North And South Analysis

The North’s economy was based on textiles, shipping, and skilled trades. Their climate was not suited for the same type of agricultural products that the South produced like cotton, sugar, rice and tobacco. Northern states like New England manufactured and shipped goods like guns, clocks, plows and axes (page 399). One reason for the South’s dependence on slavery is because their economy relied on the existence of slave labor. For example, the cultivation of cotton depended largely on slave labor, with 75% of the crop grown on plantations,

Both areas had many farmers, but the south was successful with big plantations. The southern economy depended on agriculture while the North was based on technological advancement. The North successful developed many industries, while the south improved their farming methods (Roark, 7). The south farmers established huge plantations for cash crop production especially cotton. In addition, slavery became an important factor that provided

The main difference between the Northern and Southern states was that the North was mostly populated by small farms and larger towns and cities with mercantile and factory-based economies, in contrast the South was populated by large plantations and had relatively fewer large cities and few factories. Since the north had significantly more factories, they tended to trade more manufactured goods instead of raw materials like the south. The south’s economy was heavily reliant on the labor of slaves, the north had slaves as well but it did not really compare to that of the

Slavery was the focal point of the economy in the South, this inthrallment was the fuel for the agricultural South as well as the industrial North. Slaves would work the lands of their masters and bring in the raw materials produced, and these raw materials, commonly tobacco and cotton, would be shipped to the North and Europe. The North used the raw materials for the textile mills from the South because it made more economic sense because it cost less than the raw materials coming from Europe. Both regions became dependent upon each other, "the ruin of thousands and hundreds of thousands in the manufacturing states..." (Doc A) would occur if slavery was prevented from spreading by the Republicans. This claim being that if the North continued its free-soil mentality, it would fail as well due to a lack of raw materials caused by an insufficient amount of land for slaves and plantations; "a blow at slavery ia a blow at commerce and civilization..." (Doc R). The North was strongly tied economically to the products of slavery, the South was immensely impacted by slavery, it was the foundation and

Throughout American history, the south and the north have consistently held different beliefs on how to handle some subjects. Whether it ranged from slavery, to taxing, or to business, southerners and northerners often seemed to be on opposite sides of the spectrum. It was not any different back in the 1800’s. Though intensely different, they were still part of the same country. One of the biggest issues that made the north and the south so distinct from one another was their view and perspective on slavery. The north, who was considered mostly republican, saw slavery as something that needed to be abolished for it was a great sin committed by mankind; while the south, who were mostly considered democrats, viewed it as a necessity for they considered African-Americans a race that needed to be controlled because they were less intelligent than the white man but very violent and because they were “built” for the hard labor. Over the 1800’s they had been a tension built between the two sides of the country. The tension rose to a boiling point when the 1860 election rolled around. After the elections occurred, a chain of events followed which would leave a lasting impact on the current United States. In the heart of these events was the civil war. To this day, it is very debatable that the war started because of the unsure future of slavery under new leadership.

The South expressed their pride over their cotton-based economy system. Due to the fertile lands in that region, cotton was found to be a valuable cash crop, providing more than half of the world’s production of it. Consequently, the South believed that they played an integral part of the Union. James Hammond showed how much pride he had in the Southern economy when he said, “The South is perfectly competent enough to go on, one, two, or three years, without planting a single seed of cotton. I believe that if she was to plant but half her cotton, it would be an immediate advantage to her”. Through this speech, he expressed the crop as “King”; by using this title, the Southerners portrayed cotton as the honorable and indispensable figure in their economy. It was the staple crop of the South, and without it, the region’s economy was collapse. However, the popularity of cotton production made Hammond and many other Southerners believe that the cotton-based economy would help the region stand on its own as a Confederacy. Due to the Southern pride on how indispensable the region was internationally, the South believed their exports of cotton overshadowed all other exports from America, even though some crops were more profitable than the cotton.

agriculture. The industrial revolution in the North, during the first few decades of the 19th century, brought about a machine age economy that relied on wage laborers, not slaves. In addition, At the same time the warmer Southern states continued to rely on slaves for their farming economy and cotton production. Southerners made huge profits from cotton and slaves and fought a war to maintain them. Northerners did not need slaves for their economy and fought a war to free them. For instance, James Henry Hammond announces that the slaves hired in the South are hired for life and compensated while in the North their manual laborers are not cared about and are essentially “slaves”. (Doc L.) Essentially, Hammond felt that people are better off in the South because they are treated much better and they have a prime purpose unlike the North who call the hired “manual laborers” but are just slaves, who are one day working then suddenly ‘beggars “on the street. Another example of the Industry vs. Agriculture being a cause of the Civil War was South Carolina Threatening Secession, with all its pecuniary bounties to the Northern states, and its pecuniary burdens upon the Southern states, would be utterly “overthrown and demolished”. (Doc A.) This would develop in the ruin of thousands and hundreds of thousands in the manufacturing

