Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Trust me, we all know here in the Missouri forum that the paticular poster you are replying to (and all of the other usernames he has used) is full of crap. Thanks for helping to correct the ignorance and misinformation though
Trust me, we all know here in the Missouri forum that the paticular poster you are replying to (and all of the other usernames he has used) is full of crap. Thanks for helping to correct the ignorance and misinformation though
Well duh. Maryland was a state a lot longer than Missouri was. MO also was the frontier as well, and was not very populated. Note 1860 Missouri had more slaves than MD. 114,000.
However Maryland is a interesting case as the state started to change at the breakout of the civil war. While the St. Louis area was starting to change, outstate Missouri still had slaves in little Dixie and southeast Missouri.
Lincoln had the lawmakers in MD jailed in the civil war. Luckily here in Missouri our lawmakers were able to flee Jefferson City.
However most of the historians say Maryland did not have the votes to seceede anyways. Even if they did there would be a debate as if to the lawmakers had the authority to. Same as Missouri the argument if our lawmakers had the authority to but that is not relevant to this.
You wouldnt even think of MD as a southern state today as the state is pretty much part of the northeast and very liberal.
Present day the border states ranking from most southern to the least southern Id rank them.
1. Kentucky
2. West Virginia
3. Missouri
4. Maryland
5. Delaware.
During the breakout of the civil war its more debatable between KY and MO. MO was closer to full out secession than KY ever was. During the war just about all the lawmakers were pro union backers in KY unlike MO governor and senators and representatives. Even though originally the convention in MO rejected secession however if Lyons was not able to capture Jefferson city I do think Claiborne Jackson would have somehow organized a undisputed secession. When the convention met to remove the lawmakers, the conditional unionist were not present as they fled with the lawmakers and the remaining convention members voted him out, but even a number of them voted NOT to evict Jackson. So yes it is quite possible some arm twisting could have eventually been done and Jackson would have got his official secession instead of the disputed one in Neosho. One interesting point some raise also is the location of the convention. Many credit St. Louis for having a influence on the convention since the convention met in stl. if it were to met in a more pro secession part of the state, the vote outcome could very well been different. Especially if it were held in Jefferson City were the lawmakers would have had more influence on the convention members.
However also note Arkansas, and Virginia originally rejected secession at first as well.
Present day border states I wont argue with. Kentucky is more southern than Missouri. Missouri changed in the late 1800s and especially the last 60-100 years.
Two reasons... firstly, the rapid industrialization of Baltimore from the 1920's through WWII. Secondly, all the government employees around DC. Maryland has been voting lock stock and barrel with the northeast for around 70 years now.
Actually, minus the government employees/transplants, Maryland is pretty similar to Missouri except that Baltimore holds far more influence over its state than St Louis does. Of course, that's a big difference I guess.
Makes sense. Also note how northern VA is pretty liberal as well, and VA has become more of a Democrat favored state. Most of the polls, experts think Obama will win VA again. NC debatable.
Well duh. Maryland was a state a lot longer than Missouri was. MO also was the frontier as well, and was not very populated. Note 1860 Missouri had more slaves than MD. 114,000.
Okay, no. The first year Maryland became a state compared to the first year Missouri became a state, it still had more. Also, why don't you try land area to slave ratio. Maryland (my state) is a tiny state. The fact that it had 10 x the amout of slaves than Missouri in one year is actually downplayed. When this is taken into account, it's more like FIFTY times the amount Missouri had. Bottom line is, Maryland was always more of a slave state than Missouri, that's just the facts of it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bred in Missouri
You wouldnt even think of MD as a southern state today as the state is pretty much part of the northeast and very liberal.
This is not completely true. This is only true for the Baltimore-Washington metropolitan area. In other words, only 1/3 of the state. Another 1/3 is conservative Appalachian. The last 1/3 is (and always has been) conservative Southern Chesapeake/Tidewater.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bred in Missouri
Present day the border states ranking from most southern to the least southern Id rank them.
1. Kentucky
2. West Virginia
3. Missouri
4. Maryland
5. Delaware.
I'd agree with this, although historically, Maryland would be number one or two, Missouri and WV would vie for three. Maryland was an original Southern Colony, based on plantation agriculture and a tobacco cash crop, along with Virginia.
Okay, no. The first year Maryland became a state compared to the first year Missouri became a state, it still had more. Also, why don't you try land area to slave ratio. Maryland (my state) is a tiny state. The fact that it had 10 x the amout of slaves than Missouri in one year is actually downplayed. When this is taken into account, it's more like FIFTY times the amount Missouri had. Bottom line is, Maryland was always more of a slave state than Missouri, that's just the facts of it.
This is not completely true. This is only true for the Baltimore-Washington metropolitan area. In other words, only 1/3 of the state. Another 1/3 is conservative Appalachian. The last 1/3 is (and always has been) conservative Southern Chesapeake/Tidewater.
I'd agree with this, although historically, Maryland would be number one or two, Missouri and WV would vie for three. Maryland was an original Southern Colony, based on plantation agriculture and a tobacco cash crop, along with Virginia.
As is 1/3 of the State of Maryland.
I agree with a lot of that. Although historically it's hard to believe Maryland was more southern than KY. WV is another strange state Its colder than MO in many areas, and you have that section that jets up way into PA and OH. It's the upper south in many areas, but certainly not southern like the bootheel is down in the delta. I can see why WV broke away from present VA though. The areas of WV are not very favorable for agriculture like present VA is so that is possibly the main reason why they broke away cause of slavery issue. they didnt have much use in WV for slavery.
Like I said it's amazing though today how much different Maryland is.
However the population as a whole in present day Maryland is far more liberal. Look at their high taxes and crazy gun laws compared to Missouri!! Its hard to get a conceal carry permit there. I could never live in a state with bad gun laws.
Thanks to all of you. Interesting reading this morning while enjoying this snowy and cold day. I had forgotten about much of this information. Will get history books dusted off and check out 'Wilson's Creek battle'. Sorry to admit that I had forgotten about this battle.
Anyway, thanks again for the history lesson.
Researching my family history, I discovered one branch lived in Missouri as the war began. My great grandfather was the last of the children born there until after the war, as they lived directly in the way of union troops heading in from Iowa and left for Illinious. I don't know which side they considered themselves on, but nobody fought for either side in the war. The book I read using all material of the time to describe the situation called it its own civil war within one. Eight counties were totally depopulated and burned by the infamous Orders. I grew up (in California) with stories of how 'the family' had later sheltered Jessie James so I can guess the side.
This is something I want to do more research about. There is a family story about being run out of home and farm and it being burned, which fits nobody but that branch. The rest of the family, grandmother's side, parked themselves forever in Iowa.
Researching my family history, I discovered one branch lived in Missouri as the war began. My great grandfather was the last of the children born there until after the war, as they lived directly in the way of union troops heading in from Iowa and left for Illinious. I don't know which side they considered themselves on, but nobody fought for either side in the war. The book I read using all material of the time to describe the situation called it its own civil war within one. Eight counties were totally depopulated and burned by the infamous Orders. I grew up (in California) with stories of how 'the family' had later sheltered Jessie James so I can guess the side.
This is something I want to do more research about. There is a family story about being run out of home and farm and it being burned, which fits nobody but that branch. The rest of the family, grandmother's side, parked themselves forever in Iowa.
That was called General Order 11! Harry Truman's grand parents farm was trashed in the process too by the Union. Truman you could call a southern now. The media even called his accent from the upper south.
However he was born in 1884. MO was a lot different back then. During the civil war KC area was mostly plantations.
I agree with a lot of that. Although historically it's hard to believe Maryland was more southern than KY.
Well, it is hard to say, they may be tied, after all, Kentucky was originally part of Virginia and there's no argument that Virginia was more Southern than Maryland. West Virginia on the other hand, was not very Southern historically.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bred in Missouri
WV is another strange state Its colder than MO in many areas, and you have that section that jets up way into PA and OH. It's the upper south in many areas, but certainly not southern like the bootheel is down in the delta. I can see why WV broke away from present VA though. The areas of WV are not very favorable for agriculture like present VA is so that is possibly the main reason why they broke away cause of slavery issue. they didnt have much use in WV for slavery.
Definitely, the difference in terrain was the deciding factor.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bred in Missouri
However the population as a whole in present day Maryland is far more liberal. Look at their high taxes and crazy gun laws compared to Missouri!!
Its hard to get a conceal carry permit there. I could never live in a state with bad gun laws.
I wouldn't say this is true in the broader sense. You have to understand, most of the liberals in the State of Maryland are not native Marylanders. The population in the Balt-Wash metro area is enormous and filled mostly with transplants in the case of the Wash suburbs. Most of the State of Maryland is conservative as far as land area and native inhabitants. Trust me, most native Marylanders are not O'Malley fans or fans of our taxes!
I agree with a lot of that. Although historically it's hard to believe Maryland was more southern than KY. WV is another strange state Its colder than MO in many areas, and you have that section that jets up way into PA and OH. It's the upper south in many areas, but certainly not southern like the bootheel is down in the delta. I can see why WV broke away from present VA though. The areas of WV are not very favorable for agriculture like present VA is so that is possibly the main reason why they broke away cause of slavery issue. they didnt have much use in WV for slavery.
Like I said it's amazing though today how much different Maryland is.
However the population as a whole in present day Maryland is far more liberal. Look at their high taxes and crazy gun laws compared to Missouri!! Its hard to get a conceal carry permit there. I could never live in a state with bad gun laws.
Location: Jefferson City 4 days a week, St. Louis 3 days a week
2,709 posts, read 5,092,866 times
Reputation: 1028
Quote:
Originally Posted by latetotheparty
as is EVERYTHING over the span of 150 years.....
With MD, DE, and MO, the change was to much a greater extent then the rest of the country. All three of these states basically cut their ties to the south after the Civil War...today, MD and DE are Northeastern in most senses, and Missouri is Midwestern in most senses. Kentucky and WV have assumed overall southern identities. Kentucky today is hard to imagine as having been a border state in the Civil War. just about all of the state is definitively southern.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
