Tariffs Forced Southern States to Secede

Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

BigTex

Corporal
Joined
May 19, 2019
Messages
259
More sources:
Tariff of 1816
Tariff of 1824 the "Sectional Tariff"
Tariff of 1828 the "Tariff of Abominations"
Tariff of 1832
Tariff of 1833
John Randolph, on the Tariff of 1816, makes the issue clear:
"It eventuates in this: whether you, as a planter will consent to be taxed, in order to hire another man to go to work in a shoemaker's shop, or to set up a spinning jenny. For my part I will not agree to it, even though they should, by way of return, agree to be taxed to help us to plant tobacco; much less will I agree to pay all, and receive nothing for it. No, I will buy where I can get manufactures cheapest; I will not agree to lay a duty on the cultivators of the soil to encourage exotic manufactures; because, after all, we should only get much worse things at a much higher price, and we, the cultivators of the country, would in the end pay all."

The result of these Tariffs was, in the words of Senator Benton in 1828, in the Senate :
" I feel for the sad changes which have taken place in the South during the last fifty years. Before the Revolution, it was the seat of wealth as well as of hospitality. Money and all it commanded abounded there. But how now?All this is reversed. Wealth has fled from the South and settled in the regions North of the Potomac; and this in the face of the fact that the South in four staples alone has exported produce since the Revolution, to the value of eight hundred millions of dollars; and the North has exported comparatively nothing. Such an export would indicate unparalleled wealth, but what is the fact? In the place of wealth a universal pressure for money was felt---nor enough for current expenses ---the price of all property down ----the country drooping and languishing ---towns and cities decaying ---and the frugal habits of the people pushed to the verge of universal self-denial for the preservation of their family estates. Such a result is a strange and wonderful phenomenon. It calls upon statesmen to enquire into the cause; and if they enquire upon the theatre of this strange metamorphosis they will receive one universal answer from all ranks and ages, that it is Federal legislation which has worked this ruin."......"No Tariff has yet included Virginia, the two Carolinas, and Georgia, except to increase the burdens imposed upon them."

Clearly the historical facts prove out that the South was forced by the North into Secession and thus it is, to this day referred to as the "War of Northern Aggression " by Southerners.
Men behind curtains
 
Last edited by a moderator:

unionblue

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Member of the Year
Joined
Feb 20, 2005
Messages
30,061
Location
Ocala, FL (as of December, 2015).
More sources:
Tariff of 1816
Tariff of 1824 the "Sectional Tariff"
Tariff of 1828 the "Tariff of Abominations"
Tariff of 1832
Tariff of 1833
John Randolph, on the Tariff of 1816, makes the issue clear:
"It eventuates in this: whether you, as a planter will consent to be taxed, in order to hire another man to go to work in a shoemaker's shop, or to set up a spinning jenny. For my part I will not agree to it, even though they should, by way of return, agree to be taxed to help us to plant tobacco; much less will I agree to pay all, and receive nothing for it. No, I will buy where I can get manufactures cheapest; I will not agree to lay a duty on the cultivators of the soil to encourage exotic manufactures; because, after all, we should only get much worse things at a much higher price, and we, the cultivators of the country, would in the end pay all."

The result of these Tariffs was, in the words of Senator Benton in 1828, in the Senate :
" I feel for the sad changes which have taken place in the South during the last fifty years. Before the Revolution, it was the seat of wealth as well as of hospitality. Money and all it commanded abounded there. But how now?All this is reversed. Wealth has fled from the South and settled in the regions North of the Potomac; and this in the face of the fact that the South in four staples alone has exported produce since the Revolution, to the value of eight hundred millions of dollars; and the North has exported comparatively nothing. Such an export would indicate unparalleled wealth, but what is the fact? In the place of wealth a universal pressure for money was felt---nor enough for current expenses ---the price of all property down ----the country drooping and languishing ---towns and cities decaying ---and the frugal habits of the people pushed to the verge of universal self-denial for the preservation of their family estates. Such a result is a strange and wonderful phenomenon. It calls upon statesmen to enquire into the cause; and if they enquire upon the theatre of this strange metamorphosis they will receive one universal answer from all ranks and ages, that it is Federal legislation which has worked this ruin."......"No Tariff has yet included Virginia, the two Carolinas, and Georgia, except to increase the burdens imposed upon them."

