Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: PeaRidge; Bubba Ho-Tep; rustbucket
PeaRidge: "The Morrill Tariff was not a relatively small burden by any reasonable standard.
Some predicted average rates would reach about 45%, which they did."

The original Morrill Tariff proposed in 1860 raised rates from then historically low 15% back to more average rates around 22%.
There was nothing unusually high about those levels.

During the Civil War Union tariff rates reached 35%, or roughly the same as the 1830s, when Southerner Democrat President Andrew Jackson and South Carolinian Vice President John C. Calhoun were in charge.

The highest rates of 45% did not come until 1870, to help pay for the war, and also to protect US industry and workers against foreign competitors.
The result was the longest, greatest period of economic growth in world history, from 1865 until passage of the 16th Amendment in 1913.

PeaRidge: "You have made several comments about the timing of Morrill and secession, as well as one about the fact that the South could have defeated it had the Congressmen stayed in Washington."

No, why insist on misunderstanding?
The Morrill Tariff could have been defeated in the House in 1860 if the South and/or Democrats had firmly opposed it.
But there were more than enough Southerners and Democrats who voted for Morrill to allow its passage in the House, in 1860.

In the Senate, Southerners opposed to Morrill held positions of power until they began walking out after the November 1860 election.
So Morrill passed first because House Southerners were only halfhearted in opposition, and second because Senate Southerners walked out of the Senate.

PeaRidge: "The only thing left was the Senate, and, by their own calculations of December 12th, 1860, the southerners knew they did not have the votes to stop it there."

Because not all Southerners and Democrats opposed Morrill.

417 posted on 04/16/2013 9:41:14 AM PDT by BroJoeK (a little historical perspective....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 398 | View Replies ]


To: BroJoeK
You said: “The original Morrill Tariff proposed in 1860 raised rates from then historically low 15% back to more average rates around 22%. There was nothing unusually high about those levels.”

Wrong. Before Morrill, the average rate was 18.84%. It jumped to 36.2% with Morrill, then creeped up to 47.56% after two years when even more protectionist adjustments were made to Morrill.

By comparison, the confederate tariff adopted in May 1861 had an average rate of just over 13%.

Whether or not you think that “..there was nothing unusually high about those levels” is not the point. It was critically important to Northern manufacturing and consumers that the Morrill tariff was 40% higher and would drive European trade through Southern ports.

You said: “The highest rates of 45% did not come until 1870...”.

Actually they came five years before then.

You said: “The Morrill Tariff could have been defeated in the House in 1860 if the South and/or Democrats had firmly opposed it.

Not true: The sectional breakdown was 96–15 in the north, 7–9 in the Border states, and 1–39 in the south. Had everyone in the South and border states voted against it, it would still carry.

“But there were more than enough Southerners and Democrats who voted for Morrill to allow its passage in the House, in 1860.”

Wrong again.

You said: “In the Senate, Southerners opposed to Morrill held positions of power until they began walking out after the November 1860 election. So Morrill passed first because House Southerners were only halfhearted in opposition, and second because Senate Southerners walked out of the Senate.”

Wrong again and again....this is boring.

On December 12, 1860 speaking before the Senate, before any state had seceded, Sen. Louis Wigfall revealed his opinion on future equal representation as provided by the US Constitution:
“Tell me not that we have got the legislative department of this Government, for I say we have not. As to this body, where do we stand?
“Why, sir, there are now eighteen non-slaveholding States. In a few weeks we shall have the nineteenth, for Kansas will be brought in. Then arithmetic which settles our position is simple and easy.
“Thirty-eight northern Senators you will have upon this floor. We shall have thirty to your thirty-eight. After the 4th of March, the Senator from California, the Senator from Indiana, the Senator from New Jersey, and the Senator from Minnesota will be here.
“That reduces the northern phalanx to thirty-four...There are four of the northern Senators upon whom we can rely, whom we know to be friends, whom we have trusted in our days of trial heretofore, and in whom, as Constitution-loving men, we will trust.
“Then we stand thirty-four to thirty-four, and your Black Republican Vice President to give the casting vote.

460 posted on 04/19/2013 1:23:31 PM PDT by PeaRidge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 417 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson