Economic Aspects Of Southern Sectionalism, 1840-1861 Russel

jgoodguy

Webmaster
Staff member
Administrator
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
7,116
Reaction score
4,148
Economic Aspects Of Southern Sectionalism, 1840-1861  Russel

A bit dated(Originally published 1924 ) but free to read online.  Let us remember slavery is behind the curtain and concentrate on this article/book.  
Also beware of biases because the financial/industral North won the Civil War.

Economic Aspects Of Southern Sectionalism, 1840-1861  Russel
University of Illinois Studies in the Social Sciences, V11, No. 1-2, March-June, 1923
Economic aspects of southern sectionalism, 1840-1861Emphasis mine.
Preface
 
The object of this monograph is to attempt to evaluate some of the causes for the secession of our Southern states which, to me, seem generally to have been underestimated. Lack of time has prevented the utilization of much available newspaper, pamphlet,  and manuscript material of considerable value; but great confidence is felt that the evidence is typical, if not exhaustive. The work deals with matters which even today in a measure arouse the passions or prejudices of men; the greatest effort has been made, therefore, to preserve a detached point of view. A better contemporary understanding of the economic relations of the sections before 1861 might have moderated the bitterness of the sectional controversy; a better understanding of them even now would soften its memories.
Introduction.  P10

 
The most significant fact of American history from about 1820 to 1875, at least, was sectionalism. The section which was at all times most clearly defined was the South. The term South, however, did not have the same connotation at all times and to all men. Until about 1845 the term South was commonly applied only to the South Atlantic states. The states of the lower Mississippi valley were gradually brought under the term as their economic and social organization and general conditions approximated those in the old South and differentiated from those of the states of the upper part of the valley, for Southern sectionalism had bases in several distinctive features besides latitude.
Get this out of the way

 
Foremost of these was the existence of slavery.
P11 

 
There was basis for sectionalism, also, in divergent economic interests and conditions. To what extent the divergence was due to geography, to what extent due to other factors, including social organization, it is not necessary here to inquire. The Southern states, however, were engaged largely in the production of a few great staples cotton, tobacco, and sugar not produced in other states of the Union. Of these staples only a small proportion was consumed at home; much the greater part was exported either to the North or to Europe. The portion exported abroad constituted considerably more than half the nation's total exports. Manufacturing and mining had made, and were making during the period under survey, little progress in the South compared with the same industries in other sections; the exports of the South were exchanged in part for agricultural products of the West but chiefly for manufactured goods of the East or Europe. The ocean commerce of the South, whether coastwise or foreign, was carried almost altogether in Northern or European vessels; foreign goods for Southern consumption came largely by way of Northern ports. Only a small percentage of the Southern population was urban; the cities and towns of the section were few and small compared with those of the East or even those of the growing Northwest. The banking capital of the country was largely concentrated in the East; the South was not financially independent.
P12-13

 
Divergent economic interests of the sections led to the advocacy of different policies, on the part of the Federal government, as regards tariff, taxation, navigation laws, and the amount and objects of government expenditures. The disparity of the sections in industry and commerce was to many Southerners evidence of lack of prosperity in the South commensurate with that of the North, and, consequently, was a cause of dissatisfaction, and was galling to Southern pride. The causes of Southern "decline" were sought for; it was variously attributed to geography and climate, qualities of the people, misdirection of private enterprise, mistaken policies of the state and local governments, and the unequal operation of the Federal government, but not, generally, to slavery. Remedies were proposed, corresponding roughly to the causes, as analyzed.
The article says it will look at Southern opinion and how divergent economic interest and conditions drove Southern secetionism.  

 
It is the purpose of this study to attempt to discover to what extent Southern sectionalism had its basis in divergent economic interests and conditions. The study is primarily a study of public opinion. It will require an examination of the opinions of Southern men as to the divergence of economic interests and the extent of the disparity of economic development in the sections, the causes of such disparity, and the proper remedies therefor. Actual economic conditions and changes will be described and explained only in so far as such description and explanation are essential to an understanding of Southern public opinion. It is hoped, however, that incidentally some additional light may be thrown upon the economic status of the antebellum South, and that some conclusions may be drawn as to the justification for Southern discontent.
 

