Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
Wilber, idon't know if I want to get into a debate about your broader point of oceans.

The battle on the Plains of Abraham was important but hardly decisive. St. John's (Nfld) fell several times to the French in almost similar manner. The battle in Spring 1760 was just as decisive, or the arbitrary fact that a British ship first arrived that summer.

In fact, the Treaty of 1763 was the decisive fact. Canada (New France, Quebec, whatever) was a colony. Wilber, do you know what a colony is?

The Plains of Abraham was decisive because the French couldn't reverse it. St. Foy was not because the British still held Quebec. The first ship was British because they had naval supremacy, locally at least. It wasn't just going to be the first ship. The British controlled the St. Laurence so they controlled Canada as it then was. The 1763 Treaty re shuffled the deck regarding colonial possessions of the European powers. The 1763 treaty may have decided New France's fate in a political sense but the fact is, there is no way France could have taken Canada back. To maintain the 1763 Treaty of Paris was the deciding factor in New France's fate is as absurd as saying the 1783 Treaty of Paris decided the fate of the United States. Both of them merely confirmed what already was. Regarding North America, the British were the winners in 1763 and the Americans were the winners in 1783. End of story. Wars decide the future. Treaties confirm it. Not the other way around.

The French in Canada were isolated, outnumbered and eventually succumbed at the end of the Seven Years War. There is no shame in that. If anything, they can take pride in making it so difficult. We have enough issues to deal with other than 18th century wars between European colonial powers

I know what a colony is.

"Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC

Posted

Had the British not got the fench colony it probably would have been sold to the Americans as a part of the Lousiana Purchase.

"What about the legitimacy of the democratic process, yeah, what about it?" Jack Layton and his coup against the people of Canada

“The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help.’”

President Ronald Reagan

Posted
To maintain the 1763 Treaty of Paris was the deciding factor in New France's fate is as absurd as saying the 1783 Treaty of Paris decided the fate of the United States. Both of them merely confirmed what already was. Regarding North America, the British were the winners in 1763 and the Americans were the winners in 1783. End of story. Wars decide the future. Treaties confirm it. Not the other way around.

The French in Canada were isolated, outnumbered and eventually succumbed at the end of the Seven Years War. There is no shame in that. If anything, they can take pride in making it so difficult. We have enough issues to deal with other than 18th century wars between European colonial powers

I'm glad you wrote this because otherwise I would have had to. Thank you for saving my wrists and fingers.

The fate of colonial France, in North America AND elsewhere, was all but decided long before the battle of the Plains. It was cemented and sealed in November of the same year when the British beat the French navy at the battle of Quiberon Bay and pretty much permanently ended them as a contender for naval power.

A vastly outnumbered colony cut off from the motherland really had no chance. That France relinquished it formally in a treaty in 1763 is barely even relevant.

"A man is no more entitled to an opinion for which he cannot account than he does for a pint of beer for which he cannot pay" - Anonymous

Posted
Whatever you say, Bambino. Given that Laurier's riding was in Quebec City and he was PM, I think that I'll go with my version of events. Liberal PMs have a tendency to create National Parks in (or near) their ridings.

Not what I say, August:

In... 1905, Lord Grey took up the work of preserving the battlefields... [H]e paused at Wolfe's monument and there said that he would never rest until such sacred ground became the heirloom of all Canada... In 1906, the St. Jean Baptiste Society took up Mr. Chouinard's suggestion for a Champlain Tercentenary in 1908, and proposed that the celebration should be a Dominion one. In January 1907, a Quebec deputation waited on the Dominion Government and proposed a Canadian historical museum as a fitting permanent memorial to the coming fête. Sir Wilfrid Laurier, however, suggested that the preservation of the Quebec Battlefields... would be better still.

Meanwhile, the Lord Grey had become an enthusiastic supporter of the Champlain Tercentenary. Then he and Sir Wilfrid Laurier made in concert the master stroke which united the Battlefields project with that of the Tercentennial celebration.

You're right about the gates, though. One - the Kent Gate - was a gift from Queen Victoria; the cornerstone was set by her daughter, Princess Louise.

Posted
To maintain the 1763 Treaty of Paris was the deciding factor in New France's fate is as absurd as saying the 1783 Treaty of Paris decided the fate of the United States.
You open many issues but I'll stop you there.

The 1783 Treaty of Paris recognized a popular uprising, and solved a problem. It made the US "official" in European eyes.

The 1763 treaty was, like Versailles in 1919 or Yalta in 1945, designed to rearrange the world and make peace for a generation.

In 1945 at Yalta, Romanians and Poles became subjects of Soviet Russia and in 1763 at Paris, Quebecers became subjects of George III. Regardless of specific battles, however Poles, Romanians and Quebecers may have felt, treaties decided the State and who formed the government.

Wilber, the Treaty of 1783 was entirely different.

Posted
That France relinquished it formally in a treaty in 1763 is barely even relevant.
It's entirely relevant. Gaudeloupe and Martinique are still French departments. Quebec is not.

More broadly, we make choices in life - and these choices have consequences.

Posted
Wilber, the Treaty of 1783 was entirely different.

Not really, the Treaty of 1783 acknowledged the reality that the 13 Colonies were no longer British unless the Americans decided otherwise. The Treaty of 1763 acknowledged the reality that New France was no longer French unless the British decided otherwise.

"Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC

Posted
Not really, the Treaty of 1783 acknowledged the reality that the 13 Colonies were no longer British unless the Americans decided otherwise. The Treaty of 1763 acknowledged the reality that New France was no longer French unless the British decided otherwise.

I would side with August on this one. In 1763, there was a diplomatic trading of conquered territories as a means to achieve peace; as I understand it, Louis XV could have taken Canada - or, at least, parts of it - back, if he so wished. He would merely have had to make other concessions. In the end, he chose to retain Guadeloupe, instead. Twenty years later, there was no intention of the Americans and British doing the same kind of territorial trading; the American insurgents got what they wanted, and George III said "fine."

Posted (edited)
It's entirely relevant. Gaudeloupe and Martinique are still French departments. Quebec is not.

More broadly, we make choices in life - and these choices have consequences.

and what did the British 'give up' in these 'treaties' really? The French got Guadeloupe and Martinique, which are tiny islands amongst a swathe of predominantly British posessions and the British got North America, India and a bunch of island territories.

It appears to me that old Louis got the crap end of this deal, and I'd wager that's because he'd already lost what he 'conceded' :rolleyes: in the treaty.

Edited by Moonbox

"A man is no more entitled to an opinion for which he cannot account than he does for a pint of beer for which he cannot pay" - Anonymous

Posted
I would side with August on this one. In 1763, there was a diplomatic trading of conquered territories as a means to achieve peace; as I understand it, Louis XV could have taken Canada - or, at least, parts of it - back, if he so wished. He would merely have had to make other concessions. In the end, he chose to retain Guadeloupe, instead. Twenty years later, there was no intention of the Americans and British doing the same kind of territorial trading; the American insurgents got what they wanted, and George III said "fine."

There was a lot on the table at the end of the Seven Years War, it involved most European powers and was fought on a global scale. It could be called the first real world war. It is also true to say that these exchanges were part of the price of peace. The point is, because Britain had taken New France, Guadeloupe, Martinique, most of France's India possessions, as well as Manila and Havana from the Spanish, they all became chips on Britain's side of the table to be used to her advantage. In reality, Louis XV wasn't in position to "take" any of them back. The military outcome established the negotiating conditions for the treaty, not the opposite.

"Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,853
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    Beat My Insurance
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Barquentine went up a rank
      Explorer
    • Scott75 went up a rank
      Experienced
    • Barquentine earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Barquentine earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Radiorum earned a badge
      Posting Machine
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...