The Walker Tariff of 1846

Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!
Status
Not open for further replies.

unionblue

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Member of the Year
Joined
Feb 20, 2005
Messages
29,889
Location
Ocala, FL (as of December, 2015).
(I'll address the only part of your post that I consider interesting enough to answer.)

Basically, Lincoln was willing to negotiate with the South about everything except the collection of the tariff which was vital to the govt.'s revenue.

Wrong.
The federal government collected most of it's tariffs in Northern ports, not Southern ones, besides of which, tariffs were not the issue that led to Southern secession. That fable has been told too many times and has always come up dry of fact.

53 million dollars collected in 1860 tariffs does not even come close to the 4 BILLION dollars of human property, the primary reason for unilateral secession in the slave-holding states.
 

Patrick Sulley

Corporal
Joined
Aug 8, 2019
Messages
317
The federal government collected most of it's tariffs in Northern ports, not Southern ones, besides of which, tariffs were not the issue that led to Southern secession. That fable has been told too many times and has always come up dry of fact.

53 million dollars collected in 1860 tariffs does not even come close to the 4 BILLION dollars of human property, the primary reason for unilateral secession in the slave-holding states.
well, the federal income in 1859 was 91 percent ad valorem duties. 87 percent of exported goods were made up of cotton. Cotton 87 percent of 91 percent of federal income is a pretty good motivator for the North to not allow secession.
 

Patrick Sulley

Corporal
Joined
Aug 8, 2019
Messages
317
The federal government collected most of it's tariffs in Northern ports, not Southern ones, besides of which, tariffs were not the issue that led to Southern secession. That fable has been told too many times and has always come up dry of fact.

53 million dollars collected in 1860 tariffs does not even come close to the 4 BILLION dollars of human property, the primary reason for unilateral secession in the slave-holding states.
on Dec. 25, 1860, South Carolina declared unfair taxes to be a cause of secession: "The people of the Southern States are not only taxed for the benefit of the Northern States, but after the taxes are collected, three-fourths (75%) of them are expended at the North (to subsidize Wall Street industries that elected Lincoln)." (Paragraphs 5-8)
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

John Fenton

Corporal
Joined
Apr 18, 2019
Messages
453
Location
retired traveling
well, the federal income in 1859 was 91 percent ad valorem duties. 87 percent of exported goods were made up of cotton. Cotton 87 percent of 91 percent of federal income is a pretty good motivator for the North to not allow secession.
Some sources for this ?
In the decades prior to the Civil War, the US was by far the world’s most important source of cotton. As Table 1 indicates, the US accounted for about 80% of the world’s cotton production between 1820 and 1860, with Brazil, India, Egypt, and a few other countries supplying the remainder. Cotton was America’s leading export throughout the entire nineteenth century, comprising over half of all exports in the antebellum period, and nearly 40% of exports as late as 1890 (US Bureau of the Census, 1975, series U-276, U-191).
https://www.dartmouth.edu/~dirwin/docs/exporttax.pdf

In 1859, Federal spending was split about 46% on defense and 54% of domestic spending; in 1860, the split was roughly 37/63.
So we're down to 63 percent of the budget that could conceivably have been spend on "improvements in the North." Of course, just basic common sense suggest that it wasn't.
Then there was the national debt and running the government...
http://m.jacksonfreepress.com/weblogs/jackblog/2015/jul/10/flagmyths-the-civil-war-was-fought-over-tariffs/
 

trice

Lt. Colonel
Joined
May 2, 2006
Messages
11,758
on Dec. 25, 1860, South Carolina declared unfair taxes to be a cause of secession: "The people of the Southern States are not only taxed for the benefit of the Northern States, but after the taxes are collected, three-fourths (75%) of them are expended at the North (to subsidize Wall Street industries that elected Lincoln)." (Paragraphs 5-8)
Well, no, they did not do that in their secession declaration.

Also, just in passing, most of the people in the United States lived in "the North" (as in "the rest of the country") and most of the taxes consisted of import tariffs that were collected North of the Potomac River (roughly two-thirds in New York harbor alone). Since most of the people lived in "the North" and most of the tax revenue was collected in "the North", what is the problem they are referring to?
 

Patrick Sulley

Corporal
Joined
Aug 8, 2019
Messages
317
Well, no, they did not do that in their secession declaration.