Clearly the historical facts prove out that the South was forced by the North into Secession and thus it is, to this day referred to as the "War of Northern Aggression " by Southerners.
Men behind curtains
Source for the above, please.
 

wbull1

First Sergeant
Official Vendor
Joined
Jul 26, 2018
Messages
1,098
Thanks for using sources for your statement. I notice the closest statement to the Civil War is from 1833. https://www.battlefields.org/learn/articles/reasons-secession is a documentary study of the reasons for secession based on the statements of the reasons for secession given by the seceding states that listed their grievances. The only state that included any concern with economic domination by the North was Georgia. The study concluded that such concerns made up 15% of Georgia's statement. So to me, the main issue with your concept is that Confederates barely mentioned economic matters at all. Slavery, States right and Lincoln election were all more prominent according to those who seceded at the time they seceded. I take them at their word.
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

leftyhunter

Colonel
Joined
May 27, 2011
Messages
17,045
Location
los angeles ca
More sources:
Tariff of 1816
Tariff of 1824 the "Sectional Tariff"
Tariff of 1828 the "Tariff of Abominations"
Tariff of 1832
Tariff of 1833
John Randolph, on the Tariff of 1816, makes the issue clear:
"It eventuates in this: whether you, as a planter will consent to be taxed, in order to hire another man to go to work in a shoemaker's shop, or to set up a spinning jenny. For my part I will not agree to it, even though they should, by way of return, agree to be taxed to help us to plant tobacco; much less will I agree to pay all, and receive nothing for it. No, I will buy where I can get manufactures cheapest; I will not agree to lay a duty on the cultivators of the soil to encourage exotic manufactures; because, after all, we should only get much worse things at a much higher price, and we, the cultivators of the country, would in the end pay all."

The result of these Tariffs was, in the words of Senator Benton in 1828, in the Senate :
" I feel for the sad changes which have taken place in the South during the last fifty years. Before the Revolution, it was the seat of wealth as well as of hospitality. Money and all it commanded abounded there. But how now?All this is reversed. Wealth has fled from the South and settled in the regions North of the Potomac; and this in the face of the fact that the South in four staples alone has exported produce since the Revolution, to the value of eight hundred millions of dollars; and the North has exported comparatively nothing. Such an export would indicate unparalleled wealth, but what is the fact? In the place of wealth a universal pressure for money was felt---nor enough for current expenses ---the price of all property down ----the country drooping and languishing ---towns and cities decaying ---and the frugal habits of the people pushed to the verge of universal self-denial for the preservation of their family estates. Such a result is a strange and wonderful phenomenon. It calls upon statesmen to enquire into the cause; and if they enquire upon the theatre of this strange metamorphosis they will receive one universal answer from all ranks and ages, that it is Federal legislation which has worked this ruin."......"No Tariff has yet included Virginia, the two Carolinas, and Georgia, except to increase the burdens imposed upon them."

