What if, as (I read somewhere) Benjamin Franklin initially proposed, the Treaty of Paris set the boundary between the United States and British North America along the blue line on this map:
Treaty of Paris WI: A Different US-BNA Boundary
- Thread starter Lord Grattan
- Start date
So you're including the Ontario peninsula in the main US? It could be interesting, given that there aren't any land connections between the two...
Would Britain be happy about giving away all of that just for the Upper Peninsula?
I am by no means an expert in this area, but I believe that Franklin had gotten the British to tentatively agree that the entire St. Lawrence would be the boundary, making the maritimes a part of the US. Talleyrand slowed the negotiations to allow the British to come to their senses on this point.
General Zod
Banned
This is way bizarre. What interest would France have in purposefully letting Britain suffer less territorial losses in North America ???
Even if the Patriots would gain all of Canada, this would still make them rather less powerful than Britain, and much less of a threat to France than the UK. Since the whole point of French intervention in the ARW was to diminish the British Empire, this seems seriously self-defeating to me.
Thande
Donor
NNNNNNNNNYYYYYYYYYYYYYUUUUUUUUUUUUUURRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHH.
Can I point you in the direction of a good plasterer to repair that big cracked patch in the wall just above your monitor?
Yay, we get Minneapolis!
Not quite. At least it doesn't look that way.
Fatal Wit
Banned
It was in their interests to have the Brits and Americans come to blows at some later point. And indeed they did, benefiting the French somewhat.This is way bizarre. What interest would France have in purposefully letting Britain suffer less territorial losses in North America ???
Yay, we get Minneapolis!
No you get Lake of the Woods and Fargo, we get Toronto, Hamilton, and London...I'll take that trade any day of the week.
If one is willing to overlook the fact that a lower border puts the US in a terrible position to argue for Oregon Country. We'd be lucky to get Oregon with this treaty while the British would have Seattle and maybe Portland...
I've actually been researching this topic for my "Chew" timeline. Initially, Congress claimed all of BNA but when Franklin went to Paris they backed off slightly, as Arnold's offensive had failed, and only claimed Nova Scotia (today's Nova Scotia and New Brunswick), Florida, Bermuda, Canada as it was before the Quebec Act. These were revised again by the time negotiations began in 1781 to include Canada (south of the 45th north latitude/southern Lake Nipissing and source of the Mississippi line) and everthing west of the Mississippi. Florida was to remain British.
Delays caused by political problems in Britain and French and Spanish dickering delayed the British-American treaty and by the time a treaty was agreed upon there had been yet more changes to the agreed upon boundary. France did not care if the US got all of Canada (and their initial treaty of alliance with the US recognized America's claims to all of Canada and limited post-war Franch claims to off shore islands) but they did see the benefit of Britain retaining a presence on North America to cause tensions.
Unfortunately, for the US all of this was tied to French and a year later Spanish victories. In fact the US, by treaty, could not make peace with Britain until Spain captured Gibraltar. When Spain bungled that the US went ahead anyway but by then the British were less willing to deal as the major threat to the rest of their Empire had faded. The US was lucky to get what they it, especially since France and especially Spain were often working at odds to US land claims.
Samuel Flagg Bemis' A Diplomatic History of the United States is a great overview of the negotiations involved to reach the Treaty of Paris, but its old (1942) and may be hard to find. The much newer Old World, New World by Kathleen Burk is also good but not as in depth.
Benjamin
Delays caused by political problems in Britain and French and Spanish dickering delayed the British-American treaty and by the time a treaty was agreed upon there had been yet more changes to the agreed upon boundary. France did not care if the US got all of Canada (and their initial treaty of alliance with the US recognized America's claims to all of Canada and limited post-war Franch claims to off shore islands) but they did see the benefit of Britain retaining a presence on North America to cause tensions.
Unfortunately, for the US all of this was tied to French and a year later Spanish victories. In fact the US, by treaty, could not make peace with Britain until Spain captured Gibraltar. When Spain bungled that the US went ahead anyway but by then the British were less willing to deal as the major threat to the rest of their Empire had faded. The US was lucky to get what they it, especially since France and especially Spain were often working at odds to US land claims.
Samuel Flagg Bemis' A Diplomatic History of the United States is a great overview of the negotiations involved to reach the Treaty of Paris, but its old (1942) and may be hard to find. The much newer Old World, New World by Kathleen Burk is also good but not as in depth.
Benjamin
If this happened, there might not have been a War of 1812 or an analogous war starting in a different year. The USA would already possess the part of Upper Canada that had the best farmland, and the part that in OTL the British used to supply weapons to Indians who were raiding US frontier settlements. This would have eliminated two major motivations for the US going to war with Britain.
This would have been awkward for any future Canada - basically they would have lost most of the good farmland in what became OTL Ontario and kept all of the Canadian shield land that had a few inches of crappy soil over solid bedrock, plus long subarctic winters. On the other hand, if the more southern boundary further west had been extended all the way to the Pacific (in OTL, the Northwestern boundary established by the 1783 Treaty of Paris ended up being used to set the latitude for the rest of the US-Canada boundary), Canada's prairie, mountain, and Pacific Coast lands would have extended further south, making much of OTL North Dakota, Montana, Idaho, and Washington part of Canada instead of the US.
This would have been awkward for any future Canada - basically they would have lost most of the good farmland in what became OTL Ontario and kept all of the Canadian shield land that had a few inches of crappy soil over solid bedrock, plus long subarctic winters. On the other hand, if the more southern boundary further west had been extended all the way to the Pacific (in OTL, the Northwestern boundary established by the 1783 Treaty of Paris ended up being used to set the latitude for the rest of the US-Canada boundary), Canada's prairie, mountain, and Pacific Coast lands would have extended further south, making much of OTL North Dakota, Montana, Idaho, and Washington part of Canada instead of the US.
As a counter offer, how about the 42nd parallel north* from the Pacific coast to Lake Erie and New York state sticks to the proclamation line of 1763? I suspect that this line is the reason the USA still won't recognize an international court. Indian land rights.
*A compromise between the Michigan line (41° 41' N) and the Illinois line (42° 30' N) that allows the US to include Chicago. The Illinois line is the limit of our scope for negotiation, but that would require Alaska and a line at 45°N from the St Lawrence to the Atlantic coast.
*A compromise between the Michigan line (41° 41' N) and the Illinois line (42° 30' N) that allows the US to include Chicago. The Illinois line is the limit of our scope for negotiation, but that would require Alaska and a line at 45°N from the St Lawrence to the Atlantic coast.
Last edited:
General Zod
Banned
OTOH, the very fact this boundary makes the USA significantly stronger may mean that they still manage to go a win a more decisive victory in the the War of 1812, which might still easily happen because of their casus belli (British blockade, impressment). As a matter of fact, this boudnary would make American invasion of Quebec rather easier. A pincer maneuver from Ontario and Maine could easily see Montreal & Quebec City fall. Even if they fail to seize Quebec and/or the Maritimes in the peace deal, they could easily manage to bring the Northwestern boundary latitude to the 54'40'' line they claimed unsuccessfully IOTL.
Therefore, with this boundary ATL-War of 1812 could result in outcomes from Ameriquebec and/or all of AmeriOntario, or at the very least North Dakota, Montana, Idaho, and Washington plus all the useful parts of Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta & Columbia going USA. If the latter happens, North America would become USA, Mexico, and a rather-poorer Quebec dominion with some trivial Maritime appendages.