Also, just in passing, most of the people in the United States lived in "the North" (as in "the rest of the country") and most of the taxes consisted of import tariffs that were collected North of the Potomac River (roughly two-thirds in New York harbor alone). Since most of the people lived in "the North" and most of the tax revenue was collected in "the North", what is the problem they are referring to?
umm yeah they did. http://history.furman.edu/~benson/docs/SCaddress.htm, additionally, the north also realized that an anti slavery guy would not win the Presidential election on slavery alone as an issue:
"Newspaperman Horace Greeley described this strategy in a letter outlining the characteristics of a winnable campaign:

'I want to succeed this time, yet I know the country is not anti-Slavery.It will only swallow a little anti-slavery in a great deal of sweetening.An anti-slavery man per se cannot be elected; but a tariff, river and harbor, Pacific railroad, free homestead man may succeed although he is anti-slavery.'

The selection of Abraham Lincoln, an anti-slavery former congressman who described himself as an “old Henry Clay tariff whig,” almost perfectly fit Greeley’s prescription for the Republican ticket."

So, it can be argued that if Lincoln was not elected the south may not have seceded and he was elected on the strength of more his views on tariff's....or maybe less on his views but how people viewed his views


"New York harbor alone".... what do you think was being exported there?

Even when the Southern cotton bound for Europe didn't put in at the wharves of Sandy Hook or the East River, unloading and reloading, the combined income from interests, commissions, freight, insurance, and other profits took perhaps 40 cents into New York of every dollar paid for southern cotton.

"The record shows that ports with moderate quantities of outbound freight couldn't keep up with the New York competition. Remember, this is a triangle trade. Boston started a packet line in 1833 that, to secure outbound cargo, detoured to Charleston for cotton. But about the only other local commodity it could find to move to Europe was Bostonians. Since most passengers en route to England found little attraction in a layover in South Carolina, the lines failed.[3]

As for the cotton ports themselves, they did not crave enough imports to justify packet lines until 1851, when New Orleans hosted one sailing to Liverpool. Yet New York by the mid-1850s could claim sixteen lines to Liverpool, three to London, three to Havre, two to Antwerp, and one each to Glasgow, Rotterdam, and Marseilles. Subsidized, it must be remembered, by the federal post office patronage boondogle.

U.S. foreign trade rose in value from $134 million in 1830 to $318 million in 1850. It would triple again in the 1850s. Between two-thirds and three-fourths of those imports entered through the port of New York. Which meant that any trading the South did, had to go through New York."

"any trading the South did, had to go through New York". This is where you get skewed figures from. altho cotton was not exported directly from New York...the exported cotton ships originated in New York.
 
Last edited:
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

Patrick Sulley

Corporal
Joined
Aug 8, 2019
Messages
317
Some sources for this ?
In the decades prior to the Civil War, the US was by far the world’s most important source of cotton. As Table 1 indicates, the US accounted for about 80% of the world’s cotton production between 1820 and 1860, with Brazil, India, Egypt, and a few other countries supplying the remainder. Cotton was America’s leading export throughout the entire nineteenth century, comprising over half of all exports in the antebellum period, and nearly 40% of exports as late as 1890 (US Bureau of the Census, 1975, series U-276, U-191).
https://www.dartmouth.edu/~dirwin/docs/exporttax.pdf

In 1859, Federal spending was split about 46% on defense and 54% of domestic spending; in 1860, the split was roughly 37/63.
So we're down to 63 percent of the budget that could conceivably have been spend on "improvements in the North." Of course, just basic common sense suggest that it wasn't.
Then there was the national debt and running the government...
http://m.jacksonfreepress.com/weblogs/jackblog/2015/jul/10/flagmyths-the-civil-war-was-fought-over-tariffs/
sure. sources
1) usgovernmentrevenue.com

see also 2) Taussig, Frank William. The Tariff History of the United States. New York/London: G. P. Putnam's sons, 1888

"On the eve of the war in 1860, tariffs brought in $53,188,000, or almost 95% of the federal government’s tax receipts.[1] No other revenue source would approach the tariff’s preeminence until the adoption of the income tax in 1913. "

3) the tariff act of 1846
the tariff act of 1846 (which stayed in effect until 1857) had schedules for collecting "tariff's" or "duties" broken down in to 4 groups. A, B, C AND D. Cotton was in schedule C and "taxed" by having a duty levied at 25 percent.

"cotton made up over 50% of exports"
i cant find where i got 87 but from the figures below its roughly 75.4 percent
the tariff tax of 1846 (which lasted thru 1857) put a 25 percent tax on "raw material" cotton...schedule D.
there is 500 pounds per bale of cotton.
cotton sold for 10 to 12.5 cent per pound.
let's round down (to give benefit of doubt) to 50 dollars per bale.
Roughly 3 to 4 million bales were exported per year in the years leading up to the Civil war.
50 dollars per bale times 3 to 4 million bales exported equals roughly 200 million dollars exported per year
25% duty or tax on that between 1846/57 or 24 percent from 1858/60 is roughly rounded down (again for the benefit of doubt) to 40 million of the 53 million the federal government took in from taxes....just in slave labor cotton alone

i wonder why the north didnt want the southern states to seceded?


"Defense spending"

...so us army corp of engineers ( ‎11 June 1775) were not part of "defense spending"? Do you know what the us army corp of engineers did? This is just a part of several ways tax money was spent building the north. this made sense to focus most tax money on the north as that is where a majority of people lived. Just basic common sense.
 
Last edited:

Patrick Sulley

Corporal
Joined
Aug 8, 2019
Messages
317
most of the taxes consisted of import tariffs
What? ummm no. close to 40 million of the 53 million of taxes collected in 1860 came directly from duties on EXPORTED cotton.

the tariff tax of 1846 (which lasted thru 1857) put a 25 percent tax on "raw material" cotton...schedule D....moved to schedule C after 1857 at 24 percent
there is 500 pounds per bale of cotton.
cotton sold for 10 to 12.5 cent per pound.
let's round down (to give benefit of doubt) to 50 dollars per bale.
Roughly 3 to 4 million bales were exported per year in the years leading up to the Civil war.
50 dollars per bale times 3 to 4 million bales exported equals roughly 200 million dollars exported per year
25% duty or tax on that between 1846/57 or 24 percent from 1858/60 is roughly rounded down (again for the benefit of doubt) to 40 million of the 53 million the federal government took in.....just in slave labor cotton alone...
so no....most taxes taken in were not from imports.
i wonder why the north didnt want the southern states to seceded?
 
Last edited:

WJC

Brigadier General
Moderator
Thread Medic
Answered the Call for Reinforcements
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
12,608
the tariff tax of 1846 (which lasted thru 1857) put a 25 percent tax on exported cotton...schedule C.
I believe you have been misled: can you furnish the relevant text in the Tariff Act of 1846 that supports your claim? Schedule C, like the rest of the Act, refers to duties on imports.
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

Patrick Sulley

Corporal
Joined
Aug 8, 2019
Messages
317
I believe you have been misled: can you furnish the relevant text in the Tariff Act of 1846 that supports your claim?
absolutely. The Tariff, 1830-1860 Author(s): F. W. Taussig Source: The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 2, No. 3 (Apr., 1888), pp. 314-346 Published by: Oxford University Press Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/1879417

i did say schedule C but meant schedule D but moved to schedule C after 1857...but the rate was correct. The tax is a "raw materials" tax not an export tax.

" the act of 1846 is often spoken of as an
instance of the application of free-trade principles. In
fact, however, it effected no more than a moderation in
the application of protection. The act established several
schedules, indicated by the letters A, B, C, D, and so on.
All the articles classed in schedule A paid 100 per cent.,
all in schedule B paid 40 per cent., all in schedule C paid
30 per cent., and so for the rest. Schedule C, with the
30 per cent. duty, included most articles with which the
protective controversy is concerned,- iron and metals in
general, manufactures of metals, wool and woollens, man-
ufactures of leather, paper, glass, and wood. Cottons
were in schedule D, and paid 25 per cent. Tea and
coffee, on the other hand, were exempt from"

"The act of 1846 remained in force till 1857, when a still further reduction of duties was made. The revenue was redundant in 1857, and this was the chief cause of the reduction of duties. The framework of the act of 1846 was retained,-the schedules and the ad valorem duties. The duty on the important protective articles, in schedule C, was lowered to 24 per cent., cottons being transferred, moreover, to that schedule "....
The Tariff, 1830-1860 Author(s): F. W. Taussig Source: The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 2, No. 3 (Apr., 1888), pp. 314-346 Published by: Oxford University Press Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/1879417
 
Last edited:

WJC

Brigadier General
Moderator
Thread Medic
Answered the Call for Reinforcements
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
12,608
absolutely. The Tariff, 1830-1860 Author(s): F. W. Taussig Source: The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 2, No. 3 (Apr., 1888), pp. 314-346 Published by: Oxford University Press Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/1879417

i did say schedule C but meant schedule D...but the rate was correct.

