English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories
0

What are several problems in the 1800's on farms that may or may not have eventally led up to the civil war.

2007-01-08 13:47:13 · 4 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities History

4 answers

Both farm work and factory work (of the 1800s) were labor intensive. Due to limited but increasing automation, factory work could produce more value and therefore higher wages than could farm work which was dependent on handwork during that period. As today, this drew increasingly literate workers to factories. It also moved an increasing preponderance of voters to factories. This difference was enhanced by the ease of using slaves in some types of farm crops. This was also split geographically with factories (literate voters) increasing in the North and plantation farming (nonliterate nonvoters) in the South. Over time this impacted the way the federal government reacted to this quite different (culturally & economically) States.

All of this combined an increasing separation between the States which represented these two different cultural concepts. This was also represented by federal statute processing which the agriculturally oriented States increasingly believed to be extra-constitutional. It is likely that even if the plantation farming had not been accomplished by slaves, the split between these States would still have occurred. .

2007-01-08 14:41:56 · answer #1 · answered by Randy 7 · 0 0

Well, the South was a much more Agrarian (farm based) culture than the North, and cotton was by far ans away their cash crop. And The problems you are asking about were'nt so much as current problems, but rather what might happen is slavery was abolished, like the people in the North wanted. With the invention of Eli Whitney's cotton gin in the 1850's, a tremendous amount of cotton was now able to be harvested, enabling better profits for plantation owners. And so slaves were needed to ensure this. Abolishing slavery would be ruinous to the South's economy. Also, many southern farmers were tired of paying taxes to the government, which were being used mainly for things that only the North depended on, like railroads and factories and such. So, basically, the South just wanted to be left alone to keep their slaves and sell their cotton. When Lincoln was elected president, the South knew he was an abolishinist, so they immediately seceded from the Union to protect their economy.

2007-01-08 13:57:56 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

The crops being produced on the farms at that time like tobacco and cotton needed a workforce. Someone had to gather and store the crops. The cheapest workforce and the easiest to maintain were slaves. Thus, the farmers did not want slavery to end because they needed the slaves to maintain their economy and to run their farms.

This is definitely a problem that encouraged the South to receed from the North resulting ultimately in the Civil war.

2007-01-08 13:53:36 · answer #3 · answered by myjumpman42 2 · 0 0

slavery

2007-01-08 13:57:29 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers