"We were divided and confused till our pockets were touched..."

[Battalion]

Originally Posted by unionblue

Battalion,

I suggest the way you see it is just like Lincoln described it to a crowd during one of his speeches.

"Abraham Lincoln, making speeches in New England, used a story to illustrate how such big money interferes with understanding. There was, said Lincolon, an argument between two pastors. One pointed to a word in the Bible. "Do you see that word?" "Yes, of course." Then the first pastor put a gold coin over the word. "Do you see it now?" Lincoln's New England audiences, like the one at New Haven, would begin to laugh in anticipation of his application of this joke even before he stated it.

"Whether the owners of this species of property [slaves] do really see it as it is," Lincoln went on, "it is not for me to say, but if they do, they see it as it is through 2,000,000,000 of dollars, and that is a pretty thick coating." The audience laughed. "Certain it is," Lincoln continued, "that they do not see it as we see it. Certain it is, that this two thousand million of dollars, invested in this species of property, all so concentrated that the mind can grasp it at once--this immense pecuniary interest, has its influence upon their minds."

The tariff was not the 'coin' covering the words of the Constitution, slavery was. The attempt to inflate the tariff as such and all the arguments, theories, charts and schedules, when boiled down to the one essential fact is, it was not enough to bring about the bloodshed you claim it did.

You, as they could not then, 'do not see it as we see it.'

Unionblue

Oh...no...no....you misunderstand...

I'm just showing the charts and schedules to reveal what's going on.

To the South this was definitely a grievance but by itself not enough to go to war over...
...(except for the little matter of South Carolina in 1832).

My focus is primarily on the Northern POV (which you conveniently ignore) on this subject- Their "gold coin covering the Constitution"

Yes, certainly- "this immense pecuniary interest, has its influence upon their minds" (Lincoln)...

~

[Battalion]

Originally Posted by JohnTaylor

....
W. W. Boyce, spoke in the House of Representatives against the use of specific duties in February 1859. He said. "They are too convenient an instrument of the protective policy. While an ad valorem duty of fifty, sixty, seventy-five, or one hundred per cent for protection, would shock the justice of any fair-minded person, a specific duty of the same or greater amount, from its hidden character, would not excite attention. If the purpose be to give the greatest amount of protection in the most covert way, then specific duties are to be preferred." Congressional Globe, House of Representatives, 35th Congress, 2nd Session Page 242 of 1692.
....
Respectfully,
John Taylor

Petitions, petitions, petitions.....

...presented in the Senate & House of Rep's:

February 14, 1860
By Mr. Sherman: The memorial of citizens of the State of Ohio, praying specific duties on railroad iron; which was referred to the Committee of Ways and Means.
By Mr. Trimble: The petition of citizens of the State of Ohio, in favor of specific duties on railroad iron; which was referred to the Committee of Ways and Means.
By Mr. Trimble: Three petitions of citizens of the State of Ohio. praying for the imposition of specific duties on railroad iron; which were referred to the Committee of Ways and Means.

February 15, 1860
Mr. Campbell submitted the following preamble and resolutions; which were read, and referred to the Committee of Ways and Means, viz:
~
"Resolved, by the senate and house of representatives of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania in the general assembly met, That our senators in Congress be instructed, and our representatives requested, to earnestly endeavor, by their votes and influence, to procure such a revision of the revenue laws as will restore the national credit, prevent excessive importation of foreign products, and secure to American labor and enterprise an ample reward.

"Resolved, That the views of the governor of this Commonwealth, as expressed in his last annual message, in favor of placing the revenue laws upon such a basis as to afford to our great mining and manufacturing interests the largest incidental protection, and to substitute the specific for ad valorem duties on articles which, from their nature, are of equal or nearly equal value, or to change the foreign to a home valuation, are eminently sound and practical, and meet the approbation of the legislature.

"Resolved, That the governor be requested to forward to each of our senators and members of Congress a copy of the foregoing resolution."
~
By Mr. Trimble: Six petitions of citizens of the State of Ohio, praying the imposition of specific duties on imported iron; which were referred to the Committee of Ways and Means.

