Was slavery the only reason of the war?

[wilber6150]

The tariff issue had been a point of contention between the North and South for decades starting with the Tariff of 1828. The Morrill Tariff that went before Congress in 1860 was vehemently opposed by the southern states. The tariff issue was also very important to the Union since it provided the major source of tax revenue. In his inaugural address of March 1861, Lincoln practically threatned a military invasion of any state that did not collect its fair share of the federal tariff. In addition, Lincoln issued his Proclamation of Blockade Against Southern Ports in April of 1861 because the tariffs were not able to be collected in the southern states.

But, by 1861 the tariffs were almost at free trade levels and its hardly mentioned in secession documents..The Morrill tariff only passed because the seceeded states had pulled their members of Congress..

 

[seboyle]

Out of curiosity, what year was that?

Edit: oops nevermind.

Actually I think the petition is different than the letter I just posted. IIRC the petition had something like 10 or 20 thousand names on it. I'll have to look it up, give me some time and I'll find it. Pretty sure I found out about it while researching another thread on here about Britian's feelings towards the war.

 

[seboyle]

Apparently not until the Civil War.

http://civilwartalk.com/threads/england-and-cotton.48595/

http://www.english.uga.edu/newsite/fyc/barnett/mays09-10.pdf

http://www.britishempire.co.uk/maproom/egypt.htm

http://www.logan.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0017/7325/richinhistory-kingcotton.pdf

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?hl=en&gbv=2&q=cache:Xa6Wyo2higgJ:http://www.liv.ac.uk/rilas/Publications/paper6.pdf England Alternate Sources Cotton&ct=clnk

As far as I understand it this was the case. I think GB started looking for alternatives during the CW and it wasn't long before Egyptian cotton and Indian cotton were replacing American. I believe it may be true that, because of this, cotton exports to GB never quite regained their pre-war levels. CSA possibly shot itself in the foot there.

 

[cash]

But, by 1861 the tariffs were almost at free trade levels and its hardly mentioned in secession documents..The Morrill tariff only passed because the seceeded states had pulled their members of Congress..

Additionally, Lincoln didn't threaten invasion to collect the tariff. He said he would enforce the laws. The revenue laws were laws of the United States passed in accordance with the Constitution, and the President's constitutional duty is to enforce the laws. The blockade wasn't because of the tariff, though there was a proposal to possibly collect duties offshore--a proposal that never went anywhere.

 

[dvrmte]

Apparently not until the Civil War.

http://civilwartalk.com/threads/england-and-cotton.48595/

http://www.english.uga.edu/newsite/fyc/barnett/mays09-10.pdf

http://www.britishempire.co.uk/maproom/egypt.htm

http://www.logan.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0017/7325/richinhistory-kingcotton.pdf

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?hl=en&gbv=2&q=cache:Xa6Wyo2higgJ:http://www.liv.ac.uk/rilas/Publications/paper6.pdf England Alternate Sources Cotton&ct=clnk

So you're stating that India wasn't trading raw cotton for cotton finished goods in 1843. If so, then you're incorrect.
http://www.spinningtheweb.org.uk/m_display.php?irn=80&sub=trade&theme=industry&crumb=India

 

[dvrmte]

Apparently not until the Civil War.

http://civilwartalk.com/threads/england-and-cotton.48595/

http://www.english.uga.edu/newsite/fyc/barnett/mays09-10.pdf

http://www.britishempire.co.uk/maproom/egypt.htm

http://www.logan.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0017/7325/richinhistory-kingcotton.pdf

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?hl=en&gbv=2&q=cache:Xa6Wyo2higgJ:http://www.liv.ac.uk/rilas/Publications/paper6.pdf England Alternate Sources Cotton&ct=clnk

In 1843 England imported 85% of their cotton from the US but by 1859 it had dropped to 78%. In pounds imported from countries other than the US, 1843 - 98,454,594 lbs.------ 1859 - 264,281,208 lbs.

http://books.google.com/books?id=Yd...british raw cotton imports 1843 india&f=false

 

[Potomac Pride]

But, by 1861 the tariffs were almost at free trade levels and its hardly mentioned in secession documents..The Morrill tariff only passed because the seceeded states had pulled their members of Congress..