" the act of 1846 is often spoken of as an
instance of the application of free-trade principles. In
fact, however, it effected no more than a moderation in
the application of protection. The act established several
schedules, indicated by the letters A, B, C, D, and so on.
All the articles classed in schedule A paid 100 per cent.,
all in schedule B paid 40 per cent., all in schedule C paid
30 per cent., and so for the rest. Schedule C, with the
30 per cent. duty, included most articles with which the
protective controversy is concerned,- iron and metals in
general, manufactures of metals, wool and woollens, man-
ufactures of leather, paper, glass, and wood. Cottons
were in schedule D, and paid 25 per cent. Tea and
coffee, on the other hand, were exempt from"
Thanks for your response.
This excerpt makes it clear that the tax was a protective act, meant to protect American producers from foreign imports, including imported raw cotton.
The tax on imported cotton in the Tariff of 1846 was enthusiastically supported by Southerners.
 

Patrick Sulley

Corporal
Joined
Aug 8, 2019
Messages
317
Thanks for your response.
This excerpt makes it clear that the tax was a protective act, meant to protect American producers from foreign imports, including imported raw cotton.
The tax on imported cotton in the Tariff of 1846 was enthusiastically supported by Southerners.
Protective taxes were a point of contention, but that's not what i was arguing today....he claimed that most taxes were collected via imports. ...they were not. Additionally, my point could be made that the North cared far more for lost revenue than abolition of slaves.....thus committing 100 thousands of lost lives over protecting revenue...not rights of fellow humans.
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

Patrick Sulley

Corporal
Joined
Aug 8, 2019
Messages
317
Thanks for your response.
This excerpt makes it clear that the tax was a protective act, meant to protect American producers from foreign imports, including imported raw cotton.
The tax on imported cotton in the Tariff of 1846 was enthusiastically supported by Southerners.
i want to be clear. i do not dispute that anything other than slavery was secondary to the reason for slave states seceding. I will argue that the North/Union went to war not for human rights but revenue....notably the duties collected on cotton.
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

WJC

Brigadier General
Moderator
Thread Medic
Answered the Call for Reinforcements
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
12,608
Protective taxes were a point of contention, but that's not what i was arguing today....he claimed that most taxes were collected via imports. ...they were not.
Thanks for your response.
Protective taxes- tariffs- were the primary source of revenue for the Federal government prior to the war.
 

WJC

Brigadier General
Moderator
Thread Medic
Answered the Call for Reinforcements
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
12,608
that's not at all what those schedules were about. we didnt import cotton.
Thanks for your response.
In addition to raising revenues, the purpose of a protective tariff like those in the Tariff of 1846 is to limit imports of certain goods in order to stimulate domestic production. The tariff persuaded any American manufacturer tempted to use foreign cotton in its products to 'buy American'.
It is not surprising that Congressional opposition to the 1846 Tariff bill came from representatives of Northern, textile-producing states.
 

Patrick Sulley

Corporal
Joined
Aug 8, 2019
Messages
317
Thanks for your response.
Protective taxes- tariffs- were the primary source of revenue for the Federal government prior to the war.
he said "import taxes" cotton was an export. Both of you are confusing imports tariffs with export ad valorem duties....or maybe i am. ok, i was confusing raw material taxes for export taxes although i cant tell the difference. 200,000,000 dollars of "raw material" was taxed at 25 percent. which is more than all import taxes combined.
 
Last edited:
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

John Fenton

Corporal
Joined
Apr 18, 2019
Messages
453
Location
retired traveling
What? ummm no. close to 40 million of the 53 million of taxes collected in 1860 came directly from duties on EXPORTED cotton.
The Export Clause, found in Article I, Section 9, Clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution, directly statesNo Tax or Duty shall be laid on Articles exported from any State.” ... The Clause prohibits taxes and duties that are targeted at exports or imposed on goods during “the course of exportation.”
 

Patrick Sulley

Corporal
Joined
Aug 8, 2019
Messages
317
Thanks for your response.
Protective taxes- tariffs- were the primary source of revenue for the Federal government prior to the war.
actually, again, we didnt import cotton...we exported it....200,000,000 dollars of "raw material" cotton was taxed at 25 percent. which is more than all import taxes combined. It looks like cotton was taxed using a value tax...not an export tax. (ad valorem)
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!
Top