Though the North and South, or the Union and Confederacy, didn’t share views on slavery, they did share the problems they faced during the Civil War. Each side reacted to their problems differently, the North placing emphasis on taxes and the South on cotton. The problems they faced were not only affected by how they reacted but also by the battles they fought and won. Through some of the most significant battles fought and reactions had, the paths of victory and defeat were paved for each side to follow. Though the North and South were fighting for different causes they both experienced some common problems. Many of the problems faced were because of the expensiveness of the war. The war was even referred to as a rich man’s war fought by …show more content…
The North began to react to their problems by enforcing many different taxes, sales taxes, federal income taxes, and acts, many that included tariffs. They also welcomed women into the workforce to continue factory and governmental work as the men went off to war. The South, however, reacted to their problems by producing cotton in abundance in belief that Europe would rely on them for cotton, which in turn would help their financial situation and hopefully lead to the South’s recognition as a sovereign nation. They also sought the help from states to enforce taxes that would help the federal government but many governors refused to tax their people until it was too late in 1863. With their failure to fix their financial problems, the South saw an inflation of 9000% compared to the North’s inflation of 80%. To help with their lack of manpower they enforced a draft, and with the draft they allowed paid substitutes so owners, of slaves, could watch over their slaves, which did not seem to help with the lack of …show more content…
One of the first battles of the war was at Bull Run, this was eye opening for both sides, bringing to light the need to be prepared, for the North, and staying prepared after losing deserting soldiers, for the South who won the battle. The Battle of Shiloh, with the win going to the Union due to Ulysses S. Grant’s counterattack, was significant because it confirmed that the war, in the West, would not come to a quick end. The Union win at the Battle of Antietam served as the jumping-off point for the emancipation of the slaves, leading to the preliminary Emancipation Proclamation. With the Confederate win at the Battle of Chancellorsville, the Union General Joseph Hooker was injured and replaced by George G. Meade, who took a stand, with his troops, on top of low ridge near Gettysburg, leading to the Battle of Gettysburg. The significance of the Battle of Gettysburg was that it was the northernmost point reached by any substantial Confederate force and was the Confederate’s last real chance of winning the war, but the win went to the Union. The Union victory at the Battle of Vicksburg led to the union control of the Mississippi and the end of foreign help to the
America’s transformation into the country we live in today has been formed through numerous events during its short history but the event that will split the United States into North versus South is truly one of the most defining events in American history. Through numerous events leading up to the start of the Civil War, I will attempt to show how the United States was destined for conflict and that the Civil War was inevitable. The first way I will show how the war could not be avoided will deal with the issue of slavery. Slavery should be the first mentioned because many conflicts within the United States leading up to the Civil War and the division of the United States dealt with slavery. The Missouri Compromise should also be talked
The economies of the North and South were vastly different leading up to the Civil War. Money was equivalent to power in both regions. For the North, the economy was based on industry as they were more modern and self-aware. They realized that industrialization was progress and it could help rid the country of slave labor as it was wrong. The North’s population had a class system but citizens could move within the system, provided they made the money that would allow them to move up in class. The class system was not as rigid as it was in the South. By comparison, the South wanted to hold on to its economic policy. In doing so, the practice of slavery kept the social order firmly in place. The economic factors, social issues and a growing
During the early nineteenth century the United States began to split, but at the middle of the century people views started to become more concrete and so separation in the Union became more drastic. From 1850 to 1861 it was apparent that the union was separating into the North and the South. The Constitution played a major role in the separation that was occurring. Through sectional favoritism of bits and pieces of the Constitution and through ideas that were left out of it, the Constitution led to sectional discord and nearly the failure of the union.
The Civil War that took place in the United States from 1861 to 1865 could have easily swung either way at several points during the conflict. There is however several reasons that the North would emerge victorious from this bloody war that pit brother against brother. Some of the main contributing factors are superior industrial capabilities, more efficient logistical support, greater naval power, and a largely lopsided population in favor of the Union. Also one of the advantages the Union had was that of an experienced government, an advantage that very well might have been one of the greatest contributing factors to their success. There are many reasons factors that lead to the North's victory, and each of these elements in and
Who would have thought that a nation could split and turn on each other? The Civil war has main causes, key people, and battles. All of the people, events, and causes effected how the war came to be and how the Civil War was fought. The important people of the Civil war made important decisions that may have caused one side to a victory or a horrific lose. The battles of the war were bloody and devastating, and the causes of the Civil War show how different the North was from the South. Many people know the Civil War was extremely significant, but most people don't know what caused this major battle in history.
