Well what.
...importers were taking advantage of the 1846 Warehousing Act.
Leaving out some of the statement, Non, tends to re-frame the debate. Here is what was said: " There are many factors that contributed to it but the main reason is simple: importers were taking advantage of the 1846 Warehousing Act."
And those factors were influencing northern shipping from almost the beginning. 1600s square riggers left Liverpool, having to have the wind at the stern or quarter. So they sailed the circular trades in a roundabout direction to the Indies and southern north America.
Inventions in boat riggings, navigation, and seaworthiness eventually made the shorter route directly to the north more efficient.
1700s shipping successes and the profits from the slave trade boosted business. Coastal traders began picking up southern goods for transshipment on bigger, deeper draft ships from NYC to Europe.
Federal laws also were set up to favor northern shipping by making it illegal for foreign ships to engage in coastal trade, and required penalties if southern shippers used foreign ships for international trade.
So, technology, slave profits, and federal laws boosted the success of northern shipping.
"Ah yes, the ever popular Warehousing Act of 1846. For those unitiated in the sothron interpretation why not outline for us why one simple piece of legislation would trump common economic logic: ie, ship the goods directly to those consuming them?"
Yes, Non, your idea of direct shipment is good. Maybe you can get a top job at FED-EX by convincing them that landing your package plane in your front yard is a better 'common economic' idea than landing at an airport first.
I could give you a full and accurate description of the effect of the Act on trade, except it would bore you since you have been given the same thing several times on this and other threads by knowledgable historians and economists who you don't listen to. Ignoring the impact of federal legislation on coastal trade is not an interpretation, but fact.
There was an active packet or coastal trade that began in the 1700s.
Northern trader-packets carrying cargo were in the harbor at the time of Ft. Sumter.
Pick up the book you use to falsly describe the coastal trade, Wise's Lifeline of the Confederacy, and it lists the packet service ships that were in service before the war. Page after page.
But you know this, and like Walt, would rather argue for days than acknowledge the truth.
If you disagree, why don't you tell us what the business of the Star of the West was before Buchanan hired it to carry troops to Charleston.
But don't take my word. Here: http://www.tulane.edu/~latner/StarOfTheWest.html
Oh don't worry about me, Pea. Think of the other members who have no idea of what you are talking about, and who might have actually read the legislation. Have at it.
Pick up the book you use to falsly describe the coastal trade, Wise's Lifeline of the Confederacy, and it lists the packet service ships that were in service before the war. Page after page.
Page after page, huh? A whole two of them?
But you know this, and like Walt, would rather argue for days than acknowledge the truth.
We're not getting it from you.
If you disagree, why don't you tell us what the business of the Star of the West was before Buchanan hired it to carry troops to Charleston.
Passenger runs between New York and New Orleans. And?