Southern Unionists or Anti-Secession Southerners?

[ole]

Virginia raised most of its money by taxing property. Tools were taxed as property, but slaves under 12 were exempt. This shifted the burden of taxation from the east, to the west.

Whoa! I don't understand that one. Would you explain that for me?

As the west had virtually no slaves, how did the exemption of pre-teens affect them? By dint of their more numerous tools? I can see that westerners thought that the exemption was an unfair benefit to the easterners, but I don't see where the burden was significantly shifted. If the exemption were lifted, the required revenue would be met with a greater burden to the slaveowning easterners and a lessened levy on the west. Perhaps you meant to say "shifted some of the burden..."

With thanks in advance,
Ole

[JohnTaylor]

Originally Posted by ole

Whoa! I don't understand that one. Would you explain that for me?

As the west had virtually no slaves, how did the exemption of pre-teens affect them? By dint of their more numerous tools? I can see that westerners thought that the exemption was an unfair benefit to the easterners, but I don't see where the burden was significantly shifted. If the exemption were lifted, the required revenue would be met with a greater burden to the slaveowning easterners and a lessened levy on the west. Perhaps you meant to say "shifted some of the burden..."

Ole, you are right, the proposed change would shift some of the burden. If all property was taxed at the same rate, but young slaves were exempted, then on a percentage basis, more of the burden of taxes fell on western non-slaveowners. Westerners wanted young slaves taxed like every other form of property. Easterners countered that young slaves weren't eceonomically productive (which was not encessarily true), and therefore should not be taxed at all. I believe that it suited easterner slaveowners who would sell off a number of their slaves each year, when they reached a certain age. Basically, this was a case in which the easterner slaveowners used the system to protect their interests. Westerners disapproved, and, just like the south in the north-south economic exploitation, western victims of that exploitation left Virginia like southern victims of the north-south economic exploitation left the Union. (although in neither case am I suggesting that the perceived economic exploitation was sufficient to cause the secession, just that it helped cause secession).
Respectfully,
John Taylor

[ole]

Thanks eversomuch, Mr. Taylor. I thought that was the case, but ***-u-me .... However, I will speculate with reckless abandon.

I suspect that the westerners paid, per capita, less than the easterners (fewer toys, slaves, carraige horses, etc.). They saw a way to make that gap a little deeper in their favor. Conversely, the easterners wanted to keep things the way they were. Politics as usual.

(although in neither case am I suggesting that the perceived economic exploitation was sufficient to cause the secession, just that it helped cause secession)

If you were suggesting it, I'm satisfied that you'd have said so.

I'll close by suggesting that the role of the exemption in the subsequent secession is much like the Confederacy's claim of unfair taxation and expenditures. By themselves, they don't look like much, but the length of the list impresses those who don't know what you're talking about. (The you is editorial, as in "We are not amused.")

Ole

[JohnTaylor]

Originally Posted by ole

Thanks eversomuch, Mr. Taylor. I thought that was the case, but ***-u-me .... However, I will speculate with reckless abandon.

Originally Posted by ole

I suspect that the westerners paid, per capita, less than the easterners (fewer toys, slaves, carraige horses, etc.). They saw a way to make that gap a little deeper in their favor. Conversely, the easterners wanted to keep things the way they were. Politics as usual.

I'll close by suggesting that the role of the exemption in the subsequent secession is much like the Confederacy's claim of unfair taxation and expenditures. By themselves, they don't look like much, but the length of the list impresses those who don't know what you're talking about. (The you is editorial, as in "We are not amused.")

Economic exploitation of the western counties, (via what they considered unfair taxes, which exempted young slaves) was indeed a major reason for wanting to leave Virginia. A couple of quotes will do to illustrate the point.

On April 3rd, Mr. Stuart (of Dodderidge County) said “If the East will not give the West a compromise on taxation, the Commonwealth may be split. The West has fought to defend the interests of the East on the slavery question.” (Virginia Convention, vol. 3, pg. 287.)

On April 6th, Mr. Jackson says that if a Border Confederacy is formed, the Western counties will stay, but “if you intended to hitch us to South Carolina we would not go with you.” Montague tells the “eastern men to note what he said.” (Virginia Convention, vol. 3, pg. 287.)

On April 11th, Cyrus Hall says that if Gov. Wise “wants to save the life of Virginia, give to the West her just demands. … This system of unjust and unequal taxes is at this very hour doing more to crush out the very vitals of Virginia than anything else.” (Virginia Convention, vol. 3, pg. 526)

Also on April 11th, Summers said "if we separate from Ohio and impose a tariff in Ohio goods, it will effectively prohibit trade with Ohio. The Southwest of Virginia sells an immense amount of salt to Tennessee and Tennessee sells cattle and corn to Virginia. Virginia cattle are sold in Baltimore, Philadelphia and New York. One cannot cut off ties with these “without destruction" to western Virginia. "For this reason I have been for co-operation throughout, and shall be for co-operation.” Men should be governed by their interest, and just because nature ordains that the interest of western Virginia lie with the Border States does not mean they lack patriotism. (Virginia Convention, vol. 3, pg. 583)

Respectfully,
John Taylor

[trice]

Originally Posted by JohnTaylor

...
On April 6th, Mr. Jackson says that if a Border Confederacy is formed, the Western counties will stay, but “if you intended to hitch us to South Carolina we would not go with you.” Montague tells the “eastern men to note what he said.” (Virginia Convention, vol. 3, pg. 287.)