February 16, 1860
By Mr. Laban T. Moore: The petitions of citizens of the State of Kentucky, praying specific duties on iron.
By Mr. Sherman: Three petitions of citizens of the State of Ohio, praying specific duties on iron.
By Mr. Corwin: The petition of citizens of the State of Ohio, praying specific duties on foreign iron.

February 20, 1860
By Mr. Trimble: Four petitions of citizens of the State of Ohio, praying the imposition of specific duties on imported iron; which were referred to the Committee of Ways and Means.

February 21, 1860
Mr. Wade presented two memorials of citizens of Sciota and Lawrence counties, Ohio, praying such a modification of the revenue laws as will afford protection to those engaged in the manufacture of iron; which were referred to the Committee on Finance.
By Mr. Pennington: The petition of citizens of the State of Ohio, praying specific duties on imported iron.
By Mr. Trimble: Four petitions of citizens of the State of Ohio, praying specific duties on imported iron.

February 23, 1860
By Mr. Trimble: Five petitions of citizens of the State of Ohio, praying the imposition of specific duties on imported iron.
By Mr. Stanton: The petition of citizens of the State of Ohio, praying specific duties on imported iron.
By Mr. Blair: The petition of citizens of the State of Pennsylvania, praying specific duties on imported iron.

February 24, 1860
By Mr. Trimble: Four petitions of citizens of the State of Ohio, praying the imposition of specific duties on imported iron; which were referred to the Committee of Ways and Means.

February 27, 1860
By Mr. Sherman: The petition of citizens of the State of Ohio, praying specific duty on imported iron.

February 28, 1860
By Mr. Sherman: Two petitions of citizens of the State of Ohio, praying specific duty on imported iron; which were referred to the Committee of Ways and Means.
By Mr. Campbell: The memorial of citizens of the State of Pennsylvania, praying protection to American industry; which was referred to the Committee of Ways and Means.

February 29, 1860
Mr. Cameron presented four petitions of manufacturers, colliers, merchants, farmers, mechanics, miners, and laborers of SchUylkill county, Pennsylvania, praying such a modification of the tariff as will afford protection to the industrial and productive interests of the country; the abolition of, or a change in, the warehouse system; and the substitution of specific for ad valorem duties; which were referred to the Committee on Finance.

Mr. Pugh presented a petition of citizens of Lawrence county, Ohio, praying for specific duties on imported iron; which was referred to the Committee on Finance.
By Mr. Trimble: Four petitions of citizens of the State of Ohio, praying specific duties on imported iron.
By Mr. Campbell: The petition of citizens of the State of Pennsylvania, praying protection to American industry.
By Mr. Corwin: The petition of citizens of the State of Ohio, praying specific duties on imported iron.

March 1, 1860
By Mr. Tompkins: The memorial of citizens of the State of Ohio, for the levying of specific duty on imported iron; which was referred to the Committee of Ways and Means.

March 5, 1860
By Mr. Laban T. Moore: Five petitions of citizens of the State of Kentucky, praying the imposition of specific duties on imported iron.
By Mr. Trimble: Three petitions of citizens of the State of Ohio, praying the imposition of specific duties on imported iron.

March 6, 1860
By Mr. Ashley: The petition of citizens of the State of Ohio, praying specific duties on imported iron; which was referred to the Committee of Ways and Means.
By Mr. Campbell: Seven petitions of citizens of the State of Pennsylvania, praying a tariff with specific duties and increased protection to American labor; which were referred to the Committee of Ways and Means.

March 8, 1860
By Mr. Laban T. Moore: Three memorials of citizens of the State of Kentucky, asking the imposition of specific duties on imported iron; which were referred to the Committee of Ways and Means.
By Mr. Campbell: Seven petitions of citizens of the State of Pennsylvania, praying protection to American industry; which were referred to the Committee of Ways and Means.

March 9, 1860
By Mr. Campbell: Eight petitions of citizens of the State of Pennsylvania, praying specific duties on imported iron.
By Mr. Trimble: Four petitions of citizens of the State of Ohio, praying for specific duties on imported iron.
By Mr. Corwin: Two petitions of citizens of the State of Ohio, praying specific duty on imported iron.