Even though the South economy was dependent on agriculture the North produced more food. The North manufactured nearly triple of what the South did in 1861 (Document B). Document D, goes on the explain

Since the South was strictly only agricultural, they had to depend on the North for industrial supplies. In document 3 it said, “matches, shoepegs and paintings up to cotton-mills, (and)

The Civil war was the most momentous and crucial period of time in the history of America. Not only did this war bring an end to slavery but also paved way for numerous social and political changes. The country had already been torn by the negative trend in race relations and the numerous cases of slave uprisings were taking their toll on the country 's political and social structure. The country was predominately divided up into 3 sections, the North, the South, and the West. Each of these groups had different fundamental interests. The North wanted economies depending on farming, factories and milltowns, while the West relied on expansion and development of land for farming and new towns. The South mainly relied on agriculture like

The South’s agriculture was predominantly dependent on slave labor prior to the Civil War. Although the North continued to industrialize and improve its technology to advance their farming, the South stuck to their tradition of using slaves, which proved to be inefficient. By 1860, the productivity of the North was almost double of that of the South, and the reason is revealed in this article. When he was traveling short distances, he found the slaves to be completely inefficient. Only few slaves on a farm were capable of working for their masters, others were often too young, too old, or too ill to work. The white men didn’t like work because of their belief that work was meant for slaves, and the slaves that worked never gave their best effort, for they were lacking

The division between the North and South states in the early American life was inevitable. The population in the Northern States were growing rapidly, while the population in the Southern States remained stagnant. The Northern economy was growing rapidly as well, as they were manufacturing goods that they wanted they to sell abroad, but more importantly, they wanted to sell these goods locally. The Southern States were a good market for these manufacturers. Their economy was rich from the sale of cotton, and they represented a prime, albeit small market. Northern manufacturers pressed for tariffs that imposed on imported foreign goods that could be made in the United States so they could ensure that the South bought the Northern goods. The Southern States, being predominantly agricultural, demanded there to be almost a status quo government, which would allow them to have more individual state rights, however, the Northern states relied on the government for help with their immigration and flourishing population. The two goals of the regions were

The North had a better transportation network which aided in their victory of the war. The excellent and extensive railway system linked the cities and allowed cheap and quick movement of the troops and supplies. Key to the North’s victory in this area was in the management of the supplies and logistics by Union officials such as Quartermaster General Montgomery Meigs and military railroad administrators Daniel McCallum and Herman Haupt. According to author James McPherson, these men and other officials “organized the northern economy and the logistical flow of supplies to Union armies with unprecedented efficiency and abundance in which the Confederacy could not match (139).” The South, on the other hand, committed to a cotton economy and decided to remain with inefficient manual labor - slave labor - as its path to future growth. It rejected building its own factories, preferring to ship cotton to mills in New England and relying on exports to England. A system such as this would inevitably be unable to compete with the more efficient North in the long term, particularly in the areas of communications, mechanical labor, logistics, and agriculture and food production. Industrialization therefore would prove to be the final nail in the South’s coffin as it were, affecting the outcome of the Civil War

As Kivumbi wrote in his article Difference Between the North and the South During the Civil War, “Farming was the major activity of the South and people earned from plantation crops including tobacco, sugarcane, rice and cotton the produce of which was mainly exported to Europe.” The South was majorly relied on plantation and exportation because of the geographic advantages. The coastal characteristics of the southern states, along with the Mississippi River, had provided abundant water resource to support the plantations, and the warmer climate ensured the high agricultural yield in the South. As a result, the North became more industrialized and constructed more complete transportation networks to meet the huge desire of domestic trade, while the South failed to follow the trend of the

The South was viewed by many in the United States and elsewhere as a robust, self-sufficient economy (Surdam, 2001, p. 1). It produced much of the world's supply of cotton and Texans bragged that their cattle could feed the world. What the South lacked in manufacturing was compensated for by the immense wealth produced from raw cotton, cattle, and corn exports. Obviously, the predictions that the South could survive a war with the North due to its economic self-sufficiency were wrong. This essay analyzes the possible reasons for the failure of the Confederacy to win the Civil War.