I found this line interesting.
“As for the cotton ports themselves, they did not crave enough imports to justify packet lines until 1851, when New Orleans hosted one sailing to Liverpool. ”
I knew you would, but I don't omit things that I recognize as suiting the arguments of others. I don't try to manipulate information so that it just shows what I want to be shown. I highlight what I want people to look at, but I don't censor things that would be seen as damaging to my argument.
New Orleans, under the conditions that held sway at the time, did not crave enough imports to justify a packet line. When the prices of things they might want is effectively doubled by protectionist taxes, it tends to discourage people from wanting it.
I cannot say with any confidence that in absence of the additional costs of the taxes, there would be no higher demand.
Indeed, common sense would dictate that if the prices were lowered substantially, demand would likely increase. Therefore conditions as they were would not likely hold in light of the economic changes that would have occurred if the South had established normalized trade with Europe free of interference from New York and Washington.