Conquest of Canada 1775 ,a ATL

[wemayberry]

Oct 30, 1775 Governor of Canada Carleton crosses the St. Lawrence at Longueuil in an attempt to relieve Fort St.Jean. Meanwhile Col. Allan MacLean of the Royal Highland Emigrants leads a force down the Richelieu River from Sorel on the same mission.

Carleton's effort is defeated by the Americans. MacLean, unaware of Carleton's defeat, presses forward to take Fort Chambly (1). MacLean finally receives word on Carleton while engaged and is forced to break off.
Maclean suffers minor wounds and injuries while retreating back to Sorel.

Nov.3 1775 Fort St.Jean surrenders to American General Montgomery.

Nov.5 1775 HMS Lizard , 26 gun frigate, arrives in Quebec City carrying supplies and 20,000 pounds sterling in specie.

Nov.9 1775 British transport Jacob arrives in Quebec City with military supplies for approx. 6000 men.
American General Benedict Arnold arrives opposite Quebec at Point Levis.

Meanwhile MacLean having been ordered to take over the defense of Quebec City hurries but is delayed at Trois Rivieres due to effects of his wounds/injuries combined with storms.(2)

Nov.11, 1775 Carleton leaves Montreal by ship accompanied by the remaining regulars.

Nov.12 1775 One of Carleton's tiny fleet runs aground delaying escape.

Nov.13, 1775 Montreal surrenders to Montgomery.

Nov.14, 1775 Arnold's force arrives on the Plains of Abraham and demand the surrender of Quebec City and it's contents from Hector Cramahe, Lt. Gov. of Canada.
Cramahe uncertain and unwilling to to test the quality of his defenses surrenders the next day. Unable to leave due to ice and unwilling to risk reprisals from Arnold, HMS Lizard (26 gun Frigate), HMS Hunter (16 gun Sloop of War) Transport Jacob, Armed Schooner Magdaline, Armed ship Charlotte plus 2 other unnamed armed ships and 1 unnamed transport surrender intact.(3)

Nov.15, 1775 Carleton's tiny fleet nears Sorel to find an American force already in place. Fleet is then becalmed. With the ship commanders unwilling to fight past, Carleton slips past in a small boat to Trois Rivieres.

Nov.16, 1775 After many delays, MacLean and roughly 80 Royal Highland Emigrants arrive at Quebec City to find Arnold already in control. He then retreats back to Pointe Aux Trembles.

Nov.19, 1775 Carleton arrives at Pointe Aux Trembles.

Attempts to rally the Canadian militia prove to be of limited value as Montgomery arrives on Dec.2. Carleton and Maclean surrender after an unsuccessful fight.

Dec.5 1775 Montgomery arrives at Quebec City. Aware that Carleton had sent calls out to England for reinforcements, Montgomery and Arnold plan for the coming British spring offensive.

And thats as about as far I've gotten so far.

(1) OTL MacLean got word that Carleton's effort had failed before he became engaged with the American forces at Fort Chambly. Instead quickly retreated to Sorel.

(2) OTL MacLean having no injuries quickly forced march to Quebec City arriving Nov. 13, 1775 and quickly stiffening Cramahe's backbone as well as bolstering the defenses.

(3)According to my limited resources, Cramahe believed that Arnold's force was stronger than it really was and lack faith in the willingness of the local Canadian troops to fight. Cramahe had only a small handful of regulars, mostly gunners, that he felt reliable. Hence MacLean's tiny force of about 80 Highlanders increased the number of regulars to roughly 100. Biggest effect was MacLean's willingness to fight and tighten discipline on the militia. This forced Arnold to commit to a siege which he was ill equipped for plus lacked the time for.


Now what might be the aftereffects if things had played out as depicted above.

 

[A Random Person]

Oct 30, 1775 Governor of Canada Carleton crosses the St. Lawrence at Longueuil in an attempt to relieve Fort St.Jean. Meanwhile Col. Allan MacLean of the Royal Highland Emigrants leads a force down the Richelieu River from Sorel on the same mission.

Carleton's effort is defeated by the Americans. MacLean, unaware of Carleton's defeat, presses forward to take Fort Chambly (1). MacLean finally receives word on Carleton while engaged and is forced to break off.
Maclean suffers minor wounds and injuries while retreating back to Sorel.

Nov.3 1775 Fort St.Jean surrenders to American General Montgomery.

Nov.5 1775 HMS Lizard , 26 gun frigate, arrives in Quebec City carrying supplies and 20,000 pounds sterling in specie.

