Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-07T06:23:50.767Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Structural Shifts in Southern Manufacturing, 1849–1899

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 June 2012

Albert W. Niemi Jr.
Albert W. Niemi Jr.
Affiliation:
Assistant Professor of Economics, University of Georgia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In the decade prior to the Civil War, southern manufacturing was surprisingly similar to that of the non-South. In the latter portion of the nineteenth century, however, a wide divergence developed between that region and the rest of the nation.

Type
Research Article
Information
Business History Review , Volume 45 , Issue 1 , Spring 1971 , pp. 79 - 84
Copyright
Copyright © The President and Fellows of Harvard College 1971

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 The South in this paper is defined as Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Virginia.

2 The manufacturing data used to construct the value added series were obtained from the following sources: Digest of the Statistics of Manufactures in the United States in 1850, Senate Documents, 35 Cong., 2 Sess., Vol. 10, 1858–1859, 5–136Google Scholar; Eighth Census of the United States, Manufactures in the United States in 1860, 14, 82, 203–04, 294, 437–38, 559, 638–39, and 733–742; Twelfth Census of the United States, Manufactures, Vol. VIII, Part II, 8–11, 138–43, 302–07, 468–69; 666–69, 832–35, and 912–17, and Vol. VII, Part I, 3–17.

3 The conversion of census data to the SIC two digit categories was made on the basis of the definitions in the 1963 Census of Manufactures, Industry Descriptions, U.S. Department of Commerce. This technique was used by this author in “The Development of Industrial Structure in Southern New England,” Journal of Economic History, XXX (September, 1970).Google Scholar A copy of the conversion tables for 1850–1900 is available from this author upon request.

The value added series was deflated to a base of 1860 prices. The deflation was based primarily on the historical series of wholesale prices by major commodity of Warren, George F. and Pearson, Frank A., Prices (New York, 1933), 24–30.Google Scholar Separate deflators were not available for SIC categories 33–37; these industries were deflated by the Warren and Pearson series on metals and metal products. SIC categories 26, 27, 38, and 39 were deflated by the Warren and Pearson prices for miscellaneous commodities. Tobacco manufactures were deflated by using Bezanson's, Anne wholesale prices on manufactured tobacco, Wholesale Prices in Philadelphia, 1852–1896 (Philadelphia, 1954), 370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar Rubber manufactures were deflated on the basis of the prices in the Aldrich report, Wholesale Prices, Wages, and Transportation, Senate Reports, 52 Cong., 2 Sess., 1892–93, Special Session March 4, 1893, Vol. 3, Report 1394, Part 1, 52.Google Scholar

4 Chemicals are included as resource oriented because most of the output in this industry consisted of crude or distilled turpentine.

5 Computations based on figures on the condition of banks in the Executive Documents, 35 Cong., 2 Sess., Vol. 12, show that on the eve of the Civil War (1859) per capita banking deposits in the South lagged behind the average in the rest of the nation, $7.05 compared to $10.35.

6 Data obtained from the Ninth Census of the United States, 1870, Vol. I, 450–51, suggest that school revenues per individual of school age (5–15) lagged in the South in the antebellum period. In 1850 the South generated $1.09 per individual of school age compared to $1.73 in the non–South; in 1860 the South had fallen further behind, $1.48 compared to $3.29. In relative terms the southern generation of school revenues per individual of school age was 63.0 per cent of the average outside the region in 1850 and only 45.0 per cent in 1860.

7 James L. Sellers points to the capital destruction in the South during the war in “The Economic Incidence of the Civil War,” in Andreano, Ralph, ed., The Economic Impact of the American Civil War (Cambridge, Mass., 1967), 98–109.Google Scholar Elimination of the non-manufacturing items from the Census statistic on capital invested in manufacturing (see source in note 2) suggests that the capital investment (current dollars) in southern manufacturing fell from $62,600,000 in 1859 to $54,100,000 in 1869. For the same decade in the non–South the capital stock (current dollars) rose from $856,900,000 to $2,000,000,000.

8 Sellers says that banks of the South had never been adequate in the antebellum period and could not be restored to the pre-war position until some time after the war. As evidence of this he points to the dramatic rise of interest rates in the South in the post-war period; see his “Economic Incidence,” 104.

Computations based on data from the Annual Report of the Comptroller of the Currency, 1883, indicate that per capita banking deposits (current dollars) in the South in 1880 were approximately $5.58 compared to $53.96 in the non-South.

9 Sellers, “Economic Incidence,” 104–105.

10 Figures obtained from the appropriate issues of the Report of the Commissioner of Education, U.S. Office of Education, suggest a further decline in the South's relative commitment to education in the post-war period. School revenues generated per individual of school age (5–17) in the South relative to those in the non-South fell as follows:.331 in 1870,.226 in 1880,.209 in 1890; and.191 in 1900. (Compare to note 6.)