Why did Britain support the pro slavery south in the US Civil War?

Question

Don't British people find this troubling and hypocritical in their condemnations of America as a racist country?

Answer 1

Tis really simple; some PM's in the UK wanted to do more Palmerston & Russell. England need the wheat and cotton.
Actually food more and wheat came from the North!

However, the Crown, the 'people" well nobody ever believed that anything would have been done against the Union fighting to abolish slavery. Chuch of England, those crazed "Methodists", there never was a real threat.

France was another pain, taking Mexico, etc.

Yes, the UK built ships and they would have done such for satan. Right after the war, the Union sent 50,000 troops to the Mexican border under General Sheridan. The French left and the Mexicans took over after killing and such a few French.

So the entire episode of behind the scenes plans by a few PM's was just that, I being Welsh have a real sense of what the UK thought of "slavers", but the UK did play the games and made some money from the South. Besides Russia was chomping at the bit to declare war on the UK and France.

If France would have held Mexico suspect that even the Southerners, defeated, would have rallied to go after Mexico, certainly the Texans. Mexico was no longer a colony of France. That is the more interesting story.

Answer 2

The issue of slavery was only made a major historical consequence of the Civil War in the last few years; The British government at the time of the Civil war was campaigning for the complete abolishment of slavery. They sided with the Confederates because it was politically and economically better for the country; The North had close economic ties with other European powers, Mostly France whilst the south, with its great supply of raw cotton was able to provide the raw material for the massive English cotton cloth industry: Ironically a big buyer of cotton cloth was the Union Army!!!!

Answer 3

The South expected Britain to give them support, but it never came. Although Britain continued to buy Southern cotton when it arrived, Britain stayed neutral. Part of this was because of the efforts of Prince Albert. He saw no advantage to getting embroiled in a civil war which would weaken Britain and force them to support slavery. He was also convinced the South did not have the resources to win.

Answer 4

They didn't. When the war began, ostensibly about about States rights I suspect that many in England sympathized with the south. England had stronger economic ties with the South. England's textile mills relied on heavily on southern cotton.

Lincoln put forth the Emancipation Proclamation a couple of years into the war so that the conflict would be about more than States Rights and also to prevent England from entering the war on the side of the Confederates. England would have supported the South in a war about States Rights but it would not support the South in a war that would promote slavery.

England was far more progressive, in abolition of the slave trade and emancipation of slaves than any other European (or U.S.) power involved in the slave trade. England's massive involvement in the slave trade might be troublesome but once popular opinion turned, their move to abolish the slave trade and then to put the world's most powerful Navy to work to attempt to enforce it are something to be admired.

Also, the emancipation of all the slaves in the British Empire was progressive, for it's time. By giving the empire's slaves their freedom after a period of "apprenticeship", effectively indentured servitude, British anti-slavery forces were able to reach a compromise that eventually won freedom for all. Well in advance of what was happening in other parts of the world.

Not hypocritical in my books.

Answer 5

During that period of history, The British Empire had influence over many parts of the world. The South had indicated that it wished to secede from the Union. The British Empire sought to support the South by buying its main export, cotton, to support its colonization efforts in other parts of the world. The Southern leaders were all too eager to have support of a then, world power.

Fast forward to today, Britain has its own ugly history regarding slavery and other issues related to colonization in India and other places. Anyone, especially Brits, who condems the United States for its history of slavery is uninformed.

One would only have to remind the Brits of their own history and ask that they reconcile the condemnation of slavery in this country while not pointing out Britain's history in say, any nation in the African continent.

Answer 6

Unless you take the position that neutrality is actually support, you can't really say that Great Britain "supported" the Confederacy.

It all started with cotton. You have to remember that in the 1860s, Great Britain had a massive textile industry, and needed (among other things) a steady source of cotton. Those who wished to secede from the United States thought Great Britain would support them to keep the cotton supply stable (and cheap, using slave labor). They felt that their cotton was so important that Britain would support their side of the conflict.

In reality, Britain pretty much stayed out of the conflict. It never officially recognized the Confederate State of America, and continued to recognize the United States Government in Washington. Basically, it did its best to remain neutral (disappointing both American factions in the process, I think).

So the leaders of the Confederacy were sorely disappointed in the result. They discovered cotton wasn't as vital to Britain as they had thought. They were never able to secure the support they had counted on when the Civil War began.

Answer 7

While individuals in Britain may have been sympathetic to the C.S.A., the British government's policy did not support the south and slavery, and did not give the southern states recognition.

Answer 8

They didnt.

The Confeds were expecting very strong support (including naval protection and financing) which never came. GB had been buying tons of cotton-making the South think they needed to keep buying it. However the South US had been overproducing without being fully aware of it-they thought it was being used rather than warehoused. When the war broke out, GB had a huge surplus of cotton, so they no longer needed to support the South.

Answer 9

At that time i don't think it was about slavery or racism to britain, remember the union was a former colony of britain do you think they would be lending a helping hand to the U.S., i think not. GB would've love to see the u.s fall apart during that time period, and the u.s wasn't really recognized as a big power anyway.

Thats not how they feel about U.S. now certain events in history change the way others feel about different countries (i.e. 9/11 was U.S. chance to be liked by those who had not liked them for a while, but we blew it by starting a war.

Answer 10

Did they? I thought the French suppoprted the South in the Civil War?

In any regard, whoever did support the South, they were probably doing so for economic reasons. The slave-based economy provided cheap resources to Europe - like cotton, sugar and spices. Adn even when Britain ended slavery within their borders, it still existed for years elsewhere throughout their empire.