A good point and an important one for understanding why western interests diverged from eastern in Virginia. For reasons of geography as well as transportation systems, the western counties were more aligned with the Ohio Valley, Pittsburgh, and Maryland than they were with the Tidewater. From Harpers Ferry, the best/fastest way to get to Richmond was to take the B&O to Baltimore and then take a ship the James River.

Originally Posted by JohnTaylor

...

Originally Posted by JohnTaylor

Also on April 11th, Summers said "if we separate from Ohio and impose a tariff in Ohio goods, it will effectively prohibit trade with Ohio. The Southwest of Virginia sells an immense amount of salt to Tennessee and Tennessee sells cattle and corn to Virginia. Virginia cattle are sold in Baltimore, Philadelphia and New York. One cannot cut off ties with these “without destruction" to western Virginia. "For this reason I have been for co-operation throughout, and shall be for co-operation.” Men should be governed by their interest, and just because nature ordains that the interest of western Virginia lie with the Border States does not mean they lack patriotism. (Virginia Convention, vol. 3, pg. 583)

Another good point. The Western counties had diffficult connections to the Deep South and even eastern VA or NC. A closed border or an economic embargo or a high tariff on the OHIO/Potomac might mean total economic devastation to these people.

Regards,
Tim

[JohnTaylor]

On March 27th, Mr. Turner (of Jackson County, soon to be West Virginia) called for equitable distribution of the tax burden between the east and the west. The people of the west “are watching how their delegates deal with this. Just as many believe that the Southern is a tributary to the North, so many of the west feel that they are tributaries of the East.” (Virginia Convention, vol. 2, pg. 431.)

On April 11th, Cyrus Hall (of Ritchie County, soon to be West Virginia) says that if Gov. Wise “wants to save the life of Virginia, give to the West her just demands. … This system of unjust and unequal taxes is at this very hour doing more to crush out the very vitals of Virginia than anything else.” If the injustice continues, the Underground Railroad will cross over into Virginia, even into the Valley, and even tunnel underneath it. The people of the west are called Abolitionists, but they are merely interested in dollars and cents. The Eastern men said changes to taxation provisions of the Constitution were not discussed prior to the elections for the Convention, but in the West, they certainly were. The East exempts its property when they have more wealth, and the State has not spend more than $2M on internal improvements in the west. Hall says he will fight to defend “this slave property of yours;” he only wants that property to pay for its defense. (Virginia Convention, vol. 2, pg. 526-528).

Mr. Treadway of (Pittsylvania County) said that the charge that the men of the Northwest are not sufficiently loyal is not justified. (Virginia Convention, vol. 2, pg. 728).

In other words, perception of sectional economic exploitation was a cause for the western Virginians to want out of the Commonwealth. As Hall says, he (and his section) is “loyal” on the question of slavery, but men like Turner & Hall just don’t like the imbalance in taxation.
Respectfully,
John Taylor

[johan_steele]

gents... thanks for an informative thread. Lets see some more!! Hurry up I just finished the books I brought w/ me on this trip & need some new heavy reading.

[whitworth]

I use to travel through many of the southern states. I would then look at the land and decide what the general secession feeling was for the population. The more mountaineous; the more loyalty for the Union. The North Georgia mountains, the Eastern Tennesee area, western North Carolina and western Virginia were hotbeds of Union support.

Over the last few years, I'd get small disclosures of Confederate troubles in various parts of the Confederacy due to Union support.

For example, in Ploughshares Into Swords by Frank E. Vandiver, he notes, "The opposition of citizens in North Carolina hampered the commanding officer of the Salisbury laboratory in getting walnut for gunstocks, since the main source of this timber lay in an area populated by disaffected persons;..."

[larry_cockerham]

I'm not sure exactly what "disaffected persons" means, but I grew up about 75-100 miles west of Salisbury in the mountains. I do know that mountain folk didn't take kindly to flatlanders messing with their walnut.

[JohnTaylor]

Originally Posted by larry_cockerham

I'm not sure exactly what "disaffected persons" means, but I grew up about 75-100 miles west of Salisbury in the mountains. I do know that mountain folk didn't take kindly to flatlanders messing with their walnut.

In the book The Heart of Confederate Appalachia, about North Carolina mountaineer attitudes, authors Taylor and Inscoe say that North Carolina mountaineers were not so much pro-Union, as anti-central (i.e. Confederate) government. They differed from their eastern Tennessee neighbors in that regard.
Actually, the mountain counties of western North Carolina volunteered for military service in 1861 at a greater rate than Piedmont and coastal NC counties. Only later, after the Conscription Act and impressment of supplies did Carolina mountaineers turn against the Confederate authorities.

One of my favorite anecdotes from western North Carolina was from the spring of 1861 (sorry, but I can't remember the source). At a public meeting in Ashville, NC, speaker after speaker had started his discourse by talking about South Carolina (e.g. "South Carolina has led the way..." or "South Carolina has raised the standard..."). Eventually, when the main speaker got up to speak, and initiated his speech with the words, "South Carolina...", an old mountaineer in the audience had had enough. He rose up to his full height, and shouted, "For God's sake, let South Carolina nullify, revolute, secess and be d_mned!"
Respectfully,
John Taylor