The Morrill Tariff was passed by Congress in March of 1861 and replaced the Tariff of 1857. This new tariff act substantially increased tariff rates because it was passed in order to protect northern manufacturers from foreign competition. In his presidential campaign of 1860, Lincoln made the passage of a new tariff a major priority. The south strongly opposed the new tariff as well as most of the Republican party platform. The southern states threatened to secede if Lincoln was elected which they did even before the Morrill Tariff was passed.

 

[KeyserSoze]

The southern states threatened to secede if Lincoln was elected which they did even before the Morrill Tariff was passed.

There threat to secede had nothing to do with the tariff.

 

[rpkennedy]

There threat to secede had nothing to do with the tariff.

Beat me to it, KS.

R

 

[wilber6150]

The Morrill Tariff was passed by Congress in March of 1861 and replaced the Tariff of 1857. This new tariff act substantially increased tariff rates because it was passed in order to protect northern manufacturers from foreign competition. In his presidential campaign of 1860, Lincoln made the passage of a new tariff a major priority. The south strongly opposed the new tariff as well as most of the Republican party platform. The southern states threatened to secede if Lincoln was elected which they did even before the Morrill Tariff was passed.

Except it only passed because the states seceeded, and ditto what RP and KS said lol

 

[OpnCoronet]

In point of historical fact, al thel 'other' issues most often cited by csa appologists, usually disappear if not for their relationship to slavery, i.e., take any(or perhaps, all) of those 'others' and view them in the context of there being no 'peculiar institution' of the south, would they be beyond the normal political processes provided by the Constitution?

 

[cash]

So you're stating that India wasn't trading raw cotton for cotton finished goods in 1843. If so, then you're incorrect.
http://www.spinningtheweb.org.uk/m_display.php?irn=80&sub=trade&theme=industry&crumb=India

I said very clearly that England apparently wasn't looking to replace US cotton until the Civil War. Please refrain from claiming I said something I very clearly didn't say.

 

[cash]

In 1843 England imported 85% of their cotton from the US but by 1859 it had dropped to 78%. In pounds imported from countries other than the US, 1843 - 98,454,594 lbs.------ 1859 - 264,281,208 lbs.

http://books.google.com/books?id=YdEoAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA98&lpg=PA98&dq=british raw cotton imports 1843 india&source=bl&ots=jCu2tGvlcC&sig=8GB4jeHgkyhaIxbPgfNtM__yuHo&hl=en&sa=X&ei=2TQoT-CWCYa6tweZmNHaBA&sqi=2&ved=0CCoQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=british raw cotton imports 1843 india&f=false

Doesn't look like they were replacing the US. An 8% decrease isn't too significant.

 

[cash]

The Morrill Tariff was passed by Congress in March of 1861 and replaced the Tariff of 1857. This new tariff act substantially increased tariff rates because it was passed in order to protect northern manufacturers from foreign competition. In his presidential campaign of 1860, Lincoln made the passage of a new tariff a major priority. The south strongly opposed the new tariff as well as most of the Republican party platform. The southern states threatened to secede if Lincoln was elected which they did even before the Morrill Tariff was passed.

Which means the Morrill Tariff didn't cause the cotton states to secede, especially since they could have bottled it up forever in the Senate.

Wonder what "most of the Republican Party platform" consisted of. Hmmm.

 

[KeyserSoze]

Which means the Morrill Tariff didn't cause the cotton states to secede, especially since they could have bottled it up forever in the Senate.

Wonder what "most of the Republican Party platform" consisted of. Hmmm.