Nov.9 1775 British transport Jacob arrives in Quebec City with military supplies for approx. 6000 men.
American General Benedict Arnold arrives opposite Quebec at Point Levis.

Meanwhile MacLean having been ordered to take over the defense of Quebec City hurries but is delayed at Trois Rivieres due to effects of his wounds/injuries combined with storms.(2)

Nov.11, 1775 Carleton leaves Montreal by ship accompanied by the remaining regulars.

Nov.12 1775 One of Carleton's tiny fleet runs aground delaying escape.

Nov.13, 1775 Montreal surrenders to Montgomery.

Nov.14, 1775 Arnold's force arrives on the Plains of Abraham and demand the surrender of Quebec City and it's contents from Hector Cramahe, Lt. Gov. of Canada.
Cramahe uncertain and unwilling to to test the quality of his defenses surrenders the next day. Unable to leave due to ice and unwilling to risk reprisals from Arnold, HMS Lizard (26 gun Frigate), HMS Hunter (16 gun Sloop of War) Transport Jacob, Armed Schooner Magdaline, Armed ship Charlotte plus 2 other unnamed armed ships and 1 unnamed transport surrender intact.(3)

Nov.15, 1775 Carleton's tiny fleet nears Sorel to find an American force already in place. Fleet is then becalmed. With the ship commanders unwilling to fight past, Carleton slips past in a small boat to Trois Rivieres.

Nov.16, 1775 After many delays, MacLean and roughly 80 Royal Highland Emigrants arrive at Quebec City to find Arnold already in control. He then retreats back to Pointe Aux Trembles.

Nov.19, 1775 Carleton arrives at Pointe Aux Trembles.

Attempts to rally the Canadian militia prove to be of limited value as Montgomery arrives on Dec.2. Carleton and Maclean surrender.

Dec.5 1775 Montgomery arrives at Quebec City. Aware that Carleton had sent calls out to England for reinforcements, Montgomery and Arnold plan for the coming British spring offensive.

And thats as about as far I've gotten so far.

(1) OTL MacLean got word that Carleton's effort had failed before he became engaged with the American forces at Fort Chambly. Instead quickly retreated to Sorel.

(2) OTL MacLean having no injuries quickly forced march to Quebec City arriving Nov. 13, 1775 and quickly stiffening Cramahe's backbone as well as bolstering the defenses.

(3)According to my limited resources, Cramahe believed that Arnold's force was stronger than it really was and lack faith in the willingness of the local Canadian troops to fight. Cramahe had only a small handful of regulars, mostly gunners, that he felt reliable. Hence MacLean's tiny force of about 80 Highlanders increased the number of regulars to roughly 100. Biggest effect was MacLean's willingness to fight and tighten discipline on the militia. This forced Arnold to commit to a siege which he was ill equipped for plus lacked the time for.


Now what might be the aftereffects if things had played out as depicted above.

n00b: toronto is too well guarded... it will never happen
(waiting for zzyzzyva)

 

[Zyzzyva]

Hmmm...

Well, actually, it's not terrible as far as these kind of threads go... If I read you right, the POD is essentially McLean is delayed in reinforcing Quebec?

The big issue, though, is that it really depends a lot on the character of Cramahe. And while I'll admit I don't know a lot about the man, typically you surrender for a reason more pressing than "I don't much like the Quebec militia." Quebec's fortifications were good and if he thought he could stop an assault - and Arnold's men were looking in really, really poor shape by this point - he could definitely ride out Arnold's siege.

(The other one is Carleton's surrender on Dec 2; I do know a bit about Guy and he certainly wasn't the type to surrender before trying the battle. Of course, that could just be retconned to "Carlton surrenders after a brief unsucessful battle.")

Cramahe's surrender granted, where would it go from there? The Americans are in a much better strategic position that IOTL but of course that's hardly the same as "they've conquered Quebec, it will be theirs come 1783". They've got a lot of British troops of various types and positions in their rear, and Quebec will be a big target for british reinforcements. Of course, the fact that British troops are going to Quebec and New England will weaken the latter effort some, but the Continental Congress has to send troops to reinforce Monty too. No idea what this will do for popular sentiment - morale boost for the Congress, obviously, but it may inspire the British to crack down harder faster.

I'm still not sure of the POD but I would like to see where this goes. Good luck!

 

[Dan1988]

Cramahe's surrender granted, where would it go from there? The Americans are in a much better strategic position that IOTL but of course that's hardly the same as "they've conquered Quebec, it will be theirs come 1783". They've got a lot of British troops of various types and positions in their rear, and Quebec will be a big target for british reinforcements. Of course, the fact that British troops are going to Quebec and New England will weaken the latter effort some, but the Continental Congress has to send troops to reinforce Monty too. No idea what this will do for popular sentiment - morale boost for the Congress, obviously, but it may inspire the British to crack down harder faster.

Hmm, I wonder how good popular resistance would be among the Canadiens to the Americans (and not just from the Church)?

 

[Zyzzyva]

Hmm, I wonder how good popular resistance would be among the Canadiens to the Americans (and not just from the Church)?

Well, that's another thing, of course. How the Congress treats the Canadiens is probably in the long run going to decide Quebec's fate a lot more than any run of American victories will. (If the British get it back, of course, they're probably going to hold on to it.)

 

[wemayberry]

Hmmm...

Well, actually, it's not terrible as far as these kind of threads go... If I read you right, the POD is essentially McLean is delayed in reinforcing Quebec?

The big issue, though, is that it really depends a lot on the character of Cramahe. And while I'll admit I don't know a lot about the man, typically you surrender for a reason more pressing than "I don't much like the Quebec militia." Quebec's fortifications were good and if he thought he could stop an assault - and Arnold's men were looking in really, really poor shape by this point - he could definitely ride out Arnold's siege.

(The other one is Carleton's surrender on Dec 2; I do know a bit about Guy and he certainly wasn't the type to surrender before trying the battle. Of course, that could just be retconned to "Carlton surrenders after a brief unsucessful battle.")

Cramahe's surrender granted, where would it go from there? The Americans are in a much better strategic position that IOTL but of course that's hardly the same as "they've conquered Quebec, it will be theirs come 1783". They've got a lot of British troops of various types and positions in their rear, and Quebec will be a big target for british reinforcements. Of course, the fact that British troops are going to Quebec and New England will weaken the latter effort some, but the Continental Congress has to send troops to reinforce Monty too. No idea what this will do for popular sentiment - morale boost for the Congress, obviously, but it may inspire the British to crack down harder faster.

I'm still not sure of the POD but I would like to see where this goes. Good luck!

Yes the POD is based on MacLean not being present at Quebec when the decision to fight on not is made.

I speculated on Cramahe's surrender based on quotes in the following books:
King's Men by Mary Beacock Fryer
Allan MacLean, Jacobite General By Mary Beacock Fryer

(I found those two on google books)
A History of the American Revolution by John R Alden. (also found online)

As for Carleton's surrender, I based that on Carleton and MacLean having very few troops availible to resist plus no real amounts of supplies when Montgomery arrives with troops and more importantly at this point in the campaign , artillery.

Note I based the surrender of ships at Quebec on the fact that the St Lawrence was reportly blocked by ice at least as far as breaking out to the Atlantic was concerned. Various sources implied that no more ships could reach Quebec from the Atlantic until spring. I'm not sure if any of the ships were capable of heading towards Montreal, but without the option to escape I could see them being forced to surrender. While scuttling is a possibility, I assumed that Arnold might hint at reprisals if that was done.

 

[wemayberry]

Hmm, I wonder how good popular resistance would be among the Canadiens to the Americans (and not just from the Church)?

At this point the Canadiens are largely indifferent. While most are not interested in joining the Rebels, not many were willing to fight for the King either.

As I recall roughly 200-300 joined the Americans over time the make up the 1st and later 2nd Canadian regiments.

While Carleton got a slightly better responce, most sat things out.

That said, most of the OTL resistance generated was caused by American General Wooster and his hamhanded efforts to "Americanise" the Canadiens plus use of Continental paper currency vice gold, confiscations etc.
While Wooster was soon removed from his post a military governor of Montreal, the American forces never had much chance to make amends.

Now with the capture of a payroll at Quebec plus military supplies, I can see Montgomery smoothing ruffled feathers with a little hard cash.
Plus with winter quarters inside Quebec City vice being camped out in the cold, I see the smallpox outbreaks that took place OTL causing fewer casualties.

 

[wemayberry]

Anybody have clear idea of what the garrison and setup at Fort Niagra was at this point in the war?

I'm aware that the regular troop strength would be small as Carleton concentrated most of his strength at Montreal, Quebec and the Lake Champlain region.
I was just wondering who might be the local British commander and what his opinion of the Native Americans was. From the various sources I've checked there isn't much mention until later in the war on this region.

Could they be stupid enough to unleashed the Iroquois against the American army in Canada? Or attempt to?

