The Postbellum Cotton Competition: A New North vs South

 

In the antebellum economy of the United States the cotton economy was based on production in the South and processing in the North. Slave labor and an abundance of farmland made conditions for cotton production favorable in Southern states where the crop was dominant. Well established industry in the form of factories made Northern states the dominant region for cotton processing through textile mills. After the Civil War, the dynamics of cotton production and processing changed. Southern states began seeing a growth of cotton mills in new mill towns while Northern states saw a decrease in textile mills in this transitioning postbellum economy. The transition of cotton mill production dominance from the North to the South in postbellum United States can be attributed to a change in the dynamics of the labor force.

The economics of the cotton industry focused on the bottom line for each level of production of cotton and cotton-based products. In order to manage the greatest profit margins for cotton in the South, land and labor were the critical components. Prior to the Civil War, cotton farming took place on large plantations. Free labor in the form of slaves provided the greatest potential value for profits. After the war and with the end of slavery, cotton plantations declined with the loss of slave labor. Labor costs would now rise and land would be distributed to lower class Whites and some former slaves.[1] Many of the statistics on labor and land ownership are somewhat skewed in the postbellum South. Slaves no longer existed. A transition to a free labor force countered efforts to doctor antebellum numbers. While it was important to count slaves or free Blacks for purposes of representation, counting property ownership by free Blacks was not. Addressing children in the labor force was also a controversial issue for both regions. Immigrant children in the North and poor White and free Black children provided a means of additional labor with very little cost.[2]

In the North, cotton processing took place in various mills predominantly in the Northeast. These mills were well-established going back decades prior to the war. Labor was local with a mixture of family and neighbors. As immigration increased, labor increased. This increase provided an expansion of factories. Most of the mill production at this point was for domestic consumption with raw cotton typically being shipped to foreign buyers.

In analyzing the data presented in the sources, there are notable differences in the transition of manufacturing of cotton through mills. This transition for both North and South takes place during the Civil War. Prior to the war, Southern states were the source for cotton farming. Northern states dominated in numbers of textile mills. Postbellum numbers shows a decline in Northern mills and exponential growth in the number of Southern mills with some areas tripling and quadrupling total numbers in a period of twenty years after the end of the war. Output of raw cotton and number of cotton farms increased in Southern states as well.[3]

Among the labor changes seen, Northern mills declined in total number but increased in size and production. Labor forces were influenced by the influx of immigrants. Southern mills developed in new towns along rail lines. Labor in the mills included many poor Whites losing land and income due to the war. In search of jobs, many families relocated to these new mill towns. The mills employed entire families with even younger children working in roles suited for their size.[4] Most northern states saw at minimum 50% declines in the number of cotton mills in the postbellum era. Maine was the only Northern state with established antebellum factories that saw growth in numbers. While Northern states saw a decline in the number of cotton mills, they saw a proportional match in capital investment with Southern states. The factories themselves saw an expansion in production abilities as well as upgrades in technology. These Northern mills were able to offset the drop in mill numbers with production increases.[5] The increase in production could not offset the efficiency of the Southern system of having farms, mills, railroads, and ports in proximity for a more efficient process.

While there are no doubt other factors playing a role in the change in farming and production of cotton in a postbellum economy, there is enough data to note a shifting of the processing of cotton from Northern mills to newly established Southern mills. With competition based on cheaper labor and proximity to cotton farms, rail lines, and Southern ports, Northern mills reduced in numbers, having to either retool for other production options or consolidate through upgrading the remaining mills. This shift provided the means for the South to become more industrialized as mill towns drew in population from the rural areas.

 

---

[1] Louis A. Ferleger and John D. Metz, Cultivating Success in the South: Farm Households in the Postbellum Era. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2014.

[2] McHugh, Cathy L. "Child Labor in the Postbellum Southern Cotton Textile Industry." Business and Economic History 11 (1982): 136-46.

[3] Douglas Flamming. Creating the Modern South: Millhands and Managers in Dalton, Georgia, 1884-1984. Univ of North Carolina Press, 2000.

[4] William H. Phillips, "The labor market of southern textile mill villages: Some micro evidence." Explorations in Economic History 23, no. 2 (1986): 103-123.

[5] United States. 1975. Historical statistics of the United States: colonial times to 1970. Washington: U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of the Census.