much the same claims as they had OTL. I don't know anything for sure, however.

The British political establishment in the 19th century had an irritating habit of seeing the USA through rose-tinted spectacles as 'our slightly wayward cousins'. And that was OTL, after the War of 1812. Lord knows how'd much they'd have cheerfully signed away without it... :rolleyes:

Agreed - HBC was too thin on the ground to maintain a credible claim to the northern half of the NorAm bread basket. A scattering of fur trading posts wouldn't be able to keep the settlers out, and in fact would probably be happy to supply them the means to chop forests and sow fields. If anywhere were to be texafied in TTL it would be here, if the UK didn't ceded it amicably. It may be a gradual thing, with the HBC being pushed into more and more northern lands for just as long as the Americans didn't see a value in it's holdings, but it wouldn't last. Just as in OTL a land empire would turn into a more credible commercial enterprise.

And besides, the Americans wouldn't feel constrained by a land warrant granted by a British King...
 
Agreed - HBC was too thin on the ground to maintain a credible claim to the northern half of the NorAm bread basket. A scattering of fur trading posts wouldn't be able to keep the settlers out, and in fact would probably be happy to supply them the means to chop forests and sow fields. If anywhere were to be texafied in TTL it would be here, if the UK didn't ceded it amicably. It may be a gradual thing, with the HBC being pushed into more and more northern lands for just as long as the Americans didn't see a value in it's holdings, but it wouldn't last. Just as in OTL a land empire would turn into a more credible commercial enterprise.

And besides, the Americans wouldn't feel constrained by a land warrant granted by a British King...

How lovely to have been mistaken!

I wonder, though, how fast Americans would have expanded and in what directions given this sans-1812 state of affairs? On the one hand, land in the northwest seems easier to occupy, since there are no barriers to settlement. However, how much of OTL Central Canada is reachable by river or the Great Lakes? Presumably climate is a difficulty and farming the Northern plains might require more advanced methods of the middle and late nineteenth century. I suppose there might have been something like an Oregon Trail effect, but again some kind of access for shipped goods is needed. CA may also beckon if gold is discovered. And Texas/Mexico beckon to southerners seeking similar climates for their own expansion.

It's a lot of directions to settle in all at once. And it also begs the question of slavery: access to northern lands tips future prospects for the North much more quickly than OTL if something like the Missiouri Compromise emerges.
 
Agreed - HBC was too thin on the ground to maintain a credible claim to the northern half of the NorAm bread basket. A scattering of fur trading posts wouldn't be able to keep the settlers out, and in fact would probably be happy to supply them the means to chop forests and sow fields. If anywhere were to be texafied in TTL it would be here, if the UK didn't ceded it amicably. It may be a gradual thing, with the HBC being pushed into more and more northern lands for just as long as the Americans didn't see a value in it's holdings, but it wouldn't last. Just as in OTL a land empire would turn into a more credible commercial enterprise.

And besides, the Americans wouldn't feel constrained by a land warrant granted by a British King...

Dutchie

While both you and Thande have points about the potential vulnerability of Canada without the 1812 conflict there is also an argument that the HBC delayed the settlement of the Canadian west. It sought to prevent settlement in the area to protect its trading interests.

Similarly a lot of US settlement in Upper Canada occurred prior to the war and the population remained largely loyal during the conflict and afterwards. However concerns about this influence meant restrictions on settlement from the US followed. As such, without the conflict there would probably have been more settlement northwards. This might have led to a US annexation later on or a more settled, and hence powerful Canada.

Steve
 
Top