March 13, 1860
By Mr. Green Adams: The memorial of citizens of the State of Kentucky, praying specific duties on imported iron.
By Mr. Trimble: Nine petitions of citizens of the State of Ohio, praying specific duties on imported iron.
By Mr. Campbell: Sixteen petitions of citizens of the State of Pennsylvania, praying specific duties on imported iron.

March 15, 1860
By Mr. Campbell: Seven petitions of citizens of the State of Pennsylvania, in favor of specific duties on imported iron; which were referred to the Committee of Ways and Means.

March 16, 1860
By Mr. Campbell: Seven petitions of citizens of the State of Pennsylvania, praying for specific duties on imported iron; which was referred to the Committee of Ways and Means.

March 19, 1860
By Mr. Ashley: The petition of citizens of the State of Ohio, praying for specific duties on imported iron; which was referred to the Committee of Ways and Means.

March 20, 1860
By Mr. Stratton: The petition of three hundred citizens of Trenton, New Jersey, asking for an increase of specific duties upon certain manufactured articles; which was referred to the Committee of Ways and Means.

March 21, 1860
By Mr. Laban T. Moore: Two petitions of citizens of the State of Kentucky, praying for specific duties on imported iron; which were referred to the Committee of Ways and Means.

March 23, 1860
By Mr. Campbell: Seven petitions of citizens of the State of Pennsylvania, in favor of specific duties on imported iron; which were referred to the Committee of Ways and Means.

April 5, 1860
By Mr. Campbell: Four petitions from citizens of Schuylkill county, Pennsylvania, for a tariff law with increased protection and specific duties on certain articles therein described.
By Mr. Laban T. Moore: Two petitions from citizens of Kentucky, for specific duties on importations of foreign iron.

April 7, 1860
By Mr. Pendleton: The petition of citizens of the State of Ohio, praying for specific duties on imported iron. April 10, 1860
By Mr. Campbell: Seven petitions of citizens of the State of Pennsylvania, praying for specific duties on imported iron; which were referred to the Committee of Ways and Means.

April 13, 1860
By Mr. William Kellogg: The petition of citizens of the State of Illinois, praying for specific duties on articles of fine pottery ware; which was referred to the Committee of Ways and Means.

April 20, 1860
By Mr. Tompkins: The petition of citizens of the State of Ohio, praying for specific duties on imported iron; which was referred to the Committee of Ways and Means.

[trice]

Originally Posted by JohnTaylor

Tim, the larger the market, the greater the elasticity of supply. If your were going to buy a commodity, and, for some reason, you decided only to purchase a commodity in your township, the likelihood of getting it cheap is low. If you are willing to purchase anywhere in your county, then you are more likely to get cheaper. If you are willing to purchase from anywhere in New Jersey, your odds get better. If you are willing to buy from anywhere in the US, your odds get pretty good.
By getting out of the relatively small US customs market, lowering tariffs, and opening their market to world-wide competition, the Confederates were more likely to get their commodities at lower prices, because they would be accessing the world-wide elsticity of supply, whereas, stying in the US, they would be restricted to the US elasticity of supply.
In the example I used with Neil, the size of the customs market is staying the same, only tariffs are going up. The two situations are not analogous.

John, you are deceiving yourself here. The amount of supply has not changed at all.

The sole change is that the secessionists have decided to remove the Northen US source of supply from the internal market and place in in their theoretical new international market. All they have done is move the source of supply from one pocket to the other. In the process of doing that, they have definitely imposed on their previous domestic source of supply a brand new cost (a new tariff), and possibly modestly reduced an existing cost of buying from international sources.

For example, you have told me you are familiar with the work of Carlander and Majewski on the tariffs. If so, you have seen the chart they presented in Imagining “A Great Manufacturing Empire:” Virginia and the Possibilities of a Confederate Tariff called Confederate Imports in 1860

and Confederate Revenue Projects for 1861.

