Guadeloupe not Canada

[Georgie Porgie]

I am thinking about writing a time line that explores Britain keeping its American territories and the effect that will have on the British Empire if it can call on the resources and markets of the OTL USA as well as the effect that remaining British will have on America. In particular I want to examine the affect of anti-slavery legislation being introduced in 1807.

This will mean butterflying the ARW which is not an easy thing to do. However when I look at the causes of the ARW I feel that one of them was the fact that the British Government needed money and they saw the Americans as an income stream, secondly there is the whole "no taxation without representation" thing.

In the 1763 Treaty of Paris Britain handed over a lot of Frances Caribbean Islands but kept Canada. What if they kept Guadeloupe and returned Canada?

This would give them access to tax the £6m worth of sugar Guadeloupe produced every year so easing their money problems, whilst keeping an enemy on the close to the 13 Colonies so there would be less reason to complain about the taxes raised to keep the country defended.

I know that Lord Bute wanted to appease the French in the hopes of staving off yet another French / British conflict in the near future but many Brit's (including William Pitt the Elder) were against this policy of appeasement.

I would welcome any thoughts you have.

 

[Imladrik]

The French would refuse it. Guadeloupe was worth 10 canadas at the time for the French and they already handed over Tobago, Dominica, St. Vincent and the Grenadines and Grenada.

 

[Georgie Porgie]

I am not sure the French could have refused. Their economy was in tatters and not helped by the British blockade of many of their ports, their army and navy was roundly defeated and their allies were unable to help.

That said, what if Bute offered concessions in Europe. I am thinking particularly of the withdrawal of the demand that Dunkirk's fortifications be stripped back to their 1713 level.

The other option is that Canada didn't fall to the British in 1760 and remained French.

 

[Avrorrange]

I think that not ceding Canada in this scenario only delays the inevitable.If the British doesn't take it in the 7YW,they will take it in the Napoleonic/Revolutionary Wars.Bottom line of the situation is that there's just way too few French in New France.

 

[Matteo]

that?s not sure at all.

Imagine that the french keep all their north american possessions because they victoriously resisted.

If they are clever enough to have massive immigration, this may well butterfly away the french revolution as we knew it. Bad crops in France in 1788 will not have the same effect. The solution would be : move surplus population to french America so they till vast fertile territories.

 

[riggerrob]

that?s not sure at all.

Imagine that the french keep all their north american possessions because they victoriously resisted.

If they are clever enough to have massive immigration, this may well butterfly away the french revolution as we knew it. Bad crops in France in 1788 will not have the same effect. The solution would be : move surplus population to french America so they till vast fertile territories.

...................................................................................


The "vast fertile territories" are mainly along the Saint Lawrence River Valley lowlands. They lie south of the river until they meet the Appalachian Mountains near the (modern) American border. To the west, rich, well-watered soils peter out near Ottawa where they meet the rocky Canadian Shield. There is little farmland in the boreal forests north of the St. Lawrence River.
That being said, Quebec habitant farmers were far better fed than their cousins back in France. Better nutrition meant far more children survived to adulthood. If we postulate that every French woman got pregnant in her lifetime, miss-carriages, still- births, infant mortality and childhood diseases killed many French children.
Meanwhile better nutrition and a semi-isolated rural life-style saw most of those Quebec-born children grow to adulthood. many Quebec families boasted a dozen adult off-spring. Revenge of the cradle allowed Québécois culture to survive despite repeated waves of immigration after the British captured Quebec City.

 

[funnyhat]

...................................................................................


The "vast fertile territories" are mainly along the Saint Lawrence River Valley lowlands. They lie south of the river until they meet the Appalachian Mountains near the (modern) American border. To the west, rich, well-watered soils peter out near Ottawa where they meet the rocky Canadian Shield. There is little farmland in the boreal forests north of the St. Lawrence River.

But New France also included much of what is now the United States (assuming it is not ceded to Britain/Spain in 1763), including some areas with extremely fertile soil. For the most part they were not extensively settled by France, but could have been in the future.

 

[ennobee]

New Orleans and French America not ubder Spanish rule?

I wonder: If France was to keep Canada, would it still be willing to sign over the areas west of the Mississippi and in particular New Orleans to the Spanish?

A little background: As part of the redrawing of the maps after the 7 years war, England wanted ALL of the lands east of the Mississippi, which also included Spanish Florida. Since Spain was an ally of England in the wars, they could not just move jn and take it. So a three way deal was made: France would give its Louisiana territories to Spain in return for Spain giving Florida to the English. With this, France would loose all its territories on mainland America. (Although the Spanish were pretty lax as administrators and would allow the inhabitants of the colonies to stay 'French' in all aspects but in name). Apparently France could have held onto its Louisiana territories if they wanted to, but since they already lost Canada and de facto control of the Mississippi, they saw no real need for it.

So if in this timeline, France gets to keep Canada, would they let go of greater Louisiana so easily? Would they offer Spain some other territories, may be in the pacific, may be in Italy? Or would Spain hold on to Florida?

And how would a continued presence of a French territory encircling the English colonies from Nova Scotia down to the Gulf impact further developments on the continent? Even if they could NOT use the Mississippi as a main trading road anymore?

 

[ennobee]

Ps, one unfortunate (for me that is) outcome of France holding on to Canada: No British take-over of Newfoundland = no displaced Arcadians from Newfoundland moving south = no Cajuns in today's Louisiana = one very bland New Orleans.

 

[funnyhat]

Ps, one unfortunate (for me that is) outcome of France holding on to Canada: No British take-over of Newfoundland = no displaced Arcadians from Newfoundland moving south = no Cajuns in today's Louisiana = one very bland New Orleans.

The expulsion of the Acadians was not related to the conquest of Canada. It happened in 1755 and occurred in Nova Scotia, which had been legally British since 1713.

 

[Umbric Man]

The expulsion of the Acadians was not related to the conquest of Canada. It happened in 1755 and occurred in Nova Scotia, which had been legally British since 1713.

Funnily enough, displaced French Newfoundlanders in Plaisance/Placentia were used as the nucleus of the Ile-Royal Colony and its city of Louisbourg upon their founding. These guys got crapped on TWICE when Ile-Royal got captured in 1758 and they were expelled with the other Francophones in the Maritimes.

 

[Emperor Julian]

I think that not ceding Canada in this scenario only delays the inevitable.If the British doesn't take it in the 7YW,they will take it in the Napoleonic/Revolutionary Wars.Bottom line of the situation is that there's just way too few French in New France.

Without the massive debt issues from the American Revolutionary War, the French Monarchy could very well avoid revolution altogether.

 

[Avrorrange]

Without the massive debt issues from the American Revolutionary War, the French Monarchy could very well avoid revolution altogether.

You do realize that governing New France is fairly unprofitable,right?Another thing is that the French debt was already massive after the 7YW and losing it's most lucrative colonies isn't going to help.

 

[Matteo]

It is not Guadeloupe but Haïti that was the french most profitable colony.