GDG- NPS, Slavery and Economies

Jack Lawrence jlawrence at kc.rr.com
Thu Jan 5 19:13:15 CST 2012


Andy,

Here are the slave population figures from 1800 to 1860. They do not include 
free backs.

I just do noit see a direct correlation between cotton and the slave 
population.

1800 1 million

1810 1.1 million

1820 1.5 Million

1830 2.0 million

1840 2.5 Million

1850 3.2 million

1860  309 Million

Regards,

Jack



                        'Love not the world,' the preacher said,
                        And winked his eye, and shook his head;
                        He seized on Tom, and Dick, and Ned,
                        Cut short their meat, and clothes, and bread,
                        Yet still loved heavenly union.

                        "Another preacher whining spoke
                        Of One whose heart for sinners broke:
                         He tied old Nanny to an oak,
                        And drew the blood at every stroke,
                        And prayed for heavenly union.

                        "Two others oped their iron jaws,
                        And waved their children-stealing paws;
                        There sat their children in gewgaws;
                        By stinting negroes' backs and maws,
                        They kept up heavenly union.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Andy Mills" <amills at jplcreative.com>
To: "GDG" <gettysburg at arthes.com>
Sent: Thursday, January 05, 2012 2:32 PM
Subject: Re: GDG- NPS, Slavery and Economies


