For the record,the SS Planter was built in 1860 by Charleston shipbuilder F. M. Jones at Haddrell’s Point for Charleston businessman John Ferguson. It was a shallow draft 147 ft., 300 ton displacement sidewheeler used as an inland transport in river waters. Records show she picked up cotton and produce from plantations between Charleston and Georgetown for a few weeks before she was pressed into service for the Charleston harbor guard and used as a dispatch boat.
WE have seen many posts and photographs of the CSS Planter used as an example of shipbuilding in the state of SC.
Somehow the presence of this inland steamer leads to the conclusion that boats were built in SC and that therefore, the “North could not and did not control transcontinental shipping."
You have pointed out several times the fallacy and failure of logic of this argument.
For the record, just the shipbuilding in Charleston, which began in the late 1600s is well documented because of the requirements of the Navigation Act of 1696. In 1698, there were ten ships registered in this port, most likely all having been built in that city.
Probably the first transoceanic trading vessel built in the colonies was the “Princess Carolina”, finished in 1715 and displacing 1143 tons, matching the size of any others that docked in Charleston.
This proved that builders such as Benjamin Austin of Charleston could produce international scale traders.
Other ships made in Charleston were “Friendship”, “Liberty”, “Carolina”, “Fair America”, and dozens of others.
Due to financial consequences, the ship building industry in Charleston sized downward in the early 1800s and eventually concentrated only on river traders, such as the SS Planter, essentially a small barge.
Do not forget "The Horizon" which was a Charleston built ship, and famous for being the very first American ship seized by Napoleon's Berlin Decree. It was a transoceanic vessel. It foundered on the rocks near Calais, and it's remains and cargo were seized by the French under the Berlin Decree. (because it was carrying British goods) It caused great consternation in Congress just prior to the war of 1812.
Your term "financial consequences" is vague enough to mean virtually anything, but it cannot conceal the fact that Southerners remained fully capable of building, owning and operating their own shipping, if they wanted to.
Nor is there any evidence that "financial consequences" originated in Washington, DC, as a result of some nefarious anti-Southern conspiracy.
The fact remains that Southerners dominated Washington, DC, almost continuously from 1788 through 1860 and so could have, at any time, corrected any legal issues affecting Southern owned shipping.
That said, it appears to me that your post here, PeaRidge, generally supports my arguments on this.