The Real Cause of the Civil War: In 1860, Southern Plantation Owners owed $1 billion+ to NY Banks

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

wbull1

First Sergeant
Official Vendor
Joined
Jul 26, 2018
Messages
1,099
There is interesting information on this thread, as there are on other threads about one single "real" cause of the war. I respectfully submit that there is no single "real" cause, but rather it the war was overdetermined, i.e., multiple factors were involved to varying degrees which are actually related to each other.
 

jgoodguy

Banished Forever
-:- A Mime -:-
is a terrible thing...
Don’t feed the Mime
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
35,519
Location
Birmingham, Alabama
There is interesting information on this thread, as there are on other threads about one single "real" cause of the war. I respectfully submit that there is no single "real" cause, but rather it the war was overdetermined, i.e., multiple factors were involved to varying degrees which are actually related to each other.
Shooting at Fort Sumter is the proximate cause. Slavery is at the bottom of most if not all the rest.
 

Norm53

Sergeant
Joined
Feb 13, 2019
Messages
786
Location
Cape May, NJ
For 150 years, Southerners have clung to 'The Cause' of States Rights for why the Civil War was fought. In an attempt to rewrite history and thus promote their 'righteousness', even some Neo-Confederates on this forum and elsewhere continue their propaganda of "The Civil War wasn't fought over slavery." Not only was the Civil War all about the struggle to free the African-American slaves, Southerners have attempted to mute how the Rebels never took black Union soldiers prisoner - they were always ruthlessly shot! Furthermore, the real reason for the Southern Secession movement has been effectively kept out of the history books. In 1860, Southern plantation owners were greatly in debt to New York City banks to the tune of over $1 billion dollars! That was a HUGE amount of money back then and no matter how much cotton they sold, they could never pay it back. The plantation owners figured if they could get the Southern States leaders to secede, then they wouldn't have to repay their debts. Wow! I was never taught that in school; you won't find that 'little fact' in a college textbook, battlefield park gift shop or History Channel program.

The combined worth of the African slaves in the Southern States was greater than all the other combined wealth in the United States. Yes, money and greed were the real cause of the Civil War but that wouldn't get hundreds of thousands of Southern men to fight and maybe die for that! So the slave owners' propaganda was "States rights and no Northerners coming down here and telling us how to live!"

Have you heard of anything more evil? Of course, the Northern bankers were also at fault. Their lending practices forced the plantation owners to take drastic actions! It's time to write the truth in the history books.
Since no one can provide facts that link the debt as a cause of going to war, we'll just consider this another excuse to write something - anything - on the war
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

Old_Glory

2nd Lieutenant
Joined
Sep 26, 2010
Messages
2,951
Location
NC
There is interesting information on this thread, as there are on other threads about one single "real" cause of the war. I respectfully submit that there is no single "real" cause, but rather it the war was overdetermined, i.e., multiple factors were involved to varying degrees which are actually related to each other.
This is where all sensible people end up after studying the war from both sides perspective. I tend to lean towards any cause that states it was over money and/or political power.
 
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
12,857
This is where all sensible people end up after studying the war from both sides perspective. I tend to lean towards any cause that states it was over money and/or political power.
I don't know about the "all sensible people", but it is certainly true that Southern slaveholders were not pleased with the idea that their $5.8 billion 'walking capital' might be freed.
 

jgoodguy

Banished Forever
-:- A Mime -:-
is a terrible thing...
Don’t feed the Mime
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
35,519
Location
Birmingham, Alabama
I don't know about the "all sensible people", but it is certainly true that Southern slaveholders were not pleased with the idea that their $5.8 billion 'walking capital' might be freed.
It appears that the value of slaves at 4.2 billion was roughly 6 times the total outstanding loans of .7 billion in the entire US. at 5.8 it is 8.3 times suggesting that slavery was a prime financial motive.
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

OpnCoronet

Lt. Colonel
Joined
Feb 23, 2010
Messages
10,589
This is where all sensible people end up after studying the war from both sides perspective. I tend to lean towards any cause that states it was over money and/or political power.


Not really. At least not in historical terms. The sensible evidence of history shows clearly enough, I think, that protection of slavery, was the reason for secession, which invoked a great Civil War.

There was only a single issue for the War itself, i.e., were the seceding states actually out of the Union, or not ?