From a speech given by Henry Benning, Secession Commissioner from Georgia, to the Virginia secession convention:

"Then the question is, will you have protection necessary to accomplish this result? I say I think you will. I do not come here, as I said at the outset, to make promises; but I will give my opinion, and that is that the South will support itself by duties on imports. It has certainly begun to do that. We have merely adopted the revenue system of the United States so far, and are now collecting the revenue under an old law. Our Constitution has said that Congress should have the power to lay duties for revenue, to pay debts and to carry on the government, and therefore there is a limit to the extent that this protection can go, and within that the South can give protection that will be sufficient to enable you to compete with the North. We have got to have a navy, and an army, and we have got to make up that army speedily. It must be a much larger army than we have been accustomed to have in the late Union-it must be large in proportion to the armv that it will have to meet. These things will require a revenue of about 10 per cent, which will yield an aggregate of about $20,000,000, and with this per cent, it would be in the power of Virginia to compete, in a short time, with all the nations of the earth in all the important branches of manufacture. Why? Because manufacturing has now been brought to such perfection by the invention of new machinery. The result will be the immigration of the best men of the North; skilled artizans and men of capital will come here and establish works among you. You have the advantage of longer days and shorter winters, and of being nearer to the raw material of a very important article of manufacture. I have no idea that the duties will be as low as 10 per cent. My own opinion is that we shall have as high duty as is now charged by the General Government at Washington. If that matter is regarded as important by this Convention, why the door is open for negotiation with us. We have but a provisional and temporary government so far. If it be found that Virginia requires more protection than this upon any particular article of manufacture let her come in the spirit of a sister, to our Congress and say, we want more protection upon this or that article, and she will, I have no doubt, receive it. She will be met in the most fraternal and complying spirit."

Tariffs couldn't have been that big a bone of contention if people like Benning were telling Virginia that they could have as high a protective tariff as they wanted.

 

[Potomac Pride]

Except it only passed because the states seceeded, and ditto what RP and KS said lol

Yes, you had already mentioned the tariff only passed because the southern states had seceded in your previous post. The southern states had stated they would secede upon the election of Lincoln in the election of 1860. They realized that with the new Republican administration their political power was eroding. They feared the new administration would pass legislation harmful to the economy of the south and decided to secede even before Lincoln took office. The southern states were opposed to the Republican party platform regarding the restriction of slavery into the new territories as well as other issues such as protective tariffs and internal improvements. The slavery issue was the most important factor that caused secession; however, the tariff issue had been a source of sectional disagreement for decades. In addition, tariffs were even discussed at the secession conventions of several states. The state of South Carolina, in one of their secession documents issued an offer to the other southern states to form the Confederacy, citing as the reason "the Consolidation of the North to rule the South, by the tariff and slavery issues..."

 

[James B White]

The reasons Southerners give for secession back then seems to depend very much on who their audience was..Slavery was unpopular to England, so its natural that they talk about tariffs.. But look into the debates of the secession conventions and the documents, tariffs were a very minor issue...While slavery and things connected to it were the critical issues for the cotton 7..

That's exactly what I'm saying. It was an issue, but a minor one--and of course even it led back to slavery, since a north that had the political power to pass a northern-biased tariff could start passing other laws that negatively impacted you-know-what. Yet unfortunately, anyone today who says the tariff was an issue at all, can get lumped with those trying to spin the causes for modern purposes.

 

[dvrmte]

Doesn't look like they were replacing the US. An 8% decrease isn't too significant.

Look at the pounds difference between 1843 and 1859, that's a huge increase in cotton coming from outside the US. I wonder what the increase was for India in percentage.

 

[dvrmte]

I said very clearly that England apparently wasn't looking to replace US cotton until the Civil War. Please refrain from claiming I said something I very clearly didn't say.

When I grow up I want to be like you, I'm just practicing now.

 

[Ellsworth avenger]

Tarriffs? pleaseme!