Nitti

charon's apprentice
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
282
Reaction score
263
It is almost 100 years old,that is dated.
 

RWebb

New Member
Joined
May 20, 2019
Messages
12
Reaction score
0
jgoodguy said:
Economic Aspects Of Southern Sectionalism, 1840-1861  Russel

A bit dated(Originally published 1924 ) but free to read online.  Let us remember slavery is behind the curtain and concentrate on this article/book.  
Also beware of biases because the financial/industral North won the Civil War.

Economic Aspects Of Southern Sectionalism, 1840-1861  Russel
University of Illinois Studies in the Social Sciences, V11, No. 1-2, March-June, 1923
Economic aspects of southern sectionalism, 1840-1861Emphasis mine.
Preface
 
The object of this monograph is to attempt to evaluate some of the causes for the secession of our Southern states which, to me, seem generally to have been underestimated. Lack of time has prevented the utilization of much available newspaper, pamphlet,  and manuscript material of considerable value; but great confidence is felt that the evidence is typical, if not exhaustive. The work deals with matters which even today in a measure arouse the passions or prejudices of men; the greatest effort has been made, therefore, to preserve a detached point of view. A better contemporary understanding of the economic relations of the sections before 1861 might have moderated the bitterness of the sectional controversy; a better understanding of them even now would soften its memories.
Introduction.  P10

 
The most significant fact of American history from about 1820 to 1875, at least, was sectionalism. The section which was at all times most clearly defined was the South. The term South, however, did not have the same connotation at all times and to all men. Until about 1845 the term South was commonly applied only to the South Atlantic states. The states of the lower Mississippi valley were gradually brought under the term as their economic and social organization and general conditions approximated those in the old South and differentiated from those of the states of the upper part of the valley, for Southern sectionalism had bases in several distinctive features besides latitude.
Get this out of the way

 
Foremost of these was the existence of slavery.
P11 

 
There was basis for sectionalism, also, in divergent economic interests and conditions. To what extent the divergence was due to geography, to what extent due to other factors, including social organization, it is not necessary here to inquire. The Southern states, however, were engaged largely in the production of a few great staples cotton, tobacco, and sugar not produced in other states of the Union. Of these staples only a small proportion was consumed at home; much the greater part was exported either to the North or to Europe. The portion exported abroad constituted considerably more than half the nation's total exports. Manufacturing and mining had made, and were making during the period under survey, little progress in the South compared with the same industries in other sections; the exports of the South were exchanged in part for agricultural products of the West but chiefly for manufactured goods of the East or Europe. The ocean commerce of the South, whether coastwise or foreign, was carried almost altogether in Northern or European vessels; foreign goods for Southern consumption came largely by way of Northern ports. Only a small percentage of the Southern population was urban; the cities and towns of the section were few and small compared with those of the East or even those of the growing Northwest. The banking capital of the country was largely concentrated in the East; the South was not financially independent.
P12-13

 
Divergent economic interests of the sections led to the advocacy of different policies, on the part of the Federal government, as regards tariff, taxation, navigation laws, and the amount and objects of government expenditures. The disparity of the sections in industry and commerce was to many Southerners evidence of lack of prosperity in the South commensurate with that of the North, and, consequently, was a cause of dissatisfaction, and was galling to Southern pride. The causes of Southern "decline" were sought for; it was variously attributed to geography and climate, qualities of the people, misdirection of private enterprise, mistaken policies of the state and local governments, and the unequal operation of the Federal government, but not, generally, to slavery. Remedies were proposed, corresponding roughly to the causes, as analyzed.
The article says it will look at Southern opinion and how divergent economic interest and conditions drove Southern secetionism.  

