{"title":"Liverpool, Louisiana?","authors":"J. Powell","doi":"10.2307/j.ctv1hqdjg9.12","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This chapter considers the other myth of the war years: that Liverpool was overwhelmingly Confederate in its sympathies. Much contrarian evidence emerges: the port of Liverpool prospered during the war; its trade was always more dependent on the Northern States of America than on the Southern; the depredations of the CSS Florida and the CSS Alabama, warships built on Merseyside for the Confederacy, far from being a source of pride for Liverpool merchants, were for most a threat and an embarrassment. A noisy and partisan support for the Confederacy certainly existed in the port, but perceptions have been clouded by the romance of blockade-running – which accounted for less than 1 per cent of Liverpool’s wartime trade – and by the furore over the building of Confederate warships. The chapter shows that Laird Brothers, who built the Alabama and the notorious Laird rams, were approached to build warships for the Union and agreed to do so. The conclusion is that, while the opposite view cannot be maintained either, the idea that Liverpool was overwhelmingly pro-Confederate is unsustainable.","PeriodicalId":136637,"journal":{"name":"Losing the Thread","volume":"40 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Losing the Thread","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv1hqdjg9.12","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This chapter considers the other myth of the war years: that Liverpool was overwhelmingly Confederate in its sympathies. Much contrarian evidence emerges: the port of Liverpool prospered during the war; its trade was always more dependent on the Northern States of America than on the Southern; the depredations of the CSS Florida and the CSS Alabama, warships built on Merseyside for the Confederacy, far from being a source of pride for Liverpool merchants, were for most a threat and an embarrassment. A noisy and partisan support for the Confederacy certainly existed in the port, but perceptions have been clouded by the romance of blockade-running – which accounted for less than 1 per cent of Liverpool’s wartime trade – and by the furore over the building of Confederate warships. The chapter shows that Laird Brothers, who built the Alabama and the notorious Laird rams, were approached to build warships for the Union and agreed to do so. The conclusion is that, while the opposite view cannot be maintained either, the idea that Liverpool was overwhelmingly pro-Confederate is unsustainable.