AHC: Nova Scotia is part of USA.

During the American Revolutionary War, the Continental Congress asked Nova Scotia to join the 13 colonies and declare independence, but Nova Scotia refused. There were also a lot of colonists in Nova Scotia who wanted to join the 13 colonies.

Challenge: With a POD before 1867, Nova Scotia becomes part of the United States.
 
During the American Revolutionary War, the Continental Congress asked Nova Scotia to join the 13 colonies and declare independence, but Nova Scotia refused. There were also a lot of colonists in Nova Scotia who wanted to join the 13 colonies.

Challenge: With a POD before 1867, Nova Scotia becomes part of the United States.

Well, if thy accepted to offer of joining the revolution that would help a lot.
 
Have a group of revolutionaries riot in Nova Scotia after the colony refuses to join the Continental Congress. The Colonial Government calls in for Redcoats to stop the riots, but the Redcoats end up massacring everyone in the crowd, which includes peaceful denizens of NS. NS then votes to join the Congress.

Result? Easier revolution (comparatively) for the Americans, and Nova Scotia's part of the US.
 
Well, if thy accepted to offer of joining the revolution that would help a lot.

Well, I know that. The problem is that OTL Nova Scotia's government was pro-British, and unless there is a huge revolution in Nova Scotia against the government, and America stops its privateering of Nova Scotian ships, Nova Scotia will probably stay British. If we want Nova Scotia to accept the offer, we need a POD probably before 1776.
 
Have a group of revolutionaries riot in Nova Scotia after the colony refuses to join the Continental Congress. The Colonial Government calls in for Redcoats to stop the riots, but the Redcoats end up massacring everyone in the crowd, which includes peaceful denizens of NS. NS then votes to join the Congress.

Result? Easier revolution (comparatively) for the Americans, and Nova Scotia's part of the US.

Nova Scotia's entrance into the USA will screw up the states south of the Mason-Dixon Line, because then there will be more states that do not have slavery inside them.
 
Nova Scotia's entrance into the USA will screw up the states south of the Mason-Dixon Line, because then there will be more states that do not have slavery inside them.

That's funny, I've been having a similar discussion in this thread.

And yeah, it screws over slavery in the US. But that can only be a good thing, right?
 
Well, I know that. The problem is that OTL Nova Scotia's government was pro-British, and unless there is a huge revolution in Nova Scotia against the government, and America stops its privateering of Nova Scotian ships, Nova Scotia will probably stay British. If we want Nova Scotia to accept the offer, we need a POD probably before 1776.
From what I recall the government was pro British but wasn't that well liked by everyone and there was some significant revolt in certain parts of the area in 1776, that was crushed in the wake of Fort Cumberland

Get Jonathan Eddy a cannon in November of 1776, Fort Cumberland falls and that rebellion lasts longer and may be enough to get a delegation sent to Continental Congress, assuming no disasters and Nova Scotia has a non-zero chance of being handed to the colonists in the Peace Treaty
 
I participated in that discussion, and that discussion is where I got this idea.
Yeah, 14th-colony Plymouth is in line with Nova Scotia. My bad.

But yeah, Nova Scotia had a pro-British slant, and you'd need some sort of Halifax Massacre to get it into the revolution.

With Nova Scotia in it, New Brunswick'll most like get thrown in with the US, either during or after the war - in fact, Quebec may see this as a perfect opportunity to free themselves from the rule of the homme anglais. Canada may very well be wrenched out of British hands. How do you think Newfoundland and Labrador would react? Could the British be kicked out of North America with a revolutionary chain?
 
With Nova Scotia in it, New Brunswick'll most like get thrown in with the US, either during or after the war - in fact, Quebec may see this as a perfect opportunity to free themselves from the rule of the homme anglais. Canada may very well be wrenched out of British hands. How do you think Newfoundland and Labrador would react? Could the British be kicked out of North America with a revolutionary chain?

In that case, it might be game over for the proslavery states.
 
Yeah, 14th-colony Plymouth is in line with Nova Scotia. My bad.

