Great read.... the divide between Mancunians and Liverpudlians is long entrenched. There are a few things worth mentioning, Liverpool was broadly Tory at the time - with many MPs actively involved in the slave trade and with a much greater control over the press coverage. Liverpool still retains it's own approach to the press (burn copies of The Sun) - and Manchester had a much more diverse local economy. Liverpool was 100% a dockyard town, it's very beautiful (I went there recently) whereas Manchester had a more diverse and malleable economy as well as a more liberal populace (as you've suggested). Essentially the choice between Liverpool and Manchester, whilst comparable at the macro-level, wasn't quite so cut and dry at the local level for the average worker. Liverpudlians were a) more dependent on the slave trade b) less informed about the slave trade and c) less able to psychologically endure steps 3 and 4 for those reasons. I think you've been a bit harsh on the people of Liverpool and they may have reached the same decision as Manchester, but it would've taken them longer. Great article and great bit of british social history. :o)