As John C. Calhoun, would have explained it ... 'the South would secede to defend their slaves and the Union would fight to defend itself',
 

20thncarolina

Sergeant
Joined
Jan 13, 2011
Messages
514
Location
New Mexico
The Southern cotton economy ran on credit. I cannot recall reading anything by any of the leading secessionists about being in debt to Northern or European banks. It was the standard operating procedure and there seems to be little evidence that they gave it much thought.
 

jgoodguy

Banished Forever
-:- A Mime -:-
is a terrible thing...
Don’t feed the Mime
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
35,519
Location
Birmingham, Alabama
Not really. At least not in historical terms. The sensible evidence of history shows clearly enough, I think, that protection of slavery, was the reason for secession, which invoked a great Civil War.

There was only a single issue for the War itself, i.e., were the seceding states actually out of the Union, or not ?

As John C. Calhoun, would have explained it ... 'the South would secede to defend their slaves and the Union would fight to defend itself',
OR as we say here, at the bottom of every rabbit hole we go is slavery.
 
Last edited:
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
12,857
OR as we say here, at the bottom of every rabbit hole we go is slavery.
"It was States' Rights!" Yes, States' Rights about slavery. "It was about the money!" Yes, the money tied up in slaves.
As always in Root Cause Analysis, one has to ask enough questions to get to the bottom of the 'rabbit hole'.
 

jgoodguy

Banished Forever
-:- A Mime -:-
is a terrible thing...
Don’t feed the Mime
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
35,519
Location
Birmingham, Alabama
"It was States' Rights!" Yes, States' Rights about slavery. "It was about the money!" Yes, the money tied up in slaves.
As always in Root Cause Analysis, one has to ask enough questions to get to the bottom of the 'rabbit hole'.
Yes
Lack of industrialization-land cotton and slaves was perceived as a better investment. FWIW I finished a book where the author 'proved' that industry was a better investment and Southern slaves owners were deficient in not investing in industry instead of slaves. It was full of figures and calculations, but in the end, the folks in business in the place and time of the Antebellum chose differently. Maybe emotions got the better of those generations or pride the better of the author.

States Rights for slavery was sacred while States Rights impeding slave catching were evil.

The Southern Honor system was based in a slave labor system.
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

leftyhunter

Colonel
Joined
May 27, 2011
Messages
17,058
Location
los angeles ca
This is where all sensible people end up after studying the war from both sides perspective. I tend to lean towards any cause that states it was over money and/or political power.
Not really. If the ACW was over money then why didn't Northern businesses men buy Southern land for pennies on the dollar? Jefferson Davis had to finance the sale of his land to an ex slave then default on him.
Isn't it more reasonable to conclude the war was fought for the reasons that the secessionists articulated in the various Ordinances of Secession.
Leftyhunter
 

Red Baron

Private
Joined
Nov 12, 2019
Messages
101
There may have been some resentment about Yankee dominance of the financial sector, but the Southerners had opportunities to correct, but did not because capital invested in either land to grow cotton or the means-slaves, brought much more profit than investing in the financial sector.

More to the point, after secession, debts own to the Yankee banks became payable to the CSA government so there was no advantage for the Southern Cotton growers in this.
I disagree, the northern banks were charged outrageous rates to the planters to begin with. Which was not justified. This still was not enough. Greed set in and the morill tariff was enacted by Lincoln. The south was paying 80 percent of the nation's taxes and receiving little in return from federal government. Lincoln was subsidizing Indus try in the north not the both the north and the south.
So by succeeding, the Confederacy attempted to divert the loans at more reasonable loan rates to the CSA and csa state banks would in turn invest in the southern economy. So the controllers of New York Banks(Rothschild's and friends) would loose control of the South's economy and exhoborant interest payments.
Also you are correct in that the South invested in land and slaves rather than the stock market which was also in New York and largely controlled by the Rothschild's/Rockefellers,etc...
Therefore the South was not dependent upon the northern elite....Can you say another cause for Lincoln's war??
 

Red Baron

Private
Joined
Nov 12, 2019
Messages
101
I doubt very much whether the desire to cancel debt was in the heads of the secessionists. Naturally being indebted to Northern bankers did not engender much in the way of loyalty to the free states, but if they thought about it, they would still need a loan next season. Then again, the secession sentiment of 1860/61 was not known for forward thinking.
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

Red Baron

Private
Joined
Nov 12, 2019
Messages
101
Next year's crop loan would come from the CSA bank or southern state Banks because all debts were to be transferred to the CSA at succession
 

WJC

Major General
Moderator
Thread Medic
Answered the Call for Reinforcements
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
12,857
the northern banks were charged outrageous rates to the planters to begin with. Which was not justified.
Apparently the planters thought it justified: they agreed to the terms.
There was no investment watchdog, government agency or usury laws defining acceptable interest rates. The acceptable rate was what the borrower and lender agreed upon.
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!
Top