|View single post by 39th Miss. Walker|
|Posted: Wed Dec 5th, 2007 02:53 pm||
39th Miss. Walker
|Bama, ah but keep in mind too that the wealth and fireaters of the south were almost exclusively the domain of the slaveholders.
Most of the small farmers would not have been that affected by any tariffs. In fact without the wealth of the southern slaveholders and their political will, there would not have been a South as we know it.
Most of the immigration from Virginia and Maryland was to the new areas in North and South Carolina in the mid to late 1700's and then onward to Mississippi and Alabama as westward expansion moved in the early 1800's.
The vast majority as you say didn't own slaves. As the cultivation of cotton grew so did the need for additional slaves, hence the gathering of wealth through the owning of slaves. One of the biggest concerns was the value of their property in the form of slaves. So without slaves the South would have been dominated by small yeoman farmers to the most part isolated from the everyday political and economic world.
The biggest social pressure on this class of people was religion, not economics. It was religious intolerance and divide that ruled their world.
The North was industrializing and would have have an even larger shadow over the agrarian South.
Last edited on Wed Dec 5th, 2007 03:27 pm by 39th Miss. Walker