Hypothesis: what would the US have to do to defend the Monroe Doctrine if the SS Virginius Affair ha

[miletus12]

Background.

Summary: 

The Spanish cruiser Tornado intercepted and seized the blockade runner SS Virginius. The Spanish colonial authorities took off the crew and after a rather dubious legal process commenced a series of mass executions that brought a concentration of Royal Navy and US Navy ships off the port of Santiago de Cuba. The threat of war was quite real in 1873. While the Armada was in no means prepared to fight the British Royal navy, the Spanish fleet was more than capable of wrecking the then existent USN. It was entirely possible that the Spanish government of Estanislao Figueras could have indemified the British and bought them off, while turning around on the US and fighting a naval war complete with port bombardments and naval raids; similar to the ones they successfully waged against various South American republics in the Pacific at the time.   

So... What would the Grant Presidency have to do to prevent Boston or New York from being hit like Valparaiso was.

And what would that post Civil War USN look like?

[lordroel]

Dec 4, 2021 8:05:01 GMT miletus12 said:

Background.

Summary: 

The Spanish cruiser Tornado intercepted and seized the blockade runner SS Virginius. The Spanish colonial authorities took off the crew and after a rather dubious legal process commenced a series of mass executions that brought a concentration of Royal Navy and US Navy ships off the port of Santiago de Cuba. The threat of war was quite real in 1873. While the Armada was in no means prepared to fight the British Royal navy, the Spanish fleet was more than capable of wrecking the then existent USN. It was entirely possible that the Spanish government of Estanislao Figueras could have indemified the British and bought them off, while turning around on the US and fighting a naval war complete with port bombardments and naval raids; similar to the ones they successfully waged against various South American republics in the Pacific at the time.   

So... What would the Grant Presidency have to do to prevent Boston or New York from being hit like Valparaiso was.

And what would that post Civil War USN look like?

Well i once posted a thread asking the same question miletus12, here is the original post of the thread, you can even see what the fleet in 1873 was.

What if: Spanish-America War of 1873

The Virginius affair which was a diplomatic dispute that occurred from October 1873 to February 1875 between the United States, the United Kingdom, and Spain (then in control of Cuba), during the Ten Years' War. Virginius was a fast American ship hired by Cuban insurrectionists to land men and munitions in Cuba to attack the Spanish regime there. It was captured by the Spanish, who wanted to try the men onboard (many of whom were American and British citizens) as pirates and execute them. The Spanish executed 53 of the men but stopped when the British government demanded it when HMS Niobe, arrived at the city of Santiago where the executions were taking place. The commander of the ship, Sir Lambton Loraine, immediately ordered the Spanish to cease the executions. Loraine even went so far as to threaten to bombard the city if his demands were not met. Spain relented and halted the executions, sparing the surviving crew of the Virginius.

One of the thing mentioned in the clip is that at the time of the affair, the Spanish ironclad Arapiles was in Brooklyn, New York for repairs that lasted from May to January 1874, Being a more modern ironclad, the United States Navy had no warship in its inventory capable of engaging it. This led to the sickening realization that if war had broken out, the Spanish warship could have begun shelling New York City with impunity, the US Navy powerless to stop it. Had Spain sent its fleet to battle, the US Navy would be fighting an enemy with a larger number of more advanced ships. The US Navy was surpassed by Spain both in quality and quantity. To make matters worse, the few warships the United States had were incapable of fighting abroad. The available ironclads were originally designed for operation in coastal areas and on rivers. They could hardly make the 100 mile journey to Cuba much less sail to Spain from across the Atlantic.

But what if there was no peaceful settlement and war broke out between the United States and Spain in 1873.

YouTube (The Spanish Navy in 1898 - Armada Options)



Photo: the terror to the United States Navy if war had broken out in 1873, the Spanish ironclad Arapiles

Ordered as a wood-built screw steam frigate was she during the building at the shipyard of Green, Blackwall, England converted into a broadside ironclad. Laid down in June 1861, launched on 17 October 1864, completed in 18865, commissioned in 1868, hulked in 1879, mentioned as being in poor condition while her hull was not strong enough for the armour in 1882 and finally broken up in 1883/1884. The armour consisted of a heavy iron-made belt with a thickness of 11,4cm/4.5” and a battery protected by 10cm/3.9”. Displacement 5.500 (design)-5.700 (completed) tons, other sources claiming 3.441 long tons/3.496 tons and as dimensions 85,37 x 15,9-16,45 x 5,2 metres or 280.11 x 52.2 (design)-54 (after being armoured) x 17’feet. The horsepower of 100 nhp supplied by the one shaft Trunk steam engine and 6 boilers was to allow a designed speed of 12 knots. One funnel and with ship-rigging. The original armament consisted of 2-10" riflled muzzle loading guns, 5-8”rifled muzzle loading guns and 10-7’9? breech loading guns. Her crew numbered 537 men.



United States Navy and Spanish Navy in 1873



Wikipedia article related to the Virginius Affair

[miletus12]

The answer to the question is that the Americans would have to make do with coastal defenses and build their own version of the HMS Warrior or Black Prince.

What they could build is something indicative here.

Re de' Italia (Built in the United States)

and here.

USS New Ironsides.

It is likely that seagoing monitors like USS Dictator would also be contemplated. These would be repeats of US Civil War designs and would take about 18 months to construct. Considering that a "hot war" would be upon the Grant administration, and the impetus to avenge an inevitable and probable port bombardment would be a further incentive, I think a Spanish American War of 1873 in the Caribbean Sea would be somewhat like the situation between Italy and Austria in the Adriatic with the Spaniards cast in the role of the Italians. The land campaign would be somewhat curious since the American Army would have solid cadres of Civil War veterans. The American navy would be in a similar state, but whether their commerce defense and blockader and port assault experience translates into actual fleet action experience or whether they could find a Tegetthoff of their own... I leave others to speculate.

My opinion is that the Spaniards would find such an escalation and American mobilization... problematic. Spanish Ironclads were dependent on foreign assistance construction and expertise, either British or French. The Americans rolled their own out. Unless the French pitched in with aid, the Spanish will find themselves in this hypothetical situation outclassed eventually. It could take a year for the monitors to show up, but off Key West they will show and then Cuba will fall very quickly. After that happens, it becomes academic whether US ships can sail across the Atlantic to attack Spain. There will be no need. Spain's armored warships without new world ports or coaling supply points will be neutered and will be just as range limited as US monitors. It might become a commerce war a la Kearsage and Alabama at that point, but it seems that Spain would sue for peace rather than have her remaining (Pacific) empire dismembered by US steam and sail frigates of which there were more than plenty to cover those Pacific possessions and take them.

[lordroel]

Dec 4, 2021 10:12:07 GMT miletus12 said:

The answer to the question is that the Americans would have to make do with coastal defenses and build their own version of the HMS Warrior or Black Prince.

What they could build is something indicative here.

Re de' Italia (Built in the United States)

and here.

USS New Ironsides.

It is likely that seagoing monitors like USS Dictator would also be contemplated. These would be repeats of US Civil War designs and would take about 18 months to construct. Considering that a "hot war" would be upon the Grant administration, and the impetus to avenge an inevitable and probable port bombardment would be a further incentive, I think a Spanish American War of 1873 in the Caribbean Sea would be somewhat like the situation between Italy and Austria in the Adriatic with the Spaniards cast in the role of the Italians. The land campaign would be somewhat curious since the American Army would have solid cadres of Civil War veterans. The American navy would be in a similar state, but whether their commerce defense and blockader and port assault experience translates into actual fleet action experience or whether they could find a Tegetthoff of their own... I leave others to speculate.

My opinion is that the Spaniards would find such an escalation and American mobilization... problematic. Spanish Ironclads were dependent on foreign assistance construction and expertise, either British or French. The Americans rolled their own out. Unless the French pitched in with aid, the Spanish will find themselves in this hypothetical situation outclassed eventually. It could take a year for the monitors to show up, but off Key West they will show and then Cuba will fall very quickly. After that happens, it becomes academic whether US ships can sail across the Atlantic to attack Spain. There will be no need. Spain's armored warships without new world ports or coaling supply points will be neutered and will be just as range limited as US monitors. It might become a commerce war a la Kearsage and Alabama at that point, but it seems that Spain would sue for peace rather than have her remaining (Pacific) empire dismembered by US steam and sail frigates of which there were more than plenty to cover those Pacific possessions and take them.