Clearly the historical facts prove out that the South was forced by the North into Secession and thus it is, to this day referred to as the "War of Northern Aggression " by Southerners.
Men behind curtains
What exact imported items were so vital to Southern whites that it was worth sacrificing their son's over?
Leftyhunter
 

John Fenton

Corporal
Joined
Apr 18, 2019
Messages
481
Location
retired traveling
Clearly the historical facts prove out that the South was forced by the North into Secession and thus it is, to this day referred to as the "War of Northern Aggression " by Southerners.
Men behind curtains
Clearly the historical facts that prove that the South was not forced by the North into secession were left out.
The Walker tariff of 1846 and the tariff of 1857 were written and passed by southern democrats and signed into law by Polk ( walker tariff), a southern democrat and pierce a northern pro-slavery democrat.
So who are the men behind the curtains ?
With respect, John
 
Last edited:
Joined
Mar 7, 2009
Messages
6,839
Location
About 47 miles Northwest of the Canadian border
What items were Southerners purchasing from foreign countries that they were singled out to pay high tariffs on? According to the 36th Congress, 53% of the tariff collected during 1858-1859 came from these top 10 items:

Item ............. % of tariff .. % to Slave States
Brown sugar ....... 14.8% ...... 9.6%
Silk piece goods .... 8.1% ...... 0.7%
Cotton piece goods. 8.0% ...... 7.9%
Wool piece goods .. 5.5% ...... 2.2%
Worsted woolens ... 4.7% ...... 1.4%
Cigars ................... 2.8% ...... 29.3%
Linens ................... 2.7% ...... 5.3%
Molasses ............... 2.5% ...... 11.7%
Bar Iron ................ 2.0% ...... 7.2%
Brandy ...................2.0% ...... 11.4%

The chart shows that 29.3% of the imported cigars went to the South. Just about all Southerners on this board claim that their ancestors were non-slave owning poor or just average Joe farmers. Were the poor and common Southerner the purchasers of these imported cigars? And, who payed the tariff on the other 70.7% of the imported cigars that made their way into the country? I guess a lot of poor Southerners ended up that way because they spent what little money they had on imported brandy and cigars. Virginia tobacco and local shine just wasn't good enough for them. All along the truth has been concealed by the North but it has finally come out. And to think that at all of those secessionist leaning Southern unity conventions during the 1850's such as the Montgomery Commercial Convention, the Knoxville Commercial Convention or the Vicksburg Convention, weren't about disunion to protect the institution of slavery. The Alabama platform or the disruption of the 1860 Charleston Convention and the State secession declarations weren't over slavery related issues. We now know that the likes of Yancey, De Bow, Ruffin, and other disunionists were actually advocating secession to protect the common Southerner from high tariffs on their imported brandy, cigars, and silks.
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

leftyhunter

Colonel
Joined
May 27, 2011
Messages
17,045
Location
los angeles ca
Clearly the historical facts that prove that the South was not forced by the North into secession were left out.
The Walker tariff of 1846 and the tariff of 1857 were written and passed by southern democrats and signed into law by Polk , a southern democrat.
So who are the men behind the curtains ?
With respect, John
Also their were tariffs in rice,sugar and tobacco which protected Southern farmers.
Leftyhunter
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

leftyhunter

Colonel
Joined
May 27, 2011
Messages
17,045
Location
los angeles ca
What did the South have that the North needed so desperately that they wou l d sacrifice their sons for?
To keep the United States a United States. So far in my eleven years on this forum not one proponent of the theory that the secessionists fought over tariffs can provide any examples of what items were so vital to the survival of Southern whites that they need to resort to war.
Leftyhunter
 

BigTex

Corporal
Joined
May 19, 2019
Messages
259
To keep the United States a United States. So far in my eleven years on this forum not one proponent of the theory that the secessionists fought over tariffs can provide any examples of what items were so vital to the survival of Southern whites that they need to resort to war.
Leftyhunter
Firstly, the Southern whites did not resort to war. They chose to secede and did so peaceably. The North chose war.
"The truth is, that every constitutional compact, whether between the people of a single State, or between sovereign States themselves, for a voluntary association; the one between individuals, and the other between sovereign States. Hence, if the right if secession be denied in either case, and the denial enforced by the sword of coercion; the nature of the polity is changed, and freedom is at an end. It is no longer a government by consent, but a government of force. Conquest is substituted for compact, and the dream of Liberty is over."
Albert Taylor Bledsoe
From his published book in 1866.
"IS DAVIS A TRAITOR?
or
Was Secession a Constitutional Right Previous to the War of 1861
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

