The Walker Tariff of 1846

Status
Not open for further replies.

Horrido67

Private
Joined
Sep 29, 2019
one accrued much money because of the Union blockade on southern ports.

Thank you for your reply; lurid. I believe the Federal government faced similar difficulties of collecting tariffs during the war of 1812 because of the British naval blockade. I find it ironic since it was John C. Calhoun who suggested some Federal taxes other than tariffs that would not collapse because of the blockade and supported an idea of building a large navy and federal installments to protect Southern ports after the war of 1812. I also believe (please correct me if I am wrong) John C Calhoun also proposed some sort of protection over the nation's manufacturing industry?

Why did not the Southern Oligarchy anticipate that they would face all those problems? They were obviously ill-prepared. I am also not aware of any suggested compromise on tariffs to prevent the war.
 

unionblue

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Member of the Year
Joined
Feb 20, 2005
Location
Ocala, FL (as of December, 2015).
To say that Tariffs/taxes were not an issue is patently untrue.

Tariffs were an issue, but not a cause for civil war.


The tax issue is what started the compact theory that the southern states used as an excuse/validation for secession.

THE issue was the election of a Black Republican bent on excluding slavery from the federal territories.

Taxes/tariffs were way in the rearview mirror by the time Ft. Sumter was fired on.
 

lurid

First Sergeant
Joined
Jan 3, 2019
To say that Tariffs/taxes were not an issue is patently untrue. The tax issue is what started the compact theory that the southern states used as an excuse/validation for secession

How were the tariffs an issue when the Walker Tariff lowered rates to almost nil and initiated free trade? How does free trade constitute dissent about an purported unfair tariff policy? Yes, all that compact theory was an excuse and nothing more? All those excerpts from people who claimed tariffs were an issue for secession were scant to say the least and were merely a firewall to protect the institution of slavery. All claims back then about tariffs were nothing but hyperbole and the true speculation was that they thought slavery was in jeopardy.
 

Patrick Sulley

Sergeant
Joined
Aug 8, 2019
How were the tariffs an issue when the Walker Tariff lowered rates to almost nil and initiated free trade?
Easy, with the expansion West and the certain loss of power by the Democrats in the House of Representatives and in the Senate they couldn't keep the Walker tariff in place even if they wanted to stay. They're not oblivious to what would happen in the future once the Republicans or whigs take control. It's a common fallacy to say "yeah but tariffs we're low" not by choice of the northern states. Make no mistake...I am not saying slavery was not the main issue...but it only takes one small straw to break the camel's back
 
Last edited:

trice

Lt. Colonel
Joined
May 2, 2006
Easy, with the expansion West and the certain loss of power by the Democrats in the House of Representatives and in the Senate they couldn't keep the Walker tariff in place even if they wanted to stay. They're not oblivious to what would happen in the future once the Republicans or whigs take control. It's a common fallacy to say "yeah but tariffs we're low" not by choice of the northern states. Make no mistake...I am not saying slavery was not the main issue

Hmm. Hard to justify that one. The Tariff of 1857 is even lower than the Walker Tariff of 1846 -- obviously they had no trouble keeping low rates in effect in 1857 (eleven years later). The Tariff of 1857 passed in the House with a vote of 122-72. In the Senate the vote was 33-8.

The Tariff of 1857 was still in effect during the Election of 1860, and any changes to the existing Tariff could probably have been easily stalemated in the Senate of 1861 -- if "the South" had simply decided to stay in the Union and vote against it.

What happened between 1857-1861 to make people want a higher Tariff? The economic disaster (the Panic of 1857) and the financial disasters of the southern-dominated Buchanan Administration (spent the cash in the Treasury, quadrupled the National debt, turned an annual budget surplus into a large annual deficit, fraud and embezzlement in the Department of War, etc.) created an urgent need for more revenue and the Tariff was the biggest, quickest means of getting more money.

"The South" didn't want to pay for what they had presided over.
 
Last edited:

Patrick Sulley

Sergeant
Joined
Aug 8, 2019
Hmm. Hard to justify that one.
not really...just look at the Morrill tariff to glance into the future of taxes going forward. It passed the house in the 1859/60 session. debated before that. the writing quite literally was on the wall
 

Patrick Sulley

Sergeant
Joined
Aug 8, 2019
any changes to the existing Tariff could probably have been easily stalemated in the Senate of 1861
is 1861 the only year in the future? no. again. with the expansion west and new representation favoring the "non slave" states....no one believed the tariffs would not revert back...it has been going back and forth from protective tariffs to low tariffs depending on who held power/majority.
 

Patrick Sulley

Sergeant
Joined
Aug 8, 2019
"Southern industry?"

Because most of the imports coming INTO the country were collected in Northern ports, what "Southern industry" was "misleading" in that collection?
the southern ports were not as developed as the northern ports...particularly New York. New York ports were used to import and export items used or sold by most southern industry...are you seriously unaware that the port of choice for the entire USA was New York?
 

