North.
2007-10-17 10:05:40
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
From the very beginning of the Civil War, the Confederacy was at a distinct disadvantage concerning war ordnance manufacturing capability. It only had one major facility capable of casting large caliber artillery, which was located at the Tredagar Ironworks in Richmond, Virginia. In an effort to expand indigenous ordnance capability, the Confederate government selected Selma as a location for a large manufacturing complex. Selma proved to be an ideal manufacturing location. Being situated in central Alabama, it was secure from the Union Army until the very end of the war. Selma was connected by rail to Alabama's rich iron and coal fields, which supplied the city's new manufacturing industry. Iron from the Tannehill and Brierfield furnaces was transported via road to Montevallo, where it was then taken by railroad to Selma. Finally, the city’s location on the Alabama River allowed easy access to Mobile Bay.
2007-10-17 17:10:00
·
answer #2
·
answered by Randy 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Definitely the North. They had 80% of the nation's total factories.
2007-10-17 17:10:07
·
answer #3
·
answered by Amy F 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
The north had bigger and better armies. Better factories for building war weapons and better sources of natural resourses.
The south had the worst prisons for their prisoners of war. The food that was supposed to go to prisoners went to soldiers and others instead. Many died in those prisons. The northern prisons were not much better, but more died in the south.
2007-10-17 17:06:08
·
answer #4
·
answered by Frosty 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
The North, of course.
2007-10-17 17:12:22
·
answer #5
·
answered by Bill 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
The North-Springfield, Mass. has been a center for small arms manufacturing for a long time.
2007-10-17 17:04:17
·
answer #6
·
answered by michinoku2001 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
the North by far
2007-10-17 17:02:04
·
answer #7
·
answered by Vic 1
·
0⤊
0⤋