The North and South were very different from each other. Industrialization was happening in the North, while large-scale cotton planting was happening in the South. The South sold their crops to England in exchange for inexpensive factory-made goods produced in Europe. As a result of industrialization, Northern Factories began producing many of the goods that were already being produced in Europe. Thus, the North started to tax the South on any goods imported from Europe, so that the South would buy goods from the North. These unfair taxes angered the South, and contributed largely to its anti-North attitude (Civil War
The Union blockade did not take full effect for many months, allowing the Southerners time to export their cotton harvest, and reap the financial benefits. Alexander Stephens had a plan at the start of the war that he estimated would net around $800M for the Confederacy, providing a sound financial base for the war effort. Although somewhat optimistic, and affected by practical difficulties, it is fair to say that the cotton crop would have been far better exported than stockpiled or burnt. Secondly, the Confederate government displayed an unwillingness to tax her citizens, preferring instead to print money, and suffer the rampant inflation that resulted. The Union financed its war effort mainly from taxation and bonds, while 60% of Southern funds came from unbacked paper money. The problems associated with this are clear to see: prices rose 100-fold over the four years of war, wiping out southerners' savings, and devastating the economy. The government's reaction to this, the third mistake, was to impress public goods for military use. However, rather than curbing inflation, this merely acted as a disincentive to supply, making essential items increasingly scarce. This, coupled with the poor infrastructure and parochialism of some State governors, meant that the army went hungry in a nation with the capacity to produce plenty of food. Finally, it is argued that the Confederate government should have done more to improve infrastructure and
With no navy to mount a defense, the Southern government was forced to control production of cotton and raise taxes, which only furthered the disillusionment of its population (Perman, 224). Poor Southerners in particular began to see the war as benefiting a section of society that did not include them, as they were not slave owners. They were the very people forced to make the most sacrifices for the war and the government's control of their ability to produce led to bread riots (Perman, 219). Moreover, as enlistment numbers in the Confederate army dwindled, the government had no option but to turn to forced conscription and impressments of slaves, which Southerners viewed as the impounding of personal property (Perman, 221). The realities of war created a conflict that Southerners did not foresee when they had created an aloof central government.
Slavery did play an important role in the Civil War, but it was not what the war was originally based on. James M. McPherson explains in his book, “What They Fought For” the reasons why the Union and Confederacy started the Civil War. This book review will analyze the author’s purpose, his main argument, the evidence used, whether the book succeeded in its goals, and whether I would recommend this book or not.
"If wars are won by riches, there can be no question why the North eventually prevailed." The North was better equipped than the South, with the resources necessary to be successful in a long term war like the Civil War was, which was fought from 1861 1865. Prior, and during the Civil war, the North's economy was always stronger than the South's, boasting of resources that the Confederacy had no means of attaining. Compared to the South, The North had more factories available for production of war supplies and larger amounts of land for growing crops. Its population was several times of the South's, which was a potential source for military enlistees. Although the South had better naval leadership and commanders, such as Robert E. Lee
The South vs. The South by William Freehling is a narrative that focuses on the civil war that affected a vast number of Southerners who opposed the Confederacy regardless of whether they were white or black. These “anti-Confederates,” as termed by Freehling comprised Slaves and Boarder state whites who together formed half the southern population and were significant to the Union victory. By weakening the Confederacy military, contributing manpower and resources to the Union and dividing the southern home front, the anti-Confederates made a critical contribution to the Union war efforts that hastened the end of the war leading to the Union’s victory. The U.S was not the only house that was divided; Divisions between pro-and anti-Confederates, white and black, and the loyalty of both upper and lower states to slavery contributed a lot to the downfall of the confederates. “Divisions within the South helped pave the path toward war. The same divisions behind army lines helped turn the war against the slaveholders.”(p.10). William Freehling argues that more than 450,000 Union troops from the South, especially southern blacks and border state whites, helped in the defeat of the confederates. Further, when the southern Border States rejected the Confederacy, more than a half of the South’s capacity swelled the North’s advantage.
Though, in the South they wished Europe would help them because of the cotton industry. The South had very meniscal amount of factories and little to no railroads compared to the South. Abraham Lincoln asked the loyal states to help the arm. The South attempted to have single authority, but in the end this seemed to have failed and not workout. The South had also made the inflation due to the amount of printed paper. At one point shoes were $200 Dollars a pair and a barrel of flour was $300 Dollars which was ten time the cost of a normal one before inflation (Davidson and Stoff 487-488, Guelzo, “Confederate States”).
In the time just before the Civil War, the United States was one of the most successful nations in the world. The United States had become the world’s leading cotton producing country and had developed industry, which would in the future, surpass that of Great Britain. Also, the United States possessed an advanced railroad and transportation system. However, despite its successes, the United States was becoming increasingly divided. The North and the South had many distinct differences in terms of their social, cultural, and economic characteristics that brought about sectionalism and, eventually, the Civil War.
If the north was to succeed, they would forever be oppressed by their victory, and slaves of their achievements. The Confederates fought to promote the wellbeing of their family and the protection of their land “from Yankee outrage and atrocity”(Mc.Pherson 20) .
The South vs. The South by William Freehling is a narrative that focuses on the civil war that affected a vast number of Southerners who opposed the Confederacy regardless of whether they were white or black. These ?anti-Confederates,? as termed by Freehling comprised Slaves and Boarder state whites who together formed half the southern population and were significant to the Union victory. By weakening the Confederacy military, contributing manpower and resources to the Union and dividing the southern home front, the anti-Confederates made a critical contribution to the Union war efforts that hastened the end of the war leading to the Union?s victory. The U.S was not the only house that was divided; Divisions between pro-and anti-Confederates, white and black, and the loyalty of both upper and lower states to slavery contributed a lot to the downfall of the confederates. ?Divisions within the South helped pave the path toward war. The same divisions behind army lines helped turn the war against the slaveholders.?(p.10). William Freehling argues that more than 450,000 Union troops from the South, especially southern blacks and border state whites, helped in the defeat of the confederates. Further, when the southern Border States rejected the Confederacy, more than a half of the South?s capacity swelled the North?s advantage.