Caroline War (1837)

[The Tai-Pan]

In 1837 the Caroline Incident roiled the waters between the US and Canada (and therefore the UK).

'The Caroline affair (also known as the Caroline case) was a diplomatic crisis beginning in 1837 involving the United States, Britain, and the Canadian independence movement. It began in 1837 when William Lyon Mackenzie and other Canadian rebels, with support from US citizens, fled to an island in the Niagara River, in the ship Caroline. British forces crossed the Niagara River, to board and capture the vessel where it was moored, at Schlosser's Landing, in US territory. Shots were exchanged and one U.S. citizen, a watchkeeper, was killed. British forces set fire to the Caroline and set it adrift in the Niagara River, about two miles above Niagara Falls. Sensationalized accounts of the affair were published by contemporary newspapers.'

It never seriously got close to war since US President Martin Van Buren squashed such talk and sent Winfield Scott to calm things down. But what if things were different and things got out of hand? How would a war between the USA and the UK, over Canada go? Canada itself was divided at the time with (fairly minor in OTL) revolts in both Upper and Lower Canada. The Royal Navy was still supreme, I would imagine, but the USA has grown quite a bit larger since 1812, and while it's army was no great giant, it wasn't quite as pitiful as it had been.

How would such a match-up have gone?

 

[James XI]

The US had grown, but rather than being ‘still supreme’, the British Empire was a much more potent machine than it had been in either of the two prior engagements, essentially unchallenged in Europe, ergo no prospect of tying up the bulk of their armed forces via the French. The height of the empire is generally considered to be between 1815 and 1915, during which period it occupied about 1/4 of the world/world population and aside from the Crimea never had to concern itself with anything approaching peer competition. Only comparison of navies I can find is 1850, when the Brits had 72 active ships of the line (62 steam, 10 sail) and the US navy had 5, all sail, and frigates/corvettes it’s 138 to 27. As far as land forces, BE and HEIC fielded around 500, 000 active soldiers, and the US fielded 16,000 up to the eve of the civil war.

I think it would largely depend on how seriously Britain took the matter. That’s not sarcasm...there’s a chance they say ‘fuck it’, particularly if they think Canada is leaning towards independence anyways. On the other hand, this is peak empire and if Parliament/the press turn it into a matter of the new queen‘s honour (Victoria) it might become a big deal. It’s also important to note that while nowhere near it’s Disraeli peak, imperial jingoism in the UK was much, much higher than it had been in ‘76...people often overlook the fact that a huge chunk of Brits were openly sympathetic to the Colonial cause...and even 1812 when it was all about Napoleon. The US would be squaring off alone against the undisputed reigning heavyweight champ in it’s prime...not something to wish for. On the other hand, though some of it can be blamed on an awkward alliance, the Crimea wasn’t exactly a cakewalk for Britain, though admittedly the US probably doesn’t have the stomach for ~ 600,000 casualties for Canada that Russia had for the Crimea.

 

[The Gunslinger]

The revolt was never serious and was snuffed out before it began in Upper Canada, and it never managed to make much traction outside of the Montreal region in Lower Canada. So how much traction it gains if war breaks out against the country who invaded less than twenty-five years prior is probably low.

For America, the Erie Canal is a massive boon, but Canada has the Rideau and Welland canals and can move warships straight from the Atlantic to the Great Lakes.

Other than that, it looks a lot 1812. There are only a handful of ingresses into Canada, and they'll be the same ones battled over in that war. Except Britain's military is only fighting one war.

 

[The Tai-Pan]

I do wonder, let's say the war goes on, the UK beats up on US shipping or awhile, fights some small battles in Canada and then maybe asks for a small bit of Maine or something at the peace. Would this really darken US-UK relations or would trade and common culture still trump all like in OTL? Or could a third war in about half a century really cause a harsher break?

Or would it just be a side show that mostly gets wrapped on at the peace table and everyone does their best to pretend it never happened?

 

[James XI]

I think a 3rd war, particularly with the embarrassment of the first, and with relations with France relatively good, the US might emerge as the go-to antagonist in the British mind. On the other hand, unlike France, there’s not really an overlapping set of interests outside of Canada at least until the US becomes a major player at sea. So I guess, practically speaking, it depends on how the Canadian question gets answered. But I don’t think it’s really enough of a priority for either side to get that bloody over. Then again, that describes a lot of terrible wars in OTL.