Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: mhutcheson
I am sympathetic to states' rights and I am not sympathetic to Lincoln.

For decades before the war, the South, through harsh tariffs, had been supplying about 85% of the country’s revenue

This came up on FR just the other day. I did some quick research and it appears to be a common bone of contention. Some folks say it's true. Some folks say it's not true. Perhaps I need better research skills, but I was not able to come up with any specific taxes or tariffs, and the years they were passed, which support the claim that the South was victimized in this way, or that the any huge percentage of federal revenue was coming from the cotton.

If anyone can give me cold, hard, specific facts which support the claim, I would be much obliged.

12 posted on 01/20/2014 1:52:02 PM PST by ClearCase_guy (Anti-Complacency League! Baby!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: ClearCase_guy

I would also like to know the truth of this.


27 posted on 01/20/2014 2:03:03 PM PST by Bobalu (The true secret to genius is in creativity, not in technical mechanics - Richard Feynman)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: ClearCase_guy
If anyone can give me cold, hard, specific facts which support the claim, I would be much obliged.

You're going to be waiting a long time. lol

There was never a tariff or levy on the south in the years leading up to the war. The south opposed the tariff on foreign goods because it caused a trade war to hurt them in the cotton business. The Congress gave the south what they wanted in 1853 or so, lowering the tariff to an acceptable rate to the south.

Like Mississippi said, it was all about slavery.

33 posted on 01/20/2014 2:03:58 PM PST by Partisan Gunslinger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: ClearCase_guy; Bobalu; Partisan Gunslinger
United States Revenue and Federal Spending in the 1850s

Since practically the entire revenue each year of the government was derived from tariffs on imported goods, maintaining the export of US goods was absolutely vital to the operation of the country.

The total income of the Treasury for 1857 was $68,900,000. The portion of Treasury income from tariffs was $63,800,000. The Treasury spent $67,700,000 for the calendar year. The normal expenditures of the Government for operation of the government, the army and navy, interest on public debt, and pensions were $35,400,000. Therefore, discretionary treasury spending, authorized by Congress was almost double the normal operation of the government.

Congressional discretionary spending continued to soar. Financed by increasing public debt, the government increased the debt of the country by 43%, due to its inability to control spending.

The entire system was vulnerable. Money from the sale of cotton and tobacco in overseas markets bought goods that were then imported. In 1858, Tariffs from the sale of these goods produced 65% of the revenue of the entire treasury. The value of raw cotton sold to Northern mills, which was then finished and sent in trade to Europe accounted for another 5% of the value of imports. Thus, the treasury was not only totally dependent upon tariffs, but largely tariffs on goods purchased with money earned from the sale of Southern exports.

As the recession of 1857 deepened, Northeastern financiers and overseas bankers doubled the interest rate they required for purchase of the government’s treasury notes. The rate rose to an unprecedented 12%. The bankers also required of a pledge of government owned land as collateral. This pledge had never been required, and demonstrated the precarious financial condition of the US Treasury.

80 posted on 01/20/2014 2:30:24 PM PST by PeaRidge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: ClearCase_guy

http://www.ashevilletribune.com/archives/censored-truths/Morrill%20Tariff.html

I am not sure about the 85% deal but it is documented many places that 90%of US revenue was collected through tariffs and the South took a big hit with the tariffs and it benefited the North, twice some say.


127 posted on 01/20/2014 3:09:39 PM PST by Irenic (The pencil sharpener and Elmer's glue is put away-- we've lost the red wheelbarrow)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: ClearCase_guy

I believe the war had to do with Lincoln being the major railroad attorney and his railroad buddies needed the north and south combined under the power of Lincoln. His death greatly damaged their plans for economic power for a few years.


150 posted on 01/20/2014 4:13:13 PM PST by CodeToad (When ignorance rules a person's decision they are resorting to superstition.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: ClearCase_guy

This might help-—http://www.ashevilletribune.com/archives/censored-truths/Morrill%20Tariff.html


157 posted on 01/20/2014 4:21:50 PM PST by yadent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: ClearCase_guy

Actually the South was against the tariffs pressed by Northern states on foreign goods. The South was agricultural and depended on foreign markets for their products, while the North was self sufficient in industrial and agri products.

Commerce clause prevents tariffs between states and within USA

Insistence on Free Trade, and not developing domestic industry and infrastructure, hurt the South in the Civil War


160 posted on 01/20/2014 4:23:28 PM PST by SeminoleCounty (Amnesty And Not Ending ObamaCare Will Kill GOP In 2014)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: ClearCase_guy
Perhaps I need better research skills, but I was not able to come up with any specific taxes or tariffs, and the years they were passed, which support the claim that the South was victimized in this way, or that the any huge percentage of federal revenue was coming from the cotton.

Not sure this answers your question, but here is a handy graphic showing where tariffs were collected.

I'd also point out that tariff rates at the outbreak of secession were at the lowest level in history at that point.

265 posted on 01/21/2014 9:47:25 AM PST by Ditto
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: ClearCase_guy

Well it was more like 65%. The cotton trade was a significatnt portion of the total exports of the USA. Most of it was exported on ships out of NY. So the South got stuck sending their cotton up to NY and than paying fees, commissions etc to the tune of about 40 cents on the dollar to ship it to Europe. The Cotton Tariff stipulated that all exports had to be shipped out of the country on American built ships. Well the ship building business was located in New England and most of the ships were up North.

Since the South did not have the capability of producing ships they not able to ship significant exports out of Charleston and Savannah.

All of this information is in the public domain. You can Google it in 5 minutes.


351 posted on 01/22/2014 4:36:26 PM PST by Georgia Girl 2 (The only purpose of a pistol is to fight your way back to the rifle you should never have dropped.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson