South vs. South
The border areas were such a crucial part to both the Confederacy and the Union simply because who ever had the support form those border states ultimately had the upper hand in the war. This support included materials, transport passages, and even a safe place for soldiers to plan their next attack on the opposing side. Both parties knew how important the border state’s support was, the hard part was getting those states on their side.
“ ...If a large fraction of slave labor state inhabitants added large quantities of acreage, troops, and material to free labor states’ advantages, invaders’ shrinking margin of superiority would bulge again, up the requirements for an exhaustingly ambitious half continent of sieges. Abraham Lincoln knew that the costly solution depended on rallying Southerners against Southerners” (Freehling 16).
Most border states preferred to maintain a neutral part in the war, they did not want to choose sides. Although, “If neutrals blocked Union or rebel forces from ‘passing one way ...or the other, over their soil,’ the resulting ‘impassible wall’ would secure the Confederacy’s fondest dream, ‘disunion without a struggle.’ Neutrality thus equaled ‘treason” (Freehling 48). Lincoln knew this which is why he was so intent on getting these border states on his side. Once he succeeded with Baltimore the Confederacy really did feel the absence of a border state’s support. “Without Baltimore to serve as Confederate railroad hospital, rebel generals increasingly could not move men and supplies swiftly from theatre to theatre. Nor could the confederacy compete with Union ironclads.” (Freehling 63).The efforts and activities by anti-Confederate whites and the anti-Confederate enslaved, combined with Union’s superior numbers of men, material and transportation, helped undermine the Confederacy and changed the course of the Civil War. Without the Anti-Confederate white’s industrial support to the Union in the Civil War, the outcome would have been
“ ...If a large fraction of slave labor state inhabitants added large quantities of acreage, troops, and material to free labor states’ advantages, invaders’ shrinking margin of superiority would bulge again, up the requirements for an exhaustingly ambitious half continent of sieges. Abraham Lincoln knew that the costly solution depended on rallying Southerners against Southerners” (Freehling 16).
Most border states preferred to maintain a neutral part in the war, they did not want to choose sides. Although, “If neutrals blocked Union or rebel forces from ‘passing one way ...or the other, over their soil,’ the resulting ‘impassible wall’ would secure the Confederacy’s fondest dream, ‘disunion without a struggle.’ Neutrality thus equaled ‘treason” (Freehling 48). Lincoln knew this which is why he was so intent on getting these border states on his side. Once he succeeded with Baltimore the Confederacy really did feel the absence of a border state’s support. “Without Baltimore to serve as Confederate railroad hospital, rebel generals increasingly could not move men and supplies swiftly from theatre to theatre. Nor could the confederacy compete with Union ironclads.” (Freehling 63).The efforts and activities by anti-Confederate whites and the anti-Confederate enslaved, combined with Union’s superior numbers of men, material and transportation, helped undermine the Confederacy and changed the course of the Civil War. Without the Anti-Confederate white’s industrial support to the Union in the Civil War, the outcome would have been
Bibliography: Freehling, William W. The South vs. the South: How Anti-Confederate Southerners Shaped the Course of the Civil War. New York: Oxford UP, 2001. Print.