 
It is the purpose of this study to attempt to discover to what extent Southern sectionalism had its basis in divergent economic interests and conditions. The study is primarily a study of public opinion. It will require an examination of the opinions of Southern men as to the divergence of economic interests and the extent of the disparity of economic development in the sections, the causes of such disparity, and the proper remedies therefor. Actual economic conditions and changes will be described and explained only in so far as such description and explanation are essential to an understanding of Southern public opinion. It is hoped, however, that incidentally some additional light may be thrown upon the economic status of the antebellum South, and that some conclusions may be drawn as to the justification for Southern discontent.
Refreshing to see information that adds to an understanding of the complete picture.
 

jgoodguy

Webmaster
Staff member
Administrator
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
7,116
Reaction score
4,148
Economic Aspects Of Southern Sectionalism, 1840-1861 Russel
University of Illinois Studies in the Social Sciences, V11, No. 1-2, March-June, 1923
Economic aspects of southern sectionalism, 1840-1861Emphasis mine. 

Chapter I agitation in behalf of direct trade with Europe, 1837-1839

The short story is that Southerners resented Northern economic dominance.  They had a lot of meeting with little result.

Prior to Independence Southern ports imported and export the same as the Northern but after independence imports stagnated.  Exports(Cotton?) grew very rapidity.  From the available records, The South did not consume their proportionate share of imports.

 
In colonial days the exports and imports of the Southern colonies compared very favorably in amount with those of the Northern; but shortly after independence from Great Britain was achieved, it became apparent that the importing business of the nation was being concentrated in Northern ports. As the years went by the concentration became more and more pronounced. While the exports of the staple producing states grew at a phenomenal rate, the value of the imports into Southern ports remained almost stationary or grew very slowly. This was particularly true in the case of the Atlantic ports. In the case of New Orleans, for long almost the sole outlet for the commerce of the rapidly filling Mississippi valley, there was early in the last century phenomenal increase in both exports and imports; but after about 1835 the latter increased very slowly, while the former continued to grow at the same remarkable rate. Prior to the Civil War the imports of the Northern states greatly exceeded their exports. In the Southern States the reverse was the case. A com- parison of the exports from all Southern ports with those from all Northern ports shows that after about 1830 the former always exceeded, and sometimes greatly exceeded, the latter. The imports of the Southern ports, however, were only a fraction of the imports of Northern ports, and became proportionally less as the years went by.1 If the growing superiority of the North in population be remembered, and the comparison be made on the basis of population, the disparity is still striking. It indicates that either the people of the South did not consume their proportionate share of the nation's imports, or that Northern merchants imported largely on Southern account, or both.
 

jgoodguy

Webmaster
Staff member
Administrator
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
7,116
Reaction score
4,148
[font=Tahoma,]Economic Aspects Of Southern Sectionalism, 1840-1861 Russel[/font]
[font=Tahoma,]University of Illinois Studies in the Social Sciences, V11, No. 1-2, March-June, 1923[/font]
[font=Tahoma,]Economic aspects of southern sectionalism, 1840-1861 [/font][font=Tahoma,]Emphasis mine. [/font]
[font=Tahoma,]P15[/font]


[font=Tahoma,]A study of the growth of population of Northern and Southern seaports likewise reveals a growing disparity in favor of the former.2 The antebellum South had no large and growing ports except New Orleans and Baltimore, the latter of which was on the line between the two sections.[/font]

[font=Tahoma,]
[/font]
 

jgoodguy

Webmaster
Staff member
Administrator
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
7,116
Reaction score
4,148
Economic Aspects Of Southern Sectionalism, 1840-1861 Russel
University of Illinois Studies in the Social Sciences, V11, No. 1-2, March-June, 1923
Economic aspects of southern sectionalism, 1840-1861[/b} Emphasis mine.
P16

The North had far more merchant vessels suggesting that most Southern exports were carried in Northern ships.

The available statistics of the shipping built or owned in the two sections again reveals a disparity in favor of the North as great or greater than that in the value of imports or the population of the seaports. If the comparison be limited to vessels engaged in the foreign trade, it is even more to the advantage of the North.3 These facts would seem to indicate that the foreign commerce of the Southern states was carried largely in Northern or foreign vessels, and that the coasting trade of the South, if large, must have been conducted largely in Northern vessels.
 

Nitti

charon's apprentice
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
282
Reaction score
263
Any reason other then the summer why Charleston population decreased?
 

jgoodguy

Webmaster
Staff member
Administrator
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
7,116
Reaction score
4,148
Economic Aspects Of Southern Sectionalism, 1840-1861 Russel
University of Illinois Studies in the Social Sciences, V11, No. 1-2, March-June, 1923
Economic aspects of southern sectionalism, 1840-1861[/b} Emphasis mine.
P16-17
I'll be skipping over detailed descriptions of the meetings to save time.

