Early end to Napoleonic War - Early Panic of 1819?

[DTF955Baseballfan]

The Panic of 1819 is said by some to mark the US's entry into the financial system of the world in terms of the boom-bust cycles.

Part of the problem was that the Napoleonic Wars messed thigns up a lot - and his return in 1815 meant that even that growing year was disrupted.

On the other hand, Tambora erupted in 1815, also, causing the Year Without A Summer in 1816. I would imagine Europe had as bad of a harvest as the U.S.?

So, if Napoleon loses a few years early - or just doesn't make it back from Elba - is the Panic earlier, too?

Could Henry Clay mount a challenge in 1820 if that's the case? A Panic lasting much of Monroe's first term would certainly inspire some to consider running against him - could DeWitt Clinton give it a go again?

Or, with the War of 1812 butterflied away by this - let's say Napoleon dies in one of his incursions into Spain in 1810-1811 - could aPanic come early enough to give the Federalists new life - with Clay perhaps reinventing them - in 1816? Yes, he seems mighty young, so maybe someone like John Quincy Adams instead, but it would be under Madison's watch that the economy slumped, meanign at the very least they might consider running someone, with the idea there, at least, of a national system of roads, etc., with jobs created by it. It's certainly not going to be the New Deal, but while the Federal government wasn't expected to do a lot, the National System could be made to seem very enticing in such a scenario.

 

[Well]

The Panic of 1819 is said by some to mark the US's entry into the financial system of the world in terms of the boom-bust cycles.

Part of the problem was that the Napoleonic Wars messed thigns up a lot - and his return in 1815 meant that even that growing year was disrupted.

On the other hand, Tambora erupted in 1815, also, causing the Year Without A Summer in 1816. I would imagine Europe had as bad of a harvest as the U.S.?

So, if Napoleon loses a few years early - or just doesn't make it back from Elba - is the Panic earlier, too?

Could Henry Clay mount a challenge in 1820 if that's the case? A Panic lasting much of Monroe's first term would certainly inspire some to consider running against him - could DeWitt Clinton give it a go again?

Or, with the War of 1812 butterflied away by this - let's say Napoleon dies in one of his incursions into Spain in 1810-1811 - could aPanic come early enough to give the Federalists new life - with Clay perhaps reinventing them - in 1816? Yes, he seems mighty young, so maybe someone like John Quincy Adams instead, but it would be under Madison's watch that the economy slumped, meanign at the very least they might consider running someone, with the idea there, at least, of a national system of roads, etc., with jobs created by it. It's certainly not going to be the New Deal, but while the Federal government wasn't expected to do a lot, the National System could be made to seem very enticing in such a scenario.

Clay or Clinton challenging Monroe in 1820 in an ATL is very plausible. Clay had been clashing with Monroe and Adams over South American independence, so that would be his likely platform. Clinton meanwhile is more likely to challenge on a northern sectionalist ticket. Both are likely to make relief and western development parts of their campaign. Clinton was lining himself up to run in 1820 in OTL but his narrow re-election cost him control of the state legislature and ended that campaign, along with the potential for an 1824 one.

I don't see a Federalist revival with the War of 1812 averted, and it's important to emphasise that Clay was never a Federalist, and Adams was a turncoat. Neither one of them is going to be heading a Federalist ticket in 1816. On the other hand, I think it's possible to have an alternate 1812 turn out very differently. In OTL, Madison turned in a more bellicose direction starting with the appointment of Monroe to State in 1811. Before that, he was taking criticism for being too pacific, and there was the beginning of a dissident Republican movement against him, potentially led by De Witt Clinton and John Armstrong. We could imagine an ATL in which, say, Gallatin is appointed instead of Monroe (he was Madison's first choice for State in 1809) and a continued peace-seeking approach fails to yield results, we could get Madison challenged by Clinton on a hawkish platform, potentially with Clay as a running mate or as a significant figure. If Clinton gets in in 1812, and is seen to have made Britain back down with the repeals of the orders in council, then I think you've got potential for a hybrid administration bringing the pro-development Republicans and Federalists together.

 

[TrickyApe]

On the other hand, Tambora erupted in 1815, also, causing the Year Without A Summer in 1816. I would imagine Europe had as bad of a harvest as the U.S.?

The Tambora effect is a little more complicated. Poor harvests in 1816 and 1817 affected much of Europe and the Eastern Seaboard of the US. The Midwest (meaning Ohio, Indiana, etc., in those days) was not affected badly and in fact boomed and had a land rush in 1818. Unfortunately for the speculators, the return of warm weather led to a crash in grain and cotton prices and the popping of the credit bubble that supported that land rush, with resulting bank failures and the Panic of 1819.