But yeah, Nova Scotia had a pro-British slant, and you'd need some sort of Halifax Massacre to get it into the revolution.

Or a POD that places a neutral or pro-independence government in Halifax, which takes things a few years or decades back.
 
At the time of the revolution/original colonies slavery was legal, even if not common, in many of the "northern" states. If NS in at the beginning, you have the same N/S split you had very soon after when Vermont joined. even with NS in you'll have enough pro-slavery states leading up to the CW to produce all of the difficulties (tariff issues, internal improvements like canals and RRs, issues with "forcing" slavery on incoming territories where it would not naturally occur {like Kansas}). By the time of the CW the combination of southern senators and some northern democrats was enough to tie the senate in knots, even with the "anti-slavery" shift in the house as the north became way more populous than the south even with the 2/3 clause.

Concessions to the south, like allow the slave trade for 20 years, the 2/3 clause for the house etc. would still be necessary to get the constitution accepted & ratified.

IMHO NS in the USA would cause more butterflies in the War of 1812 than in the lead up to the CW.
 
At the time of the revolution/original colonies slavery was legal, even if not common, in many of the "northern" states. If NS in at the beginning, you have the same N/S split you had very soon after when Vermont joined. even with NS in you'll have enough pro-slavery states leading up to the CW to produce all of the difficulties (tariff issues, internal improvements like canals and RRs, issues with "forcing" slavery on incoming territories where it would not naturally occur {like Kansas}). By the time of the CW the combination of southern senators and some northern democrats was enough to tie the senate in knots, even with the "anti-slavery" shift in the house as the north became way more populous than the south even with the 2/3 clause.

Concessions to the south, like allow the slave trade for 20 years, the 2/3 clause for the house etc. would still be necessary to get the constitution accepted & ratified.

IMHO NS in the USA would cause more butterflies in the War of 1812 than in the lead up to the CW.

Slavery would die out in the North anyway. Slaves aren't as much use if you're not a wealthy plantationer in the fertile south.

Hmmm. You know what would screw over the slave states more? A Plymouth state and a Nova Scotia state. :cool:

18 - 12 in the Senate, and a huge margin in the House? To quote:
In that case, it might be game over for the proslavery states.

Or a POD that places a neutral or pro-independence government in Halifax, which takes things a few years or decades back.

That could work as well.
 
Slavery would die out in the North anyway. Slaves aren't as much use if you're not a wealthy plantationer in the fertile south.



18 - 12 in the Senate, and a huge margin in the House? To quote:




That could work as well.

Could the Southern states just create their own nation at this point, splitting the US into two nations at the outset?
 
Could the Southern states just create their own nation at this point, splitting the US into two nations at the outset?
After the revolution, possibly (if the Articles fail in the right way, assuming the Articles are still in this TL).
Before or during the revolution? Nay. Two separate rebellions, even with one or more extra belligerents for the rebels would never work. IOTL the Americans got off by the skin of their teeth with the help of France, Spain, etc.
 
After the revolution, possibly (if the Articles fail in the right way, assuming the Articles are still in this TL).
Before or during the revolution? Nay. Two separate rebellions, even with one or more extra belligerents for the rebels would never work. IOTL the Americans got off by the skin of their teeth with the help of France, Spain, etc.

Yes, after the revolution was what I was referring to. So a Plymouth and Nova Scotia state, and a failed articles of confederation = two USA's. Me like.
 
Yes, after the revolution was what I was referring to. So a Plymouth and Nova Scotia state, and a failed articles of confederation = two USA's. Me like.

And without the squabbling, because the Constitution never existed.

It would make an interesting timeline.

I see the North being more Federalist, and the South being more Anti-Federalist. Though they separated, they remain allies against Britain and close trading partners, the North being industrial and the South being agricultural. The South later wages war against Mexico for land to support their growing legions of farmers and the North purchases Alaska from Russia to finish off the continent.

EDIT: Crap, what do you do about the Louisiana Purchase?
 
Last edited:
Top