In that, they show a total of 237 million dollars of "imports" into the 11 soon-to-be-Confederate states for 1860. Of that, 37 million came from Europe, and 200 million came from the North. Assuming they bought the same things from the same people and using the 15% rate, that would add a cost of $30 million dollars/year to Southern consumers on the Northern goods with the soon to be passed Confederate tariff. (Actually more in the first year if we start in February because of the higher rates that would be in effect from February to August of 1861 in the Confederacy.)

For the total cost to Confederate consumers to go down as you insist will happen, you need to show savings of more than $30 million dollars somewhere. Either you need Northern manufacturers to cut their prices by 14% or you need the savings from buying European at the lesser tariff to be $30 million, or some combination of the above. Please show how you are going to get there.

For example, here are the 1860 figures in all categories above 10 million dollars:
Cotton Woven goods 27/15

Woolen goods 34/1
Ready-made clothing 24/0
Shoes 30/0
Cast Iron Stoves 11/0
Silk goods 12/0
That is 138/16 split, comprising 154 of the 237 million.

In these five categories, you have added a new cost of 20.7 million in new tariffs if prices do not drop. Assuming the Europeans were paying 24% tariffs here, you have reduced the European price by about 7.8% by changing the tariff side (not absolute, since the goods might have qualified for a discount if in US flag ships and so the change might be less than that.)

If you look at that and assume that US goods will now be substantially more expensive than European, and that *all* of these sales went to Europeans at their existing price plus the 15% tariff, what savings do you end up with? Is your calculation more or less than the $20.7 million dollars your new tariff has potentially added?

Regards,
Tim

[trice]

Originally Posted by Battalion

RED = Items that would be purchased primarily by Southerners...
....since the same are produced and readily available in the North (no need to buy an import). ...

1860 Imports (Value in Millions of $)

Woollen goods (37.9)....Domestic Production: North $63.5 million......South $2 million

Using figures from a 1979 study in the Journal of Economic History, let's see how close your guesses on purchases come.

Actual 1860 figures for "imports" into the soon-to-be Confederate states: 34 million from the North; 1 million from the rest of the world. Less than 3% of the imports.

Originally Posted by Battalion

Silk goods (32.9)..........Domestic Production: North $5,920,571......South $0

Actual 1860 figures for "imports" into the soon-to-be Confederate states: 12 million from the North; something less than 1 million from the rest of the world. Essentially none of the imports.

Originally Posted by Battalion

Cotton goods (32.5)......Domestic Production: North $107.7 million......South $8.1 million

Actual 1860 figures for "imports" into the soon-to-be Confederate states: 27 million from the North; something less than 15 million from the rest of the world. Less than 50% of the imports.

Cotton goods manufactured in the South were generally low-quality and intended for local slave use.

Originally Posted by Battalion

Sugar (31.0)................Domestic Production: North $31,759,697......South $328,937

Not sure. Only figure I have is for Brown sugar. Southern production was of a coarse product and not easily marketable. Other than personal use, largest importer of sugar/molasses was New England.

Originally Posted by Battalion

Coffee (21.8)...............Domestic Production: North $4,012,472......South $27,800

Actual 1860 figures for "imports" into the soon-to-be Confederate states: 0 million from the North; 10 million from the rest of the world. Close to 50% of the imports.

Originally Posted by Battalion

Iron, steel mfrs. (21.5)

Don't know

Originally Posted by Battalion

Linens (10.7)

Actual 1860 figures for "imports" into the soon-to-be Confederate states: 4 million from the North; 1 million from the rest of the world. 9 or 10% of imports.

Originally Posted by Battalion

Tin mfrs. (5.8)

Don't know

Originally Posted by Battalion

Chinaware (4.5)

Don't know

Originally Posted by Battalion

Clocks & watches (2.9)

Don't know

Originally Posted by Battalion

Glass (2.1)

Don't know

Originally Posted by Battalion

Clothing, ready made (2.1)

Actual 1860 figures for "imports" into the soon-to-be Confederate states: 24 million from the North; something less than 1 million from the rest of the world.