John Fenton

Corporal
Joined
Apr 18, 2019
Messages
481
Location
retired traveling
What did the South have that the North needed so desperately that they wou l d sacrifice their sons for?
A large portion of the nation. If the nation could splinter once it could splinter into many smaller states competing and waring with the chaos of Europe. Plus we already had states on the west coast and “manifest destiny” seemed near completion.
 

leftyhunter

Colonel
Joined
May 27, 2011
Messages
17,045
Location
los angeles ca
Firstly, the Southern whites did not resort to war. They chose to secede and did so peaceably. The North chose war.
"The truth is, that every constitutional compact, whether between the people of a single State, or between sovereign States themselves, for a voluntary association; the one between individuals, and the other between sovereign States. Hence, if the right if secession be denied in either case, and the denial enforced by the sword of coercion; the nature of the polity is changed, and freedom is at an end. It is no longer a government by consent, but a government of force. Conquest is substituted for compact, and the dream of Liberty is over."
Albert Taylor Bledsoe
From his published book in 1866.
"IS DAVIS A TRAITOR?
or
Was Secession a Constitutional Right Previous to the War of 1861
We have many threads on the question of the legality or lack there of concerning Secession.
Can we stick to your OP? I posted a simple question what exact imported items were do vital that Southern parents would willingly sacrifice their sons over?
Leftyhunter
 

John Fenton

Corporal
Joined
Apr 18, 2019
Messages
481
Location
retired traveling
Was Secession a Constitutional Right Previous to the War of 1861
It was undecided and had not gone to the Supreme Court. However the case that resolved the issue in retrospect declared that the perpetual union pledge of the AOC and ratification of the constitution had already bound those states that seceded in the civil war and had the issue been before the court earlier the finding would be the same, if i understand the case properly.
Respectfully, John
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

WJC

Major General
Moderator
Thread Medic
Answered the Call for Reinforcements
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
12,820
the Southern whites did not resort to war. They chose to secede and did so peaceably.
Not really. Remember, prior to Lincoln's inauguration, the seceding states seized fifty-six U. S. forts, arsenals, and ships and forced the surrender of one-seventh of the U. S. Army.
<Dayton Pryor, The Beginning and the End: The Civil War Story of Federal Surrenders Before Fort Sumter and Confederate Surrenders After Appomattox. (Berwyn Heights, MD: Heritage Books, 2002).
All over the tariff?
 

BigTex

Corporal
Joined
May 19, 2019
Messages
259
It was undecided and had not gone to the Supreme Court. However the case that resolved the issue in retrospect declared that the perpetual union pledge of the AOC and ratification of the constitution had already bound those states that seceded in the civil war and had the issue been before the court earlier the finding would be the same, if i understand the case properly.
Respectfully, John
So, Massachusetts in 1815 was incorrect in their claim to a right of secession? The founders also?
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

WJC

Major General
Moderator
Thread Medic
Answered the Call for Reinforcements
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
12,820
***Posted as Moderator***
As has been pointed out, the topic is Tariffs. Please stay on topic. If there are other topics you want to discuss, start a new thread: don't derail this one!
 

John Fenton

Corporal
Joined
Apr 18, 2019
Messages
481
Location
retired traveling
It was not the tariffs on the imported goods, rather it was the tariff on the Cotton going out.
http://civilwarcause.com/relationship.html
There was no tax on exports that i know of however buying fewer imports from cotton buying countries would lower cotton revenues if they bought less cotton. But again the southern democrats controlled congress and the exec branch when the tariffs in operation from 1846 were imposed and could have voted down the morill tariff if they had not seceded.
Also they imposed an embargo of cotton exports to force recognition by England and France , their two largest importers.
They simply did not think this thing through, imo.
Respectfully, John
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!
Top