Building a ship takes time, its not done overnight.

[miletus12]

Dec 4, 2021 10:13:32 GMT lordroel said:

Dec 4, 2021 10:12:07 GMT miletus12 said:

The answer to the question is that the Americans would have to make do with coastal defenses and build their own version of the HMS Warrior or Black Prince.

What they could build is something indicative here.

Re de' Italia (Built in the United States)

and here.

USS New Ironsides.

It is likely that seagoing monitors like USS Dictator would also be contemplated. These would be repeats of US Civil War designs and would take about 18 months to construct. Considering that a "hot war" would be upon the Grant administration, and the impetus to avenge an inevitable and probable port bombardment would be a further incentive, I think a Spanish American War of 1873 in the Caribbean Sea would be somewhat like the situation between Italy and Austria in the Adriatic with the Spaniards cast in the role of the Italians. The land campaign would be somewhat curious since the American Army would have solid cadres of Civil War veterans. The American navy would be in a similar state, but whether their commerce defense and blockader and port assault experience translates into actual fleet action experience or whether they could find a Tegetthoff of their own... I leave others to speculate.

My opinion is that the Spaniards would find such an escalation and American mobilization... problematic. Spanish Ironclads were dependent on foreign assistance construction and expertise, either British or French. The Americans rolled their own out. Unless the French pitched in with aid, the Spanish will find themselves in this hypothetical situation outclassed eventually. It could take a year for the monitors to show up, but off Key West they will show and then Cuba will fall very quickly. After that happens, it becomes academic whether US ships can sail across the Atlantic to attack Spain. There will be no need. Spain's armored warships without new world ports or coaling supply points will be neutered and will be just as range limited as US monitors. It might become a commerce war a la Kearsage and Alabama at that point, but it seems that Spain would sue for peace rather than have her remaining (Pacific) empire dismembered by US steam and sail frigates of which there were more than plenty to cover those Pacific possessions and take them.

Building a ship takes time, its not done overnight.

USS Dictator took about a year to build. 

USS New Ironsides took about nine months.

USS Puritan, a "Theseus ship" was laid down during the Virginius crisis and was 80% complete when laid up in ordinary after the crisis was resolved. That was seven months. If the war had gone hot, I estimate another five months. The actual Spanish American War of 1898 lasted about eight months.   

As we get into the New Steel Navy of the 1890s the build times take four to six years, however the USS Kearsarge laid down during that Spanish American War of 1898, took only two years.  War speeds things up.

[lordroel]

Dec 4, 2021 10:32:50 GMT miletus12 said:

Dec 4, 2021 10:13:32 GMT lordroel said:

Building a ship takes time, its not done overnight.

USS Dictator took about a year to build. 

USS New Ironsides took about nine months.

USS Puritan, a "Theseus ship" was laid down during the Virginius crisis and was 80% complete when laid up in ordinary after the crisis was resolved. That was seven months. If the war had gone hot, I estimate another five months. The actual Spanish American War of 1898 lasted about eight months.   

As we get into the New Steel Navy of the 1890s the build times take four to six years, however the USS Kearsarge laid down during that Spanish American War of 1898, took only two years.  War speeds things up.

Well the United states could also do what they would do in the Spanish-america War of 1989, buy some ships when they bought the Brazil ships which became the USS New Orleans (formerly the Amazonas) and the USS Albany (formerly the Almirante Abreu).

[miletus12]

Dec 4, 2021 10:43:52 GMT lordroel said:

Dec 4, 2021 10:32:50 GMT miletus12 said:

USS Dictator took about a year to build. 

USS New Ironsides took about nine months.

USS Puritan, a "Theseus ship" was laid down during the Virginius crisis and was 80% complete when laid up in ordinary after the crisis was resolved. That was seven months. If the war had gone hot, I estimate another five months. The actual Spanish American War of 1898 lasted about eight months.   

As we get into the New Steel Navy of the 1890s the build times take four to six years, however the USS Kearsarge laid down during that Spanish American War of 1898, took only two years.  War speeds things up.