> Esteemed GDG Member Contributes:
> Cotton production in 1795:  8.3 million pounds
> Cotton production in 1800:  36.5 million pounds
> Cotton production in 1805:  73 million pounds
> http://www.slaveryinamerica.org/history/hs_es_cotton.htm
>
> Raw Cotton (bales)
> 1790:  3,135
> 1795:  16,719
> 1800:  146,290
> http://eh.net/encyclopedia/article/phillips.cottongin
>
> The first census counted 697,000 slaves in 1790.  In 1810, there were 1.2 
> million slaves and by 1860, there are 3.9 million.  Within 10 years of the 
> development of the cotton gin, the value of the total United States crop 
> leaped from $150,000 to more than $8 million
> http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/aia/part3/3narr6.html
> http://eh.net/encyclopedia/article/wahl.slavery.us
>
> These number increase exponentionally after the invention of the cotton 
> gin and without the cotton gin, the explosion in cotton doesn't take place 
> and as such, the demand for cheap labor isn't nearly as important as it is
>
> Without the cotton gin:  slaves are not needed in near the quantity they 
> are after the invention because the vast expansion was a direct result of 
> the invention of the cotton gin.
>
> Slaves did product a myriad of crops, but cotton vastly outnumbered 
> indigo, rice, tobacco or any other product and without the explosion of 
> cotton as a result of the cotton gin, the number of slaves is drastically 
> diminished.
>
> Thanks,
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: gettysburg-bounces at arthes.com [mailto:gettysburg-bounces at arthes.com] 
> On Behalf Of Jack Lawrence
> Sent: Thursday, January 05, 2012 3:18 PM
> To: GDG
> Subject: Re: GDG- NPS, Slavery and Economies
>
> Esteemed GDG Member Contributes:
> At the end of the day, it all folds back into slavery.
>
> And I think the cotton gin thing is vastly overblown.
>
> Slaves produced a myriad of crops.
>
> But the root cause of the war was salvery.
>
> Its like saying that a fertilized egg caused a pregnancy. There was 
> something else in there first.
>
> Regards,
>
> jack
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Andy Mills" <amills at jplcreative.com>
> To: "GDG" <gettysburg at arthes.com>
> Sent: Thursday, January 05, 2012 2:04 PM
> Subject: Re: GDG- NPS, Slavery and Economies
>
>
>> Esteemed GDG Member Contributes:
>> But the basics of slavery was money.  Money was the underlying factor 
>> that
>> kept slavery alive.
>>
>> Had slavery resorted in losing money and the decay of the plantations,
>> slavery would have been thrown out and replaced with something 
>> profitable.
>>
>> Money kept slavery alive and until slavery wasn't profitable or outlawed,
>> it would continue.
>>
>> Without the invention of the cotton gin, slavery would have most likely
>> faded out as it wouldn't have been profitable and there would have been 
>> no
>> need to protect a system that costs you money.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: gettysburg-bounces at arthes.com 
>> [mailto:gettysburg-bounces at arthes.com]
>> On Behalf Of Jack Lawrence
>> Sent: Thursday, January 05, 2012 2:53 PM
>> To: GDG
>> Subject: Re: GDG- NPS, Slavery and Economies
>>
>> Esteemed GDG Member Contributes:
>> Jim,
>>
>> All of the money reasons fold back into slavery.
>>
>> If you want to claim that the civil war was not about freeing the slaves
>> at the beginning, I will be the first to support you.
>>
>> If want to say that the Civil War was not about freeing the slaves at the
>> end, I will say Fortress Monroe.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Jack
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Jim Ferguson" <jaferg at comcast.net>
>> To: "'GDG'" <gettysburg at arthes.com>
>> Sent: Thursday, January 05, 2012 1:20 PM
>> Subject: Re: GDG- NPS, Slavery and Economies
>>
>>
>>> Esteemed GDG Member Contributes:
>>> I wish you had gone further in your discussion; money was the root cause
>>> of
>>> the Civil War in my opinion. And by root, I mean the one and only one
>>> thing
>>> that if removed from the slavery equation would stop the event from
>>> happening. The slave trade had become such a major portion of the 
>>> South's
>>> GDP that none of the major players in the region were going to accept 
>>> the
>>> elimination of it in the westward expansion.
>>>
>>> There are many work's on this subject, of course, but I like Bancroft's
>>> "Slave Trading in the Old South" for an semi-technical unvarnished
>>> explanation.
>>> Jim
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: gettysburg-bounces at arthes.com
>>> [mailto:gettysburg-bounces at arthes.com]
>>> On Behalf Of joadx1 at netscape.net
>>> Sent: Thursday, January 05, 2012 12:59 PM
>>> To: gettysburg at arthes.com
>>> Subject: Re: GDG- NPS, Slavery and Economies
>>>
>>> Esteemed GDG Member Contributes:
>>> This is not a simplistic view; in fact, a number of modern analyses of
>>> the
>>> Civil War focus precisely on the economic aspects of the conflict.  One
>>> that
>>> I have read indicates that one of the reasons why non-slave-owning
>>> southerners fought to protect slavery was because so much of the 
>>> southern
>>> economy was founded upon it that everyone would suffer economically if 
>>> it
>>> disappeared.
>>>
>>> And while it would take us too far away from the parameters of this
>>> discussion board, I would argue (and do argue in my own professional
>>> work)
>>> that the peculiar institution of money has a particularly powerful role
>>> in
>>> our history, past and present, that is often misunderstood or ignored.
>>> But
>>> I will go no further on that.
>>>
>>> But I will add that the matter of slavery and the Civil War is
>>> overdetermined--that is, there is more than one cause at work here.
>>> Beyond
>>> the very real economic dimensions of the matter are the racial ones (I 
>>> do
>>> not want to dwell on this, but racial hatred and feelings racial
>>> superiority
>>> are also involved); the social class ones (the plantation aristocracy 
>>> was
>>> able to paper over the class inequalities in the south by telling
>>> southern
>>> yeomen that without slavery they would be part of a menial class, but
>>> with