Patrick Sulley

Sergeant
Joined
Aug 8, 2019
You think the Panic of 1857 was based on the failure of a bank? That goes against all of history and economics.
it's easy enough to google...but google contemporaneous accounts not revisionist ones. "The panic began with a loss of confidence in an Ohio bank, but spread as railroads failed, and fears that the US Federal Government would be unable to pay obligations in specie mounted." "The immediate event that touched off the panic was the failure on August 24 of the New York City branch of the Ohio Life Insurance and Trust Co., a major financial force that collapsed following widespread embezzlement. In the wake of this event, a series of other setbacks shook the public's confidence"
 
Last edited:

Patrick Sulley

Sergeant
Joined
Aug 8, 2019
"Southern industry?"

Because most of the imports coming INTO the country were collected in Northern ports, what "Southern industry" was "misleading" in that collection?
you do know the "Port" itself isnt who pays the tariff...right? The "where" the tariff is collected is irrelevant. When the tariffs are high...they are called "protective tariffs" they were not protecting southern industry
 

John Fenton

Sergeant
Joined
Apr 18, 2019
Location
retired traveling
"THE issue was the election of a Black Republican bent on excluding slavery from the federal territories".
perhaps you have heard of popular sovereignty ? the slave states were bent on creating new slave states so the issue was slavery not elections, which had they been united could have kept lincoln from being elected. the majority population was against slavery, not only in kansas, but the division created actually started the war which continued until secession and after kansas was admitted as a free state. popular sovereignty was not enough so the confederacy attempted to force slavery into the southern territories it claimed. the kansas-nebraska act and the southern win created the republican party which proved dominant. the south should have taken it's win and promoted slavery where it was wanted and lincoln might have never been a candidate or won the election. the bottom line was that the majority of population and states were anti-slave. even southern miners were against slavery in the territories and wanted it kept in cotton states of the old south. the issue was slavery.

on the morrill tariff... the south controlled the senate and could have stopped passage of the bill had they not vacated their seats prematurely . they might have controlled both houses if they had accepted their own proposal of popular sovereignty. the south passed the walker tariff and the tariff of 1857 , under which they still operated when they seceded. in trying to create new slave states and opposing the morrill tariff the south jumped the gun , so to speak. the fact that the majority population was becoming more and more anti-slave meant that the southern power was going to decline, sooner or later, because the average guy did not want to compete with slave labor. in the south it was a catch 22 because they also could not and for the most part into modern times, stomach black and white equality.
the south had no industry to speak of and the import taxes paid were paid by northern merchants and collected in northern ports. the south was capital poor and did not improve their ports and most were shallow and without enough warehouses and enough market without extra transportation costs. the north was the majority market and had the capital for importing and marketing. although it is claimed that the south bought the majority of imports this is not true. most new railroads went west where the market for imports was not south. the south was largely self sufficient and only the planters bought imported items, mostly luxury items.
a final thought... if the issue were tariffs why has the race issue remained to current times.
 

Patrick Sulley

Sergeant
Joined
Aug 8, 2019
You think the Panic of 1857 was based on the failure of a bank? That goes against all of history and economics.
not only the failure of the bank...but it cant be underestimated that 30,000 pounds of gold lost at sea when the SS Central America sank during the North Carolina Hurricane of 1857. wiki.."SS Central America, known as the Ship of Gold, was a 280-foot (85 m) sidewheel steamer that ... SS George Law, after Mr. George Law of New York. The ship sank in a hurricane in September 1857, along with 425 of her 578 passengers and crew and 30,000 pounds (14,000 kg) of gold, contributing to the Panic of 1857. "
the slave states were bent on creating new slave states so the issue was slavery not elections,
the dred scott decision all but ensured slavery in the west....it wasnt that...it was elections
 
Last edited:

Patrick Sulley

Sergeant
Joined
Aug 8, 2019
on the morrill tariff... the south controlled the senate and could have stopped passage of the bill had they not vacated their seats prematurely
tariffs went up and down repeatedly over the life of the union....one act being stopped in this congress would have been temporary as expansion west would soon make democrat majority a permanent bygone. in the 1860 election, Lincoln, a former Whig and great admirer of Henry Clay, campaigned for the high protective tariff provisions of the Morrill Tariff, which had also been incorporated into the Republican Party Platform. Lincoln further endorsed the Morrill Tariff and its concepts in his first inaugural speech and signed the Act into law a few days after taking office in March of 1861. Southern leaders had seen it coming. Southern protests had been of no avail. Now the South was inflamed with righteous indignation, and Southern leaders began to call for Secession. Even if i concede the point that "at the time" things could have been stalled...it would never stave it off for more than a couple of congresses.
 

Patrick Sulley

Sergeant
Joined
Aug 8, 2019
John Fenton said:
the import taxes paid were paid by northern merchants
this is a claim you make...please cite who the "importers of record" were that make you state such a claim....and what they were importing. thanks
...........................................................................................
John Fenton said:
"the south had no industry to speak of"

John, this meant that most of the products needed in the south could not be manufactured and needed to be shipped south from northern states or imported and shipped down. Since northern states could manufacture most of the products they need it didnt matter how much of the populace was in the north....they still didnt import...why would they? So population size would only matter if products could be made equally in both places. they could not be. Most imported products ended up south. just common sense.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Top