Plus anyone have a good source for what troops were sent to reinforce Carleton in early 1776? Most of my sources skip over the relief of Quebec and jump right into the battle of Valour Island.

 

[Dan1988]

That said, most of the OTL resistance generated was caused by American General Wooster and his hamhanded efforts to "Americanise" the Canadiens plus use of Continental paper currency vice gold, confiscations etc.
While Wooster was soon removed from his post a military governor of Montreal, the American forces never had much chance to make amends.

Now with the capture of a payroll at Quebec plus military supplies, I can see Montgomery smoothing ruffled feathers with a little hard cash.
Plus with winter quarters inside Quebec City vice being camped out in the cold, I see the smallpox outbreaks that took place OTL causing fewer casualties.

Hmm, I can see a few problems that might arise already. However, I don't want to spoil things for you, so I might spot them as you progress. (For one thing, I am not too sure that bribery might work.)

 

[Zyzzyva]

Anybody have clear idea of what the garrison and setup at Fort Niagra was at this point in the war?

I'm aware that the regular troop strength would be small as Carleton concentrated most of his strength at Montreal, Quebec and the Lake Champlain region.
I was just wondering who might be the local British commander and what his opinion of the Native Americans was. From the various sources I've checked there isn't much mention until later in the war on this region.

Could they be stupid enough to unleashed the Iroquois against the American army in Canada? Or attempt to?

I have no idea for who was in charge or how large his garrison was, sorry. Most regular officers tended to fall somewhere between dismissive and contemptous of the natives. There were exceptions, of course, but in general they didn't think too highly of them.

But I suspect you're from the States, due to the cheerful phrase in bold up abaove. For starters, despite what you may have heard about 1812, the British didn't really incite the natives against the Americans; the westward American movement did plenty of inciting all on its own. We mainly just armed them and coordinated their attacks. "Inciting" an entire people to go to war is harder than you'd think, and typically requires a great deal of help from the other side. I suspect in 1775 the Iroquois were largely indifferent to the whole kerfuffle; in the actual event they tended to stick with the British but that was more as a result of the British directly promising them land rights post-war than anything that could be cooked up by one isolated British officer.

And finally - unleashing them, assuming it were done, would hardly be "stupid". The Iroquois killed a lot of settlers in the Hudson valley but it was haly more than the Loyalists and Patriots were doing to each other down South. It's just that "Iroquois massacre families" fits into the narrative of America and the Revolution a lot better than "Patriots massacre Tories" does.

Plus anyone have a good source for what troops were sent to reinforce Carleton in early 1776? Most of my sources skip over the relief of Quebec and jump right into the battle of Valour Island.

Again, no clue, sorry.

But it certianly looks like you're putting some research into this so - despite your clear Yankee leanings - I'll be glad to help out as much as I can.

 

[wemayberry]

I have no idea for who was in charge or how large his garrison was, sorry. Most regular officers tended to fall somewhere between dismissive and contemptous of the natives. There were exceptions, of course, but in general they didn't think too highly of them.

But I suspect you're from the States, due to the cheerful phrase in bold up abaove. For starters, despite what you may have heard about 1812, the British didn't really incite the natives against the Americans; the westward American movement did plenty of inciting all on its own. We mainly just armed them and coordinated their attacks. "Inciting" an entire people to go to war is harder than you'd think, and typically requires a great deal of help from the other side. I suspect in 1775 the Iroquois were largely indifferent to the whole kerfuffle; in the actual event they tended to stick with the British but that was more as a result of the British directly promising them land rights post-war than anything that could be cooked up by one isolated British officer.

And finally - unleashing them, assuming it were done, would hardly be "stupid". The Iroquois killed a lot of settlers in the Hudson valley but it was haly more than the Loyalists and Patriots were doing to each other down South. It's just that "Iroquois massacre families" fits into the narrative of America and the Revolution a lot better than "Patriots massacre Tories" does.

Again, no clue, sorry.

But it certianly looks like you're putting some research into this so - despite your clear Yankee leanings - I'll be glad to help out as much as I can.

Thanks. I worded that poorly I see. I lost my best source on Indian affars, the Book "The American Revolution in Indian Country" when my nephew's puppy chewed it up and haven't been able to afford a replacement.

I'll try to reword it a bit and explain. From what I have discovered most of the Indians could have cared less about the fighting between whites. In fact the Continental Congress desired that they stay neutral. Problem of course is settlers who wanted Indian lands and those who desired revenge for past atrocities which lead to more on both sides. It's sad that several pro-American trbal leaders were murdered by American militia as apart of the cycle.