>>> it they were part of a ruling caste); and simple fear: the southerners
>>> were
>>> very well aware that they had, in many regions, established slave
>>> populations that were much larger than the white populations, and they
>>> were
>>> terrified of a slave rebellion on the order of the successful rebellion
>>> in
>>> Haiti.
>>>
>>> There are yet other parts to this ugly puzzle, but your own suggestion 
>>> is
>>> a
>>> very important part of it all.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Andy Mills <amills at jplcreative.com>
>>> To: GDG <gettysburg at arthes.com>
>>> Sent: Thu, Jan 5, 2012 9:44 am
>>> Subject: GDG- NPS, Slavery and Economies
>>>
>>>
>>> Esteemed GDG Member Contributes:
>>> My apologies as I am not the best at getting ideas and thoughts out of 
>>> my
>>> head
>>> and rationalizing them so others can understand.
>>>
>>> Having made my disclaimer, I am curious as to why the war wasn't all
>>> about
>>> money?
>>>
>>> Secession caused the war and slavery caused secession, I think based on
>>> emails I
>>> have read over the last couple days, everyone agrees with this 
>>> statement.
>>>
>>> But what caused slavery?  The immediate cause was the need for cheap
>>> labor
>>> centuries before the civil war, so the underlying cause of slavery was
>>> money,
>>> ergo money caused slavery and slavery caused secession so the root cause
>>> was
>>>
>>> money?
>>>
>>> I understand that by 1860, there was also a racial element to America's
>>> slavery
>>> and part of the reason for maintaining the system was this racial 
>>> element
>>> but I
>>> don't think this was the major force in maintaining the "peculiar
>>> institution",
>>> as the major force was simply put:  money.
>>>
>>> So why wouldn't the root cause then be economics, that without allowing
>>> slavery
>>> into the territories, slavery would slowly die and as a result, so would
>>> the
>>> way
>>> of life for the slave holding aristocrats of the South and their desire
>>> to
>>> maintain slavery was a desire to maintain their statuses, income, etc.
>>>
>>> One example would be Hampton Plantation outside Baltimore.  It was one 
>>> of
>>> the
>>> largest and richest prior to the Civil War but slowly fell into a period
>>> of
>>> decline once slavery was banished from the country until the NPS saved
>>> the
>>> mansion future generations (yes, I know other organizations originally
>>> saved
>>> it
>>> in 1948, but didn't want to go into all the history of it).  We can look
>>> at
>>> many
>>> of the James River plantations that had to open their doors to the 
>>> public
>>> to
>>>
>>> preserve and protect their properties because they were no longer
>>> sustainable
>>> once slavery was abolished.
>>>
>>> I agree that the original south seceded to protect slavery, but
>>> underneath
>>> that,
>>> slavery was there to support their income / economies, so if you want to
>>> say
>>>
>>> slavery led to secession which lead to the war, why can't you further
>>> define
>>> it
>>> that money led to slavery which lead to secession which led to war and 
>>> as
>>> such,
>>> the root cause is the all powerful dollar?
>>>
>>> I understand this is a simplistic view and possibly an incorrect view of
>>> the
>>>
>>> situation, but to me, secession caused the war and a desire to protect
>>> slavery
>>> led to secession (I understand that you can't separate slavery from 1860
>>> South),
>>> but the root cause of slavery was money.  American slavery / chattel
>>> slavery
>>>
>>> wasn't like the Native Americans that took slaves from rival tribes to
>>> help
>>> replenish their population, or Rome that took slaves from captured
>>> armies.
>>> Slaves in those societies were not the basis of the economies as it was
>>> in
>>> the
>>> Antebellum South.
>>>
>>> I hope this makes sense, but wanted to get some viewpoints to see if 
>>> this
>>> is
>>> a
>>> valid opinion or is full of holes.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: gettysburg-bounces at arthes.com
>>> [mailto:gettysburg-bounces at arthes.com]
>>> On
>>> Behalf Of John Lawrence
>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2012 8:48 PM
>>> To: GDG
>>> Subject: Re: GDG- NPs & Slavery
>>>
>>>>--------------------------------
>>>>
>>>>Hello,
>>>>
>>>>I am not arguing  whether not Lincoln could have  have chosen another
>>>>method to react to secession.  I'm not arguing Lincoln did not go to
>>>>war to preserve the union.   I am simply stating the  historical fact
>>>>that secession was caused by slavery and war was the result.
>>>>
>>>>It is impossible to have any discussion of the causes of the war or the
>>>>cause secession without the inclusion of slavery.
>>>>
>>>>The indisputable point is  slavery was the cause of secession which was
>>>>the cause of the war.
>>>>
>>>>The other what-ifs do not apply to that.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Take Care
>>>>
>>>>Dennis
>>>
>>>
>>> ----------------http://www.arthes.com/mailman/listinfo/gettysburg_arthes.com
>>> -to
>>> unsubscribe
>>> http://arthes.com/pipermail/gettysburg_arthes.com/ for Archives
>>>
>>>
>>> ----------------http://www.arthes.com/mailman/listinfo/gettysburg_arthes.com
>>> -to unsubscribe
>>> http://arthes.com/pipermail/gettysburg_arthes.com/ for Archives
>>>
>>>
>>> ----------------http://www.arthes.com/mailman/listinfo/gettysburg_arthes.com
>>>  -to unsubscribe
>>> http://arthes.com/pipermail/gettysburg_arthes.com/ for Archives
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ----------------http://www.arthes.com/mailman/listinfo/gettysburg_arthes.com
>>  -to unsubscribe
>> http://arthes.com/pipermail/gettysburg_arthes.com/ for Archives
>>
>> ----------------http://www.arthes.com/mailman/listinfo/gettysburg_arthes.com
>>  -to unsubscribe
>> http://arthes.com/pipermail/gettysburg_arthes.com/ for Archives
>>
>
>
>
> ----------------http://www.arthes.com/mailman/listinfo/gettysburg_arthes.com 
>  -to unsubscribe
> http://arthes.com/pipermail/gettysburg_arthes.com/ for Archives
>
> ----------------http://www.arthes.com/mailman/listinfo/gettysburg_arthes.com 
>  -to unsubscribe
> http://arthes.com/pipermail/gettysburg_arthes.com/ for Archives
> 





More information about the Gettysburg mailing list