“Even when the Southern cotton bound for Europe did not put in at the wharves of Sandy Hook or the East River, unloading and reloading, the combined income from interests, commissions, freight, insurance, and other profits took perhaps 40 cents into New York of every dollar paid for southern cotton. This unnecessarily inflated the cost of cotton for overseas customers and crippled the Southern farmer.”
Assuming for a moment that statement above is true, how would all these costs have been eliminated had the commissions, freight, insurance, and other profits been in Southern hands instead? Would all that been done by slaves so it would have been free?
Do either of you actually understand how the plantation owner sold his crop?
Somewhere in that linked thread there is a very good explanation of how the New York business interests managed to gouge the Southerners with all these little cuts that worked out to be 40% of the total revenue produced by export. When I get time to do so, i'll read through the thread and see if I can find those sections where that same fellow claiming his family was involved in this shipping business at the time, explains how they were gouging because of laws which allowed them to do it.
Do either of you actually understand how the plantation owner sold his crop?
Pretty sure I do. I've only read and reread this information dozens of times already. New York ran the cotton trade. Period.
Between New York and Washington DC, most of the money produced by slaves went into the pockets of people in New York and Washington DC.
*NOW* you know why they didn't want to do anything about slavery. *NOW* you know why they had no trouble passing the Corwin Amendment.