Economic Aspects Of Southern Sectionalism, 1840-1861 Russel

Joined
Apr 4, 2017
Messages
7,634
Location
Denver, CO
#61
This economic series is a good one. Despite the shared problems that slavery created in the 15 states, the differences were significant.
Missouri had a strong stake in western development. Baltimore had already become a railroad town connected to the Midwest. Kentucky was selling tobacco and hogs in both directions, north and south, which is why Kentucky Whigs wanted the US economy to grow.
The sugar district in Louisiana was also selling domestically and wanted the tariff wall to protect them, not exclude them. The extreme counties of Western Virginia were similar. For financial and family reasons, they did not want to separate from Ohio and Pennsylvania.
Former Whigs like Lincoln and Seward knew there were divisions in southern white society that they could wedge apart.
 

(Membership has it privileges! To remove this ad: Register NOW!)
Joined
Apr 4, 2017
Messages
7,634
Location
Denver, CO
#62
The biggest difference was probably that Texas had unlimited potential. Texas was made for railroads, like the corn belt states. It is my impression that after the secessionist fever died down, the nationalist Democrats in Texas waited out the war. There were a number of none fights in Texas, both in El Paso and on the Gulf coast. I think Grant particularly knew that Texas left to its own devices would re-ally with the US. When Quantrill tried to kick up support for the Confederacy in east Texas, the locals kicked him out.
 



(Membership has it privileges! To remove this ad: Register NOW!)
Top