The Civil War was about much more than the morality of slavery.
The wealthy and powerful bankers, investors, factory owners, and politicians in the North felt that slavery gave southern plantation owners an unfair economic advantage and that eventually the power and wealth of the North would shift to the South as southern plantation owners were able to invest in mills and factories of their own to process cheap southern cotton instead of sending it North.
The powerful elite in the North were more than happy to step back into the shadows and fund the religious groups and abolitionists that took up the challenge to abolish slavery.
The change in focus from money/greed to human rights proved to be a much more powerful and widely accepted way to accomplish what they had set out to do.
I’m in no way condoning slavery or the stain of slavery on America’s past. I’m just saying that there is always more than meets the eye, two sides to every coin, etc…
Money, it's always about the money. Whilst the bankers in the North let the abolishionists get the result that they wanted, the South turned to the wealthy UK.
British merchants provided the Confederacy with crucial funds, arms, and supplies, often in exchange for cotton, and private investors funded blockade runners to bring goods through the Union blockade. While the British government remained officially neutral, private citizens and businesses provided significant financial support to the Confederate war effort.
Financial agents:
The firm Fraser, Trenholm & Co in Liverpool served as a key financial agent for the Confederacy, helping to fund the construction of blockade runners and commerce raiders, such as the "CSS Florida".
Military supply network:
The same company managed a network that sourced and transported arms and military goods into the South.
Cotton bonds:
The Confederate government issued bonds backed by future cotton shipments, and they were popular with British investors, including Chancellor of the Exchequer William Ewart Gladstone. The value of these bonds rose during the war, reflecting a belief in the South's potential to succeed.
Private business investment:
Many private British businesses profited from the conflict by supplying the Confederacy with materials in exchange for cotton, which was vital for the British textile industry.
"Cotton is King" fallacy:
Although the Confederacy hoped its cotton would force British intervention, Britain had stockpiled enough cotton to get through the war and was also more reliant on Northern grain, which reduced its incentive to formally support the South.
Financial prudence:
British banks were cautious and often refused to finance the Union's war effort to avoid a potential Anglo-American war, which also hindered the Confederacy's ability to secure a formal alliance.
Post-war arbitration:
The U.S. sued Britain for aiding the Confederacy, and the resulting arbitration awarded the US $16 million in damages, which can be seen as official acknowledgment of the financial impact of British private support.
