Replies

Well, thanks for begging the answer why some imports were not shipped directly.

The Warehousing Act of 1854 was passed by Congress. It said:

Sec. 4. And be it further enacted, That all goods, wares, and merchandise, which may be hereafter duly entered for warehousing under bond, and likewise all merchandise [not] now remaining in warehouse under bond, may continue in warehouse, without payment of duties thereupon, for a period of three years from the date of original importation, and my be withdrawn for consumption on due entry and payment of duties and charges, or upon entry for exportation, without the payment of duties, at any time within the period aforesaid; in the latter case, the goods to be subject only to the payment of such storage and charges as may be due thereon: Provided, however, that where the duties shall have been paid upon any goods, wares, or merchandizes entered for consumption, said duties shall not be refunded on exportation of any such goods, wares, or merchandizes, without the limits of the United States: and provided further, That there shall be no abatement of the duties, or allowance made for any injury, damage, deterioration, loss or leakage sustained by any goods, wares, or merchandise, whilst deposited in any public or private bonded warehouse established or recognized by this act.

The Act was signed into law on February 28, 1854. The momentous importance of this was that importers could warehouse their goods for up to three years before paying the tariff.

That meant they could sell their goods to obtain the money needed to pay the tariff fees and then pay it upon removing the sold goods from the warehouse. This offered a vast savings in finance costs to the owner.

Another major advantage to the merchants was that the did not have to carry large sums of cash on hand to pay tariffs immediately after they dropped off their cargoes, which in turn made it easier to ship goods that had no immediate buyer waiting at the docks.

Congress created secure and duty-free enclaves under federal control in order to encourage merchants here and abroad to make use of American ports. It also meant that trading organizations could better deal with market fluctuations by withholding goods for sale until conditions improved.

New York became the warehousing center of the country because it had readily convertible facilities. Businessmen shipped across the Atlantic to New York, warehoused for up to three years, and then shipped out of New York warehouses up the coast and inland to all over the U.S.

With this act, Northern merchants sealed their dominance over the cotton trade.

The Warehousing Act of 1854 was passed by Congress.
New York became the warehousing center of the country because it had readily convertible facilities.

With this act, Northern merchants sealed their dominance over the cotton trade.

Nothing in this act said that goods, wares and merchandise couildn't be stored in Southern locations also. Why couldn't Southerners build their own warehouses to compete with the mighty Yankees?

About all you've shown here is that depsite several natural advantages and some real opportunities Southerners weren't very good businessmen.

With this act, Northern merchants sealed their dominance over the cotton trade.

First off, the original warehousing act was passed in 1846. The 1854 act only changed the place of storing imports for up to three years before the tariff was paid from government customs houses to private bonded warehouses. Second, the bill was heartily approved of by the southern agricultural interests, as reported by DeBow:

"We were at Memphis, Tennessee, when a large portion of the Southern States were present, and the whole of the Western ones. Mr. Minor, from Virginia, reported favorably on the system; and had the vote of the Convention been taken. upon the merits of the question, from everything we saw and heard there, little doubt can exist that the report would have been almost unanimously adopted. Unfortunately, however, a gentleman, Mr. Trescott, of Charleston, presented a minority report, signed by himself and three others, which disposed of the question, as we conceived, on grounds scarcely tenable. The minority were not opposed to the warehousing system, but did not think it a proper subject to come before the Convention, partaking, as it did of a party complexion, and relating more to the mercantile than to the agricultural interests."(...)""It is a high and strong recommendation in favor of it, (the warehousing system,) that it was adopted on the most liberal and extensive footing in all those nations most celebrated for their commercial wisdom and experience. The want of it has already driven from New Orleans nearly the whole of the Mexican trade, as the merchants of that country can no longer procure here those large and varied assortments of foreign manufactures, which were always to be obtained in this city, and this lucrative want of commerce has been transferred to Havana, where a liberal warehouse system exists."

http://www.earlyrepublic.net/jm990907.htm