Which States Did Immigrants Live In? Census of 1860

wausaubob

Lt. Colonel
Joined
Apr 4, 2017
Location
Denver, CO
What is shown is a tidal wave of immigration, from Ireland directly, Irish people from England, more from the German states, more Irish, Scottish and English immigration from British North America, and from the successful, growing families of New England, spreading out from Ohio to Missouri and beyond. They were making slave owning a minority in Missouri, and insignificant in Kansas/Nebraska.
Missouri and California were the melting pot states. Slavery was weak in Missouri. In the last ante-bellum presidential election, Missouri went to Douglas. California went for Lincoln. Stanford and friends were not taking any chances.
There was a steady leakage of white Southerners to southern Indiana, Illinois, Missouri and California. It wasn't enormous but it weakened the Southern free economy.
Meanwhile the black enslaved population in the South not only grew, but between 1820 and 1860 it became Americanized.
They were no longer traumatized Africans. Illegal slave imports declined. The American black population grew.
The slave owning South put themselves in opposition to these two demographic forces.
They resisted the U.S. better than the indigenous people, but when the myth that slavery was a good thing, and blessed by God was put to the test, the slaves demonstrated that it was not true.
The U.S. immigration wave barely paused for the Civil War and by 1870 the population of the North had positively exploded.
 
Joined
Aug 30, 2016
Location
Bartlett, TN
I took an AncestryDNA test and it turned out a lot different than I thought. I can also confirm that many born in TN migrated to Texas and Arkansas, especially later on when oil was founded in Texas.

Europe West (Germany, France, Netherlands, Belgium, Switzerland, and Austria) - 69 Percent
Ireland (Scotland and Ireland) - 16 Percent
Great Britain (Scotland, England, and Wales) - 13 Percent
Native American - 1 Percent
East European Jewish - >1 Percent

Interestingly, as the chart displays, besides TN, the vast majority of relatives are in Arkansas and Northeast Texas. Then I have a few in MO, LA, MS, and IL.
 

Pat Young

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Featured Book Reviewer
Joined
Jan 7, 2013
Location
Long Island, NY
I took an AncestryDNA test and it turned out a lot different than I thought. I can also confirm that many born in TN migrated to Texas and Arkansas, especially later on when oil was founded in Texas.

Europe West (Germany, France, Netherlands, Belgium, Switzerland, and Austria) - 69 Percent
Ireland (Scotland and Ireland) - 16 Percent
Great Britain (Scotland, England, and Wales) - 13 Percent
Native American - 1 Percent
East European Jewish - >1 Percent

Interestingly, as the chart displays, besides TN, the vast majority of relatives are in Arkansas and Northeast Texas. Then I have a few in MO, LA, MS, and IL.
The charts are a good addition.
 

Pat Young

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Featured Book Reviewer
Joined
Jan 7, 2013
Location
Long Island, NY
I took an AncestryDNA test and it turned out a lot different than I thought. I can also confirm that many born in TN migrated to Texas and Arkansas, especially later on when oil was founded in Texas.

Europe West (Germany, France, Netherlands, Belgium, Switzerland, and Austria) - 69 Percent
Ireland (Scotland and Ireland) - 16 Percent
Great Britain (Scotland, England, and Wales) - 13 Percent
Native American - 1 Percent
East European Jewish - >1 Percent

Interestingly, as the chart displays, besides TN, the vast majority of relatives are in Arkansas and Northeast Texas. Then I have a few in MO, LA, MS, and IL.
I got 94% Irish. The last non-Irish/British to slip into the family bed was from Germany or France before 1800.
 

wausaubob

Lt. Colonel
Joined
Apr 4, 2017
Location
Denver, CO
If a person could view: the growth of slavery maps from the Smithsonian worker, a map showing the % increase in free white population between 1840-1860 by state as various shades, and the growth of railroads, from 1820-1860, showing the switch from North-South shipping to West-East shipping, one would see clearly that European immigration, and the railroads left the South as a minority region, with a large black labor force.
They rebelled because they were being left behind with a very dangerous labor force problem.
 