Well the United states could also do what they would do in the Spanish-america War of 1989, buy some ships when they bought the Brazil ships which became the USS New Orleans (formerly the Amazonas) and the USS Albany (formerly the Almirante Abreu).

The US bought those ships to keep the Spaniards from buying them. They did not need them. As an aside, the Americans, after they used the two ships came to some interesting conclusions about British built warships.

1. The engines were better than their own. The Americans copied features in British powerplants that they liked.
2. Crew accommodations and ship work spaces were horrible. The Americans despised these features and considered British practices and accessions unsafe and intolerable. 
3. British rapid-fire guns were faster cycling than the equivalent bore American artillery, but the guns were unsafe with breech plug jams and blow-outs common and barrel bursts from faulty British supplied powder propellant charges being all too common. The Americans landed the Elswick artillery and switched to American ordnance as soon as they could.
4. Bearing 3 in mind, and 2, the Americans found British ammunition and propellant stowage systems unacceptable and hazardous in the extreme. Kind of ironic when one remembers what happened to the USS Maine, which used those methods originally?
  
 

 

[lordroel]

Dec 4, 2021 11:17:06 GMT miletus12 said:

Dec 4, 2021 10:43:52 GMT lordroel said:

Well the United states could also do what they would do in the Spanish-america War of 1989, buy some ships when they bought the Brazil ships which became the USS New Orleans (formerly the Amazonas) and the USS Albany (formerly the Almirante Abreu).

The US bought those ships to keep the Spaniards from buying them. They did not need them. As an aside, the Americans, after they used the two ships came to some interesting conclusions about British built warships.

1. The engines were better than their own. The Americans copied features in British powerplants that they liked.
2. Crew accommodations and ship work spaces were horrible. The Americans despised these features and considered British practices and accessions unsafe and intolerable. 
3. British rapid-fire guns were faster cycling than the equivalent bore American artillery, but the guns were unsafe with breech plug jams and blow-outs common and barrel bursts from faulty British supplied powder propellant charges being all too common. The Americans landed the Elswick artillery and switched to American ordnance as soon as they could.
4. Bearing 3 in mind, and 2, the Americans found British ammunition and propellant stowage systems unacceptable and hazardous in the extreme. Kind of ironic when one remembers what happened to the USS Maine, which used those methods originally?
  
 

 

Well if the are a Spanish-america war in 1973, the United States Navy first rate line that is listed what i posted are located at:

Steam screw frigate, USS Colorado: part of the North Atlantic Squadron.

Steam screw frigate, USS Franklin: decommissioned at Boston (OTL recommissioned on 15 December 1873 and then operated in the North Atlantic Squadron).

Steam screw frigate, USS Minnesota: placed in ordinary at the New York Navy Yard on 13 January 1868.

Steam screw frigate, USS Niagara: decommissioned on 28 September 1865.

Steam screw frigate, USS Wabash: decommissioned at Boston on February 14, 1865.

And these are only the first line ship listed, i do think we see a lot of the same with the Second, third and Fourth line ships on the list.

Now if we look at the Spanish first line ships we get:

Ironclad Numancia



ironclad Duque de Tetuán



ironclad Vitoria



ironclad Arapiles



ironclad Zaragoza



ironclad Sagunto



ironclad Méndez Núñez (named Resolución on the list)



Screw corvette, Doña María de Molina



Screw corvette, Tornado

[stevep]

   Guys

   Small issue of Spain being deep in the Third_Carlist_War at this time and busy tearing itself apart with the Carlist claimant opposing an Italian monarch, a revolution establishing a republic and then a Bourbon restoration.  All in all between 1872-76 Spain wasn't really in a position to pose a serious threat to anyone.  If war with the US came, unless it had a unifying impact within Spain, which seems rather unlikely, its probable that the Spanish forces in the Caribbean would have been largely on their own.

  One related issue.  If there was a period of tension then could the US have sought to seize the Spanish ironclad Arapile while it was being repaired, to prevent it being used in any conflict.  Or possibly even complete the repairs and use it themselves.

  I can't see France, reeling under the defeat by the Prussians and the resulting chaos, having had a change to a republic and also still feeling very threatened by the new imperial Germany siding with Spain in any conflict.  At least unless the US so badly breached diplomatic protocols.  Something like the Trent Affair or worse.  In which case they might have problems with other nations, most especially the British. 

