THE GREAT REBELLION: Important Changes in the Disposition of the two Armies; A Brilliant Naval Exploit at Pensacola; A Privateer Burnt under the Guns of the Navy-yard (9/30/1861)

During last week it was so frequently reported from day to day, that our troops had taken possession of Munson's Hill, that when last night this long predicted event took place, it found few believers among those least excited by sensation reports. A personal visit however puts the fact beyond doubt. The American flag now floats there in place of that of the rebels.

Detachments from Gen.'s RICHARDSON's, KEYE's and WADSWORTH's Brigades, and also from Gen. FRANKLIN's Division now occupy Munson's Hill, being in command of Col. FERRY of the Fifth Michigan regiment.

Early this forenoon, the pickets from Gen. SMITH's Division advanced, and now occupy Fall's Church. Neither this nor the preceding movements met with any opposition whatever, as the rebel Army had, on Friday night, retired from the whole line of their positions on the line of of Washington. Upton's Hill, this side of Fall's Church, is necessarily included among the points now held by the National forces.

The works of the enemy at the places they had evacuated, were in a military view almost worthless, being nothing more than rifle-pits of very common construction. The positions at Munson's and Murray's Hills afforded the rebels an unobstructed view of all our fortifications and other defences. The appearance of the ground deserted by them indicated that they were deficient in those arrangements which serve to make a camp life comfortable, having no tents, but merely shelters rudely constructed. There were no signs to show that they had ever mounted any guns. Our troops are now so employed as to show that they do not merely intend temporarily to occupy their present position.

The advance of Gen. SMITH on Fall's Church from the Chain Bridge was accompanied by events of the most deplorable character.

Free Republic University, Department of History presents U.S. History, 1861-1865: Seminar and Discussion Forum
The American Civil War, as seen through news reports of the time and later historical accounts

First session: November 21, 2015. Last date to add: May 2025.
Reading: Self-assigned. Recommendations made and welcomed.

Posting history, in reverse order

https://www.freerepublic.com/tag/by:homerjsimpson/index?tab=articles

To add this class to or drop it from your schedule notify Admissions and Records (Attn: Homer_J_Simpson) by reply or freepmail.

Link to previous New York Times thread

https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3999046/posts

The Great Rebellion: Important Changes in the Disposition of the two Armies – 2
A Brilliant Naval Exploit: Destruction of the Privateer Judah – 2-3
Editorial: The Armies Before Washington – 3-4
Editorial: The Navigation of the Ohio Threatened – 4-5
More Self-Slaughter among the National Soldiers – 5
The Capture and Burning of the Privateer Judah – 5
Editorial: The Greasy Mechanic in a New Light – 5-6
Editorial: The Place of Cotton in Our European Trade – 6
Amusements – 6
Col. Mulligan’s Heroes – 6

"Editorial: The Place of Cotton in Our European Trade – 6"

For many years on these threads our Lost Causers, most notably DiogenesLamp, have argued that Deep South cotton exports were essential to the US economy, that without "Southern products" US exports would amount to little and the US economy would collapse.
This explains, they tell us, why the Union went to war in 1861 to prevent secession and Confederacy.

And for nearly as many years I have argued the reverse -- that Southern exports, notably cotton, did NOT amount to a key part of the US economy, and as evidence (among other things) I've cited the fact that in 1861, after secession and war, the Union's economy did NOT, in fact, collapse but rather continued along rather well, thank you.

Now here our NY Times editors are making my case for me, arguing slightly differently than I do, but to the same result -- that the Union's economy did rather well in 1861, even without the boosts provided by Confederate state exports.
Here are some key sentences:

"We have now had half a year of blockade, and little or no cotton has been exported during that period, and no advance has been made upon the incoming crop.
Moreover, the Southern planters and traders have paid nothing of their last year's indebtedness to Northern merchants.
And yet the balance of trade with Europe has been all the time in our favor, and the current of gold been constantly toward us.
Instead of being drained of the precious metals, the flow has been continually in our favor.
There are many millions of gold in the country beyond what there were last Fall or last Spring, and the amount is constantly increasing.
Here is a phenomenon to be accounted for by those political economists who insist that cotton is the great power which produces commercial equilibrium between the United States and Europe -- a fact, by the way, worth a bushel of theories..."

Our editors argue that the South's exports only paid for the South's imports, and that's why the Union was not negatively affected by secession.
I don't think that's quite right, but I do think the overall effect of Confederate states' economy was roughly 15% of total US GDP, and that was lost in 1861.
But 15% is far from the 75% often claimed by Confederate propagandists, and that 15% was quickly adjusted for and then consumed in the 100%+ growth of the Union's overall GDP between 1860 and 1865.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.