Anyway back on topic, using Indians as part of the war effort by either side was largely a matter of bribes or "gifts". These gifts had to be refreshed on a fairly regular basis to keep the warriors around much less fighting. Hence one of the British advantages of the war, larger amounts of trade goods when supply lines were open.

However the Indians still proved to be a largely ineffective force with few exceptions.
What I am pondering is that if the garrison at Fort Niagra does bribe a group of the Iroquois into attacking the Americans on Canadian soil, who might get caught in the crossfire?
How might that effect the populace's views on supporting either side?

Also what is the popular view of Moses Hazen, Jean-Baptiste Hamelin and James Livingston?

 

[wemayberry]

Okay I'm rather stuck at this point. I know that Burgoyne was leading the reinforcements that relieved Carleton in OTL and that it included a sizable contingent of German troops. Though how many of the 8000 that Carleton has in the field for the rest of the campaign were Loyalist/militia I have no clue.

Right now my rough draft idea goes something like this:
Burgoyne arrives and attempts to lay siege to Quebec City. Montgomery and Arnold drive him off as I expect that he lacks the needed supplies for a long siege. Plus Arnold is agressive enough to harass the Royal Navy on the St.Lawrence.
Yes I am aware of the Royal Navy's supposed invincibility. However going back over their records, one thing that many of the local admirals and commanders feared at this time was swarm style attacks in close spaces.

One the strange things I've found about the American Revolution naval affairs was this. The Royal Navy was afraid of being overwhelmed by whaleboats carrying troops while close to land but the Americans were so in awe of the fighting prowess of the Royal navy they rarely tried that tactic. Instead they wasted time and resources attempting to build a fleet to match the Royal Navy head to head knowing it was a near impossible task. On top of that even when they did get the frigates and other ships built, they sent them off penny packet on missions that could be done by privateers or hired ships.

Sorry about the miny rant. Good source to check out on this is "If by Sea" by George C. Daughan.

Anyway I see Burgoyne being forced to up stakes and retreat back to Halifax. Perhaps to try again in 1777. Not sure just yet. Depends on what kind of boosts take place around New York or further south.

Once Burgoyne's driven off I'm thinking that Thomas, Thompson or Sullivan would be sent west to secure first Niagra then Detroit in the west. Depending on what my research can turn up on the Western theater would dictate events.

As for Halifax, I just can't find a reliable source on the garrison strength to formulate any possibilities on if it could be taken. Based on what I do have the best outcome would the Americans securing Fort Cumberland and what would become in the OTL New Brunswick (ie territory west of Fort Cumberand). Maybe Prince Edward Island, though I doubt it. With the limited road network availible I don't see the Americans getting the rest of Nova Scotia and I doubt the Brits would put a lot of effort in trying to reclaim the rest.

Newfoundland is unlikely as thanks to the Hurricane that hit it on Sept.9, 1775 it was devastated. Plus the only reason to go would be to establish a claim for fishing right on the Grand Bank.

Without going wankish, I see the war ending with the US gaining Upper & Lower Canada plus a portion of Nova Scotia. Britian would retain Newfoundland, Cape Breton Island, the Hudson Bay colony, and the remainder of Nova Scotia. Possibly Prince Edward Island.

 

[catboy637]

Hmmm...

Well, actually, it's not terrible as far as these kind of threads go... If I read you right, the POD is essentially McLean is delayed in reinforcing Quebec?

The big issue, though, is that it really depends a lot on the character of Cramahe. And while I'll admit I don't know a lot about the man, typically you surrender for a reason more pressing than "I don't much like the Quebec militia." Quebec's fortifications were good and if he thought he could stop an assault - and Arnold's men were looking in really, really poor shape by this point - he could definitely ride out Arnold's siege.

(The other one is Carleton's surrender on Dec 2; I do know a bit about Guy and he certainly wasn't the type to surrender before trying the battle. Of course, that could just be retconned to "Carlton surrenders after a brief unsucessful battle.")

Cramahe's surrender granted, where would it go from there? The Americans are in a much better strategic position that IOTL but of course that's hardly the same as "they've conquered Quebec, it will be theirs come 1783". They've got a lot of British troops of various types and positions in their rear, and Quebec will be a big target for british reinforcements. Of course, the fact that British troops are going to Quebec and New England will weaken the latter effort some, but the Continental Congress has to send troops to reinforce Monty too. No idea what this will do for popular sentiment - morale boost for the Congress, obviously, but it may inspire the British to crack down harder faster.

I'm still not sure of the POD but I would like to see where this goes. Good luck!

I di not see that coming.