  Steve

[lordroel]

Dec 4, 2021 13:26:11 GMT stevep said:

   Guys

   Small issue of Spain being deep in the Third_Carlist_War at this time and busy tearing itself apart with the Carlist claimant opposing an Italian monarch, a revolution establishing a republic and then a Bourbon restoration.  All in all between 1872-76 Spain wasn't really in a position to pose a serious threat to anyone.  If war with the US came, unless it had a unifying impact within Spain, which seems rather unlikely, its probable that the Spanish forces in the Caribbean would have been largely on their own.

  One related issue.  If there was a period of tension then could the US have sought to seize the Spanish ironclad Arapile while it was being repaired, to prevent it being used in any conflict.  Or possibly even complete the repairs and use it themselves.

  I can't see France, reeling under the defeat by the Prussians and the resulting chaos, having had a change to a republic and also still feeling very threatened by the new imperial Germany siding with Spain in any conflict.  At least unless the US so badly breached diplomatic protocols.  Something like the Trent Affair or worse.  In which case they might have problems with other nations, most especially the British. 

  Steve

Well what side would join the United States in a Spanish-America war in 1873 then.

[miletus12]

Dec 4, 2021 13:26:11 GMT stevep said:

   Guys

   Small issue of Spain being deep in the Third_Carlist_War at this time and busy tearing itself apart with the Carlist claimant opposing an Italian monarch, a revolution establishing a republic and then a Bourbon restoration.  All in all between 1872-76 Spain wasn't really in a position to pose a serious threat to anyone.  If war with the US came, unless it had a unifying impact within Spain, which seems rather unlikely, its probable that the Spanish forces in the Caribbean would have been largely on their own.

  One related issue.  If there was a period of tension then could the US have sought to seize the Spanish ironclad Arapile while it was being repaired, to prevent it being used in any conflict.  Or possibly even complete the repairs and use it themselves.

  I can't see France, reeling under the defeat by the Prussians and the resulting chaos, having had a change to a republic and also still feeling very threatened by the new imperial Germany siding with Spain in any conflict.  At least unless the US so badly breached diplomatic protocols.  Something like the Trent Affair or worse.  In which case they might have problems with other nations, most especially the British. 

  Steve

All good points. However Valparaiso happened in 1866. The French were in Mexico about the same time, the Americans were fresh from their own Civil War and six years later is not that long to make trouble, no matter the Franco Prussian War or The War of the Pacific or the never-ending Carlist-Isabelline fracas that led to the Franco Prussian War. Example...

France was in not too good a shape after 1874. Ten years later the French navy was on a rampage in the South China Sea and this upset a lot of nations; Vietnam, Great Britain, China, Japan, Spain, the United States etc. 

Just because the homeland is in bad shape does not prevent the people out in the colonies from screwing up and dumping a major war in your lap. The SS Virginius affair or the USS Maine Incident are other examples of things going to 6s and 9s in a real hurry.  The Spanish republic handled the SS Virginius affair sort of, but the Spanish monarchy of 1898?  They mismanaged a worse political situation at home than they had in 1874 and earned a war on top of it.  
  
All it would take is another incompetent like Sigismund Bermejo or a Weyler and an eager firebrand like Teddy and away we go. 

[raharris1973]

Dec 4, 2021 8:05:01 GMT miletus12 said:

Background.

Summary: 

The Spanish cruiser Tornado intercepted and seized the blockade runner SS Virginius. The Spanish colonial authorities took off the crew and after a rather dubious legal process commenced a series of mass executions that brought a concentration of Royal Navy and US Navy ships off the port of Santiago de Cuba. The threat of war was quite real in 1873. While the Armada was in no means prepared to fight the British Royal navy, the Spanish fleet was more than capable of wrecking the then existent USN. It was entirely possible that the Spanish government of Estanislao Figueras could have indemified the British and bought them off, while turning around on the US and fighting a naval war complete with port bombardments and naval raids; similar to the ones they successfully waged against various South American republics in the Pacific at the time.   

So... What would the Grant Presidency have to do to prevent Boston or New York from being hit like Valparaiso was.

And what would that post Civil War USN look like?