Originally Posted by Battalion

Gunny cloth & bags (2.0)

Don't know

Originally Posted by Battalion

Hats & bonnets (1.6)

Actual 1860 figures for "imports" into the soon-to-be Confederate states: 7 million from the North; something less than 1 million from the rest of the world.

Regards,
Tim

[trice]

Originally Posted by JohnTaylor

Terry, I was not quoting any document. The words are mine. What I had in mind was places like Fort Sumter. It is not moveable.
The best that can be done with it (from the US persepctive) is to get reimbursement for the expense of building it.

Nope. The US might find your insistence a bad idea and decide to keep it. No different, really, than Guantanamo Bay or Gibraltar.

Originally Posted by JohnTaylor

As for moveable property, (e.g. equipment in arsenals, etc.), that could be removed.

So how does the US "remove it" if the seceding states have already seized it?

Regards,
Tim

[Battalion]

Originally Posted by trice

Quote:
Originally Posted by Battalion
Silk goods (32.9)..........Domestic Production: North $5,920,571......South $0

Trice-
Actual 1860 figures for "imports" into the soon-to-be Confederate states: 12 million from the North; something less than 1 million from the rest of the world. Essentially none of the imports.

The South purchased $12 million in Silk goods from the North...

.......but the North only produced $5.9 million ?????

Could it be that most of that 12 million are actually imports...coming through northern ports?

[trice]

Originally Posted by Battalion

The South purchased $12 million in Silk goods from the North...
.......but the North only produced $5.9 million ?????
Could it be that most of that 12 million are actually imports...coming through northern ports?

Couldn't tell you, just as I suspect you couldn't tell me the details of the production figure you cite. They might be apples and oranges. It might, for example, be the wholesale price to a middleman, who would then mark it up for resale, and so on and on long before it ever got to the South. The price at the factory would be far less than the price the consumer in Alabama paid, no matter where the production took place, in the North or in Britain, or in the Germanies. Playing with economics number always reveals bizarre things like this. It is normal. All the difference means is that if you want to get better information you need to look further.

Regards,
Tim

[Battalion]

Originally Posted by trice

Couldn't tell you, just as I suspect you couldn't tell me the details of the production figure you cite. They might be apples and oranges. It might, for example, be the wholesale price to a middleman, who would then mark it up for resale, and so on and on long before it ever got to the South. The price at the factory would be far less than the price the consumer in Alabama paid, no matter where the production took place, in the North or in Britain, or in the Germanies. Playing with economics number always reveals bizarre things like this. It is normal. All the difference means is that if you want to get better information you need to look further.

Regards,
Tim

The production of silk goods was the 1860 census (of manufactured items...very detailed). I will check it again later.

***

Many items purchased by Southerners may have gone thru New York City.

If Varina Howell Davis down in Missisippi orders a silk dress out of a Paris catalog (either by mail or a local store)...

...that doesn't necessarily mean the dress will enter the country through Mobile or New Orleans.

[ole]

The price at the factory would be far less than the price the consumer in Alabama paid, no matter where the production took place, in the North or in Britain, or in the Germanies.

Just hooking this phrase to chime in ... again, surprise, surprise!

All of this discussion smacks of southern resentment over the fact that the manufacturers were in the north. Rather than kvetching about it, there was a simple remedy -- industrialize. Outside of that revolting idea, there was no solution -- and its basic silliness resulted in an even sillier notion of secession.

If I may draw a parallel (and even if I may not), we have a similar problem today: gasoline. Rather than increase the supply or diminish demand, we rail about the producers. Duh! Complain, but don't do anything about the complaint. Complaining gets more votes than doing something.

Just a thought.
Ole

[william42]

First, some public property is not moveable, and thus must be occupied by the State authorities eventually, and can only be resolved by negotiation.

So John, you say then that the above words are yours and not in a US Federal document? Then you're basing your assertion on logic? Your logic? Why do you assert that Federal unmoveable property "thus must" be occupied by the state eventually? What makes that so? And why is it that, in your opinion, the US government was obliged to comply with that premise, since there is no Federal law requiring it?


Terry