The "commercial" dependence on the South generated a lot of talk. It was recognized that the lack of opportunity meant slower population growth and a threat to political power.


The comparative growth of Northern and Southern seaports, the tendency to concentration of the importing business of the United States in Northern cities, especially New York, and the disparity between the shipping industries of the two sections, in short the "commercial dependence" of the South upon the North, were matters which received considerable attention in the antebellum South, not only from citizens of the seaports themselves but from the section as a whole. Southern men quite generally looked upon commercial dependence as evidence of the failure of the South to prosper as it should. They gave consideration to the relation of commercial dependence to the comparatively slow accumulation of mobile capital in the South and to the inadequacy of credit facilities, because of which they were handicapped in their efforts to construct internal improvements and to develop the varied resources of the section. They canvassed commercial dependence as a cause for the slower increase of population in the South than in the North a matter of much concern because of its bearing upon the sectional struggle over slavery. The causes of commercial dependence were sought, therefore, and efforts were made to devise and apply remedies.
Several meetings by concerned folks were made in Georgia(1837), South Carolina(1838), and Virginia(1839).
The whole subject was first thoroughly discussed, and the first efforts made to effect a revolution in the manner of conducting Southern commerce, by a number of direct trade conventions which met in Georgia, South Carolina, and Virginia in 1837, 1838, and 1839.

3 Meetings to make a new organization of Southern relations with Europe--More direct trade--cut the Northern shippers out of he equation.

It(crash of 1837) was seized upon as affording a good opportunity for attempting to effect the establishment of direct trade and a change in the method of marketing cotton. With these objects in view, William Bearing and other gentlemen, of Athens, issued a call for a convention to meet in Augusta in October, 1837. The call stated that a crisis had arrived in the commercial affairs of the South and Southwest, "the most favorable that has occurred since the formation of the American government, to attempt a new organization of our commercial relations with Europe."6 The first Augusta convention was followed in April and October, 1838, by a second and a third and, in April, 1839, by a fourth, in Charleston.
These were well attended, 100-200 attendees, from mainly Georgia and South Caroling, but had a scattering of other States. The focus was mainly economic. The attendees were from many occupations.
Each of this series of conventions was composed of from one hundred to two hundred delegates, elected by local meetings. The great majority in each case was from Georgia and South Carolina, but there were scattering representatives from North Carolina, Tennessee, Alabama, and Florida Territory, and an attempt was made to enlist as many Southern states as possible. Although the state rights, anti-tariff men gave tone to the proceedings, the conventions were bi-partisan in composition; they were not got up for partisan purposes, and party politics played a minor part in their deliberations. Among the delegates were bankers, merchants, and planters, as well as men active in politics.

These meetings had a lot of local interest, there were local meetings and newspaper articles.

The presence and active participation of such men are sufficient to indicate the deep interest in the objects of the conventions.
Numerous local meetings and the accompanying press discussion give testimony to the same effect. In addition to the debates and resolutions and the newspaper comments, the views, objects, and plans of the conventions were set forth in several quite able addresses and reports.
Footnotes.
'Charleston Courier, Oct. 7, 1837.
*Niles' Register, LV, 43, 189. The delegates of the third Augusta convention
presented William Dearing with a silver cup in recognition of his part in inaugu-
rating the direct trade conventions.
"Charleston Courier, Aug. 14, 1837.
'Calhoun to Sidney Breese, July 27, 1839, Calhoun Correspondence.
*Charlestown Courier, Oct. 24, 1837.
DeBow's Review, IV, 208 ff.
"Report is in Savannah Daily Republican, April 6, 9, 19, 1838. The address
is in the Charleston Mercury, Aug. n, 1838; DeBow's Review, XIII, 477-
93; Niles' Register, LV, 40 f.
"DeBow, Industrial Resources of the South and West, III, 92-111.
"DeBow's Review, IV, 493-502; DeBow, Industrial Resources, etc., Ill, m-
116.
 
Top