Allen Esterson wrote: > Chris Green writes: > >> Indeed, if you recall your American history class, you >> may remember that as long as the Civil War was officially >> about "union," the British sided with the South (for the cotton) >> > > That you may recall this doesn't make it true. Britain was neutral > throughout the Civil War, and certainly didn't "side with the South" > during any part of it.
"Sided with" was indeed too strong. It is true that Britain was officially neutral, but they were, shall we say, sympathetic to the South (entirely on grounds of self-interest -- an independent Confederacy would be a very weak country, very much dependent on the British appetite for "CSA" cotton. The remaining USA would be weakened too, to the benefit of Britain). Britain was involved in a number of disputed actions during the war (running blockades, making warships, etc.), each of which "just happened" to favor the Confederacy. US diplomacy throughout the early part of the war was aimed at heading off official British recognition of the CSA, which the British gov't was ever alert for an opportunity to offer. The Emancipation Proclamation served, among other things, to take that option off the table for the duration. Chris -- Christopher D. Green Department of Psychology York University Toronto, ON M3J 1P3 Canada 416-736-2100 ex. 66164 chri...@yorku.ca http://www.yorku.ca/christo/ ========================== --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=6543 or send a blank email to leave-6543-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
