Cotton Production was at its height from 1793-1860 and was known as the cotton kingdom. These quick profits drew planters to the deep south to grow their own cotton and make big money
Northern shippers reaped a large part of the profits from the cotton trade. Cotton accounted for half the value of all American exports. Sooner or later the US owned the world due to its economic power with cotton.
Britain, their recent enemy, was tied to them by ton threads and this dependence gave America a heady sense of power. The south's pride grew and grew because of its cotton, as did the norths due to its industry.
Before the Civil war, the south had more of an oligarchy, a government by a few, rather than a democracy. The planter aristocracy heavily influenced it.
However this extreme wealth barely concealed the worrisome, distasteful and brutal business of slavery. King Cotton and his money hungry subjects despoiled the good earth quickly and made money off of human flesh.
After Eli Whitney's invention, the cotton gin, the elite planters demanded slavery more and more because it increased cotton production.
There were only 1733 families in 1840 that owned a hundred or more slaves. 1840 families representing about 1725000 white persons. 2/3s of these families owned fewer than 10 slaves. 1/4 had slaves or belonged to slave owning families
the south's free blacks numbered about 250,000 by 1860. In the deeper south, many free blacks were mulattoes, the emancipated children of a white planter and his black mistress.
Free blacks in the south were a kind of third race. They were prohibited from working in certain occupations and forbidden from testifying against whites in courts. They were often taken back into slavery.
Free blacks were unpopular in the north, about another 250,000 lived there. Some states forbade their entrance and denied them the right to vote. Antiblack feeling was frequently stronger in the north than in the south.
In society's basement in the south of 1860 there were nearly 4 million black slaves. The booming cotton economy created a seemingly unquenchable demand for slave labor.
Slavery was profitable for the great planters, though it hobbled the economic development of the region as a whole. The profits from the cotton boom sucked evermore slaves from the upper to lower south.
Breeding slaves in the way that cattle are bred was not openly encouraged. But thousands of blacks from the soil-exhausted slave states of the Old south were sold down the river. Women who bore thirteen or fourteen babies were prized as "rattling' good breeders"
slavery conditions varied greatly from region to region. Slavery meant hard work ignorance and oppression... however, some were treated differently from their masters. Some states offered protections such as banning the sale of a child under the age of 10 away from his or her mother.
Floggings were common, for the whip was the substitute for the wage incentive system and the most visible symbol of the platern's mastery. However, savage beatings made poor laborers and marks hurt resale values.
With impressive resilience, blacks managed to sustain family life in slavery and most slaves were raised in stable two parent households. Family identity across generations was evidenced in the widespread practice of naming children for grandparents or adopting the surname not of a current master but of a forebears master.
African roots were also visible in the slaves religious practices. Though heavily Christianized by the itinerant evangelists of the second great awakening, blacks in slavery molded their own distinctive religious forms from a mixture of Christian and African American elements.
Slavery was intolerably degrading to the victims. They were denied an education because reading brought ideas and ideas brought discontent. However, victims of slavery devised countless ways to throw sand din its gears. When workers are not voluntarily hired and adequately compensated, they can hardly be expected to work with alacrity. Slaves slowed down their pace of labor fostering laziness in the minds of whites. They even filched food and occasionally poisoned their masters food.
An armed rebellion led by a slave named Gabriel in Richmond, Virginia was foiled by informers and its leaders were hanged. Denmark Vesey led another ill-fated rebellion in Charleston, SC and was also betrayed by informers. He slaughtered about 60 Virginians before he was caught and hanged.
Quakers were important abolitionists.
President Monroe sent some fifteen thousand free blacks to Liberia
William Lloyd Garrison are the most conspicuous and most vilified of the abolitionists. He was a nonresistant pacifist and a poor organizer. He favored northern secession from the south and antagonized both sections with his intemperate language.
Sojourner Truth was an important abolitionist who held audiences spellbound with her deep, resonant voice and the religious passions with which she condemned the sin of slavery.
Fredrick Douglas was an active abolitionist and escaped slave. He was a gifted orator, writer, and editor who continued to battle for the civil rights of his people after emancipation.
The nullification crisis of 1832 further implanted haunting fears in white southern minds, conjuring up nightmares of black incendiaries and abolitionist devils. Proslavery whites responded by launching a massive defense of slavery as a positive good. They were quick to contrast the "happy" lot of their slaves to the overworked northern wage slaves, including sweated women and stunted children.
These proslavery arguments only widened the chasm between a backward-looking south and a forward-looking north.
Wow, Kathryn. You provided a lot of information. Good job!
But, you said Quakers were important abolitionists. How so?
Wasn't every abolitionist an important abolitionist? What made the Quakers different?
Wow, Julia. Your font is gigundo! Good job! hehe Well, I think what Katie meant is that rather than being a bunch of individuals, the Quakers as a whole were primarily whites that sought to help out the oppressed. That was pretty rare at the time.
I know we're supposed to be asking less questions, but do you think that if the south were to look back at what happened to their cotton industry after the civil war that they would still have gone down the same road they did with slavery? Would they trade in their couple years of wealth so they could build something more stable without slaves, or would they have still used slavery back then? I don't know, I think it's an ineresting question.
Jarred, For the US economy, the cotton gin was easily the greatest invention at the time. It increased cotton production making loads of money and it increased profits in the slave business making many slave traders wealthy *though they completely didn't deserve it*. However, for the US people, the cotton gin only increased slavery, in which the white aristocracy 'needed' more and more slaves. And we already know that as slavery was growing, the issue of representation of slave states in congress was growing also.... later leading to the Civil War.
Julia, I mentioned the quakers because it was the first thing i saw in the chapter about abolitionists.... and there were about a billion more groups to list. However they really were very important in the abolitionist movement because not only were they a white group of individuals, as Alex stated, but they also believed in a very peaceful way of ending slavery. The Quakers were all about peace.... love not war. However, they were no more important than other abolitionists. Journalists like William Lloyd Garrison spoke up about slavery, but in an extremely more outspoken way.
Brandi, Ummm... my brain is fried.... so I'm not sure what your question is. I am guessing that you are asking if the south knew that they would lose the Civil War and would later have to resort to paid labor for their cotton plantations..... would they still have seceded?
I'll answer that one^ Okay, I personally believe they would have still seceded because the south was a region in America with A LOT OF PRIDE. They were all about southern pride and wealth and their businesses owning slaves. The mere idea that they even seceded from the Union displays how confident the south was as a region. So, no, I think they would have still seceded. Then again, maybe not.
And your other question is very interesting i agree. But its a lot of work to answer. lol. But I think that they would have continued slavery as long as possible because King Cotton needed it. The Southern Aristocracy was often times stubborn and cared a lot about their profit. So yes, i feel as though they would have kept using slavery.
William Penn founded the state of Pennsylvania as a place for Quakers to practice their faith. This state also welcomed members of other religions, too.
Cotton Production was at its height from 1793-1860 and was known as the cotton kingdom. These quick profits drew planters to the deep south to grow their own cotton and make big money
The Cotton Production also greated great diveristy between the North and the South...Explain in detail Why....