Pat Young

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Featured Book Reviewer
Joined
Jan 7, 2013
Location
Long Island, NY
If a person could view: the growth of slavery maps from the Smithsonian worker, a map showing the % increase in free white population between 1840-1860 by state as various shades, and the growth of railroads, from 1820-1860, showing the switch from North-South shipping to West-East shipping, one would see clearly that European immigration, and the railroads left the South as a minority region, with a large black labor force.
They rebelled because they were being left behind with a very dangerous labor force problem.
I am working on something along these lines.
 

wausaubob

Lt. Colonel
Joined
Apr 4, 2017
Location
Denver, CO
Perhaps Mr. Young.
But the Irish immigrants picked the winning side in the U.S. And eventually Ireland regained its independence.
The blacks did not rise in in violent rebellion, which was widely expected.
Instead they survived and learned the system and became urban Democrats.
The railroad companies gained partial control of the U.S. government. They got a handsome payoff, but they also created a economy that sustained a new world power.
And Mrs. Grant got what she wanted.
There were some interesting winners.
 

Pat Young

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Featured Book Reviewer
Joined
Jan 7, 2013
Location
Long Island, NY
Perhaps Mr. Young.
But the Irish immigrants picked the winning side in the U.S. And eventually Ireland regained its independence.
The blacks did not rise in in violent rebellion, which was widely expected.
Instead they survived and learned the system and became urban Democrats.
The railroad companies gained partial control of the U.S. government. They got a handsome payoff, but they also created a economy that sustained a new world power.
And Mrs. Grant got what she wanted.
There were some interesting winners.
True.
 

wausaubob

Lt. Colonel
Joined
Apr 4, 2017
Location
Denver, CO
Thanks for your response.
"Radicalized" is generally used to describe causing someone becoming supportive of extreme political views. If by "radicalized" you mean motivated to disrupt one's life, 'pick up' and go elsewhere, I agree with your assessment as it pertains to the Irish. The Irish migration of the early 19th century was far less because of politics than because of empty stomachs. Certainly Irish immigrants brought with them their distaste for their will for self-determination that can be traced back to at least Henry II.
Though some Germans were politically motivated to emigrate from their homelands, few were Marxists of any variety. Marx was popular among intellectuals, but the vast majority wanted to satisfy the more basic instinct of feeding their families.
Radicalized in the sense of being desperate enough to cross an ocean and fight for a place in a new society.
 

WJC

Major General
Judge Adv. Genl.
Thread Medic
Answered the Call for Reinforcements
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Radicalized in the sense of being desperate enough to cross an ocean and fight for a place in a new society.
Thanks for your response.
You've alerted me to an error in my posting, which should have read:
"Radicalized" is generally used to describe causing someone becoming supportive of extreme political views. If by "radicalized" you mean motivated to disrupt one's life, 'pick up' and go elsewhere, I agree with your assessment as it pertains to the Irish. The Irish migration of the early 19th century was far less because of politics than because of empty stomachs. Certainly Irish immigrants brought with them their will for self-determination that can be traced back to at least Henry II.
Though some Germans were politically motivated to emigrate from their homelands, few were Marxists of any variety. Marx was popular among intellectuals, but the vast majority wanted to satisfy the more basic instinct of feeding their families.​
 

wausaubob

Lt. Colonel
Joined
Apr 4, 2017
Location
Denver, CO
Pat's work here is part of highlighting four mass migrations that set the stage for the Civil.
1. The westward migration of southern whites.
2. The contrasting forced migration of southern blacks, southward and westward.
3. The westward migration of northern whites.
4. The immigration of Europeans to the U.S. which spread from Boston and New York, all the way to Nebraska and Minnesota.
To measure the significance of each migration one would need a good knowledge of the native born population at the starting point in 1840.
The southern states were not competitive in the immigration of Europeans to the U.S. There reliance on slave labor helped them make money on cash crops, but lessened their political power due to the three fifths compromise.
The northern states gained control of the House of Representatives and the Electoral count, and that was unacceptable.
 

wausaubob

Lt. Colonel
Joined
Apr 4, 2017
Location
Denver, CO
The Irish were naturally antagonistic to anything that was English. Both Puritans and Tories had treated them poorly. Fortunately the U.S. north had moved a long way towards participatory democracy by the middle of the 1800's, so the north had a lot of people of English, Puritan ancestry, but it was decidedly American by then.
 

Pat Young

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Featured Book Reviewer
Joined
Jan 7, 2013
Location
Long Island, NY
The Irish migration of the early 19th century was far less because of politics than because of empty stomachs.
I would note that while we commonly contrast Irish poverty with Irish politics, many of the Irish immigrants at the time referred to themselves as "Exiles" signifying that they viewed themselves as being forced to migrate by political decisions made by the British Empire.
 
Top