Texas never annexed by the United States

[Dean_the_Young]

Quite frankly, Texas was too big, too poor, too sparsly populated, and bordered on both sides by much bigger, richer countries. An independent Texas surviving is unlikely: an independent Texas with anywhere close to OTL borders or larger is ASB. Without many natural boundaries, population mass would be more important. Texas certainly wouldn't be down to the Rio Grande, and much of Northern and Western Texas is unteneable to defend.

 

[David S Poepoe]

You've got to remember that Texas' southern border is not the Rio Grande but the Rio Nueces. It was the land between the two rivers that was contested ground between the US and Mexico at the outbreak of the Mexican War. So you are right that Mexico wouldn't be as large as OTL, tho a large portion of territory could be disputed land.

 

[Historico]

Some Interesting Ideas being thrown around in this thread that I really like, I love Independent Texas tl's...But the problem here is guys that we need a definate POD for a "Failed" Annexation Attempt TL. Here is where, I think we should start.

James Polk, a strong supporter of territorial expansion, won the Presidency in November 1844. Tyler, knowing the Senate would not ratify the treaty, changed course and had his allies in Congress submit the annexation bill as a joint resolution in December. With President-elect Polk's quiet support, Congress approved annexation on 28 February 1845. The vote in the Senate was 27 to 25. Tyler approved the Joint Resolution, which called for annexation of Texas to be concluded by the end of December 1845, on March 1. However, as this was done via a Joint Resolution of Congress, some scholars believe it is not legal under international law.[1][2] This has led to questions about the Legal status of Texas.

So What If Tyler never had his supporters sumbit the Annexation bill to congress as a Joint Resolution? Or What If Two Senators had swayed against annexation leaving to vote 25 to 27 instead?

 

[JohnnyHampton]

Tyler

suppose the british had allied with the texans would that effect the USA view of the young republic of this time period

 

[Jasen777]

Quite frankly, Texas was too big, too poor, too sparsly populated, and bordered on both sides by much bigger, richer countries. An independent Texas surviving is unlikely: an independent Texas with anywhere close to OTL borders or larger is ASB. Without many natural boundaries, population mass would be more important. Texas certainly wouldn't be down to the Rio Grande, and much of Northern and Western Texas is unteneable to defend.

I agree an independent Texas surviving is unlikely, but the biggest reason is because it wants to join the U.S. If the U.S. doesn't want it for whatever reason, then Texas is capable of defending itself against poorly-lead Mexico. And you're right that something would have to happen territorially, as Texas doesn't control its western 2/3 at all.

I may write a timeline with a realistic (as much as it gets) surviving independent Texas sometime.

 

[Fiver]

Questions
What would be the Texan Position on the American Civil War

Texas remaining independent might just butterfly away the Civil War.

As others have pointed out, an independence Texas is likely going to have ties with Britain. Considering that, and the US-British disagreement over Oregon, I think the most likely results are an agreement with Britain getting Texas and the US getting all of Oregon, or an Anglo-American War in 1846.

If it’s war, the US has significantly higher population than Canada and Texas combined (which didn’t help the US defeat Canada in the Revolutionary War or the War of 1812), while the British Empire has significantly higher population than the US (which didn’t help the British defeat the US in the Revolutionary War or the War of 1812). It will probably come down to commanders – OTLs US had good commanders in the Mexican-American War, Britain’s track record, from the invasion of Afghanistan to the Crimean War is a lot more spotty.

Other considerations are there were existing border disputes between Arkansas and Texas and between Texas and Mexico. It’s entirely possible that instead of a Mexican American War in 1846 over the disputed area, we have an Anglo-Mexican War. Unless, the British have as good of leadership as that of Winfield Scott and as good of scouting as that of Robert E Lee, they’ll have a harder time and lose more to diseases.

Within the US, having Canada to the north and British influenced Texas to the south will probably encourage “we must all hang together or surely we shall all hang separately. Southern expansionists will want to conquer Texas, so if the South every does attempt secession, Texas is unlikely to support them, and might even attack the CSA as an ally of the USA.

Would Mexico Hold California

Not after gold is discovered, there just isn’t enough Mexican population there. This is especially true if there’s an Anglo-Mexican War going. The US might seize it, though unlike OTL, they’d have no interest in Arizona-New Mexico – an intercontinental railroad can’t take a southern route with Texas in the way. Other possibilities are California becoming a British colony, becoming independent, or being annexed by Texas.

Would Alaska still be russian

Likely not. Russia still needs the money and if the US controls all of Oregon territory, there’s more reason for the US to buy it than in OTL.