So where do you and thread consensus stand now?  Do the Spanish just beat the Americans? Or do the Americans grind out a win even if it takes some production time?  Does the Arapiles fire on Brooklyn from the harbor, or does the Arapiles get boarded by Yanks before it can do any damage, or both, it bombards, but gets boarded and doesn't get a chance to get underway.


And what about economic effects, both policy and circumstance?  


Would the Grant Administration continue on the lines of tightening the money supply if going to war, demonetizing silver, and cleaning the greenbacks out of circulation, which all increased the deflation and hardship of the Panic of 1873? Or would they have an expansionary monetary and fiscal policy with a new war, softening the panic?  But then again, threats to ports and shipping make for commerce disruptions and can scare away foreign capital, making the panic worse.

[miletus12]

Dec 14, 2021 2:05:54 GMT raharris1973 said:

So where do you and thread consensus stand now?  Do the Spanish just beat the Americans? Or do the Americans grind out a win even if it takes some production time?  Does the Arapiles fire on Brooklyn from the harbor, or does the Arapiles get boarded by Yanks before it can do any damage, or both, it bombards, but gets boarded and doesn't get a chance to get underway.

And what about economic effects, both policy and circumstance?  

Would the Grant Administration continue on the lines of tightening the money supply if going to war, demonetizing silver, and cleaning the greenbacks out of circulation, which all increased the deflation and hardship of the Panic of 1873? Or would they have an expansionary monetary and fiscal policy with a new war, softening the panic?  But then again, threats to ports and shipping make for commerce disruptions and can scare away foreign capital, making the panic worse.

The Panic of 1873.


The US banking system was fluidic  but not backed by sufficient hard currency reserves on hand to meet expected loan obligations and demand calls. Railroad bond issues of this panic resemble the junk bonds of the tech bubble during the Clinton administration with similar disastrous future effects. 

However, we can add the Franco Prussian War, the demonetization of silver as a reserve hard currency in the US and Germany, runaway American inflation, a farming crisis and British banking manipulation that backfired when the US railroad bonds that the British lending houses used as "capital" proved to be worthless as sureties.  

How would the Grant administration possibly finance a naval war and a land campaign in the face of that economic malaise? If Salmon Chase's Civil War example was any guide, the Americans would float bonds, impose import duties on foreign imports, place large armament orders in excess of immediate need to create an artificial demand economy, and go into deficit spending by increasing the public debt under the cover of fighting the war and actually devaluing the currency. They would be running the printing presses and in effect screw the European creditors over by devaluing the dollar and paying off the aforesaid Britons and Germans in "greenbacks".

It might make sense to build a navy and keep it in permanent ordinary as is done today to maintain a steel industry. 

Foreign capital is probably not going to be available anyway, so it will be on the backs of the American working poor that the internal capital and financing will be raised. A wartime government can find a way to superheat economic activity and generate (false) revenue streams. (WWI and WWII). 

Who knows? If Grant's cabinet full of crooks play the angles, they might even win the war before the bottom falls out of the American economy. Taking Cuba would be an $800,000,000 windfall. Just how much of the global sugar market did Cuba supply?

As for the American war machine, that is somewhat problematic. British and French steam engine technology was about a half decade ahead of American tech. Artillery and firearms; the Europeans were similarly about a full decade ahead. However... war brings innovation and I presume parity. The Spanish are ratio-wise economically outmatched 4 to 1 in capital, 8 to 1 in industry, 3 to 1 in shipyard capacity, and potentially 5 to 1 in manpower. Add to this problem that US relations with France are somewhat friendly and that while the British would sell tech to anybody except the United States, there is GERMANY whose tech (Krupp guns are being sold to anybody with the cash including South American republics, China, Thailand, Russia and Turkey, so why not the Americans in this circumstance?) is right up America's alley. The Germans are trying to break into foreign markets. Those are German steel rails on American sleepers, so why not German steel breech loading guns or licensed copy designs in American ships? That would be better than anything the British or the French could offer. 

The Americans could make do with their existent repeaters for this exercise in  folderoy war-making until Lee comes out with his vertical stack bolt action. 

Mister Gatling is already putting out better Gatling guns.  

