Replies

You fail to convince. Now..................now, you're taking the position that it was the Southern states that actually dictated to the North. This is utter nonsense. Having a President from the South doesn't equal "Southern" dictatorship of some sort. You still fall into the trap of picking and choosing isolated examples that do not, in any way, represent the "whole" of the nature of our country in the years leading up to the War. The North clearly dominated in terms of commerce / industry and population.

One thing here is obvious: You have spent a lot of time digging about in an attempt to prove YOUR point, not necessarily attempting to learn the whole story. I do know a bit about Southern history, for I have lived in practically every state in the southern U.S. and have taken a little time to learn something about each one........including its history. I do not claim in any way to be an expert on such things, but I DO know an agenda when I see one. Check your assumptions, my friend. They're not selling here.

You fail to convince. Now..................now, you're taking the position that it was the Southern states that actually dictated to the North. This is utter nonsense.

Is it?

Why do I say this?

The north had the overwhelming interest in manufacturing. A high protective tariff helped them much more than it would the fewer manufacturers in the south. And yet the tariff was low -- lower in fact in 1860 than in 40 years. This is a datum. It is in the records. Alexander Stephens made the point that the tariff was "exactly" what southerners made it.

Now, look at the record --- You won't consult the record.

The record shows that you are wrong. Southern interests were served much more in the ante bellum US than northern interests were.

You said in #202:

Are you suggesting that the Federal Government in no way attempted to dictate to the Southern States or otherwise interfere with what THEY saw as their conduct of commerce?

That statement is simply not suppported in the record.

Walt