I wonder if the Spanish can or would get similar help?  Very likely. France would be more than willing.      
 

[stevep]

Dec 14, 2021 2:05:54 GMT raharris1973 said:

Dec 4, 2021 8:05:01 GMT miletus12 said:

Background.

Summary: 

The Spanish cruiser Tornado intercepted and seized the blockade runner SS Virginius. The Spanish colonial authorities took off the crew and after a rather dubious legal process commenced a series of mass executions that brought a concentration of Royal Navy and US Navy ships off the port of Santiago de Cuba. The threat of war was quite real in 1873. While the Armada was in no means prepared to fight the British Royal navy, the Spanish fleet was more than capable of wrecking the then existent USN. It was entirely possible that the Spanish government of Estanislao Figueras could have indemified the British and bought them off, while turning around on the US and fighting a naval war complete with port bombardments and naval raids; similar to the ones they successfully waged against various South American republics in the Pacific at the time.   

So... What would the Grant Presidency have to do to prevent Boston or New York from being hit like Valparaiso was.

And what would that post Civil War USN look like?



So where do you and thread consensus stand now?  Do the Spanish just beat the Americans? Or do the Americans grind out a win even if it takes some production time?  Does the Arapiles fire on Brooklyn from the harbor, or does the Arapiles get boarded by Yanks before it can do any damage, or both, it bombards, but gets boarded and doesn't get a chance to get underway.


And what about economic effects, both policy and circumstance?  


Would the Grant Administration continue on the lines of tightening the money supply if going to war, demonetizing silver, and cleaning the greenbacks out of circulation, which all increased the deflation and hardship of the Panic of 1873? Or would they have an expansionary monetary and fiscal policy with a new war, softening the panic?  But then again, threats to ports and shipping make for commerce disruptions and can scare away foreign capital, making the panic worse.

  I've seen nothing to dispute what I said earlier.  Spain is in the midst of a civil war and hence in no position to support an isolated colony, especially one so close to the US.  So if you get a situation with Spain somehow resolving matters with Britain but not the US and a vested interest in the US in going to war - taking the 1898 example of Hearst's yellow press for an example then Cuba is likely to fall and possibly Puerto Rico as well.  However is the US so close to the civil war and still with a number of Indians not yet repressed in the west that eager for a foreign war?  Despite the downgrading of its military since 1865 the US can moblise a lot of veterans quickly, including some commanders who will have useful battle experience and simply swamp the Spanish.  They can supplement their own capacity by buying from other countries and especially in this scenario I could see a lot of British and as miletus12, says Germans willing to sell.  Possibly also French as with the Germans withdrawing having got their indemnity paid off they would be looking for anything to boost their industrial and military base.

  About the worst that might happen for the US could be if prior to a dow there's an attempt to seize the Arapiles which fails, prompting international outrage and also probably the ship bombarding assorted parts of the harbour before it either withdraws or - if incapable of moving - is overwhelmed.  Even then, unless it causes some intervention on behave of Spain - which seems unlikely to me but could be wrong - or serious opposition to the war inside the US I can only see it going one way.

  Would expect that the US is unlikely to go after the Spanish Pacific possessions as their simply too far away at this point in time.

 

[raharris1973]

Dec 14, 2021 14:57:49 GMT stevep said:

Would expect that the US is unlikely to go after the Spanish Pacific possessions as their simply too far away at this point in time.

One would think so, it being a couple decades earlier, two decades of technology earlier, and that much earlier in the scramble for the China market, but.....

The US Navy wasn't inactive in the Far East in and around the early 1870s....

I would note:

1871 - The United States Korean Punitive Expedition of June 1871,https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_expedition_to_Korea, itself a sequel to the earlier General Sherman incident, when the Koreans assaulted the visiting USS General Sherman in 1866 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Sherman_incident

1867 - The United States Punitive Expedition to Formosa of June 1867 (gosh, the Yanks got frisky in June back then), en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formosa_Expedition in retaliation for the earlier Rover incident en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rover_incident, where Taiwanese aborigines had killed shipwrecked American sailors

1878 - US acquisition of refueling station at Pago Pago harbor, Samoa, not in Asia but the far South Pacific, at distances from the US mainland and Hawaii comparable to Guam and the Philippines.