The Confederate Constitution took care of the slavery thing. It was a war over taxes. The North taxed the hell out of the south. Southern commodities were shipped North, where they were taxed, and then taxed again when sold back to the South as finished products.
The Civil War was about busting the 9th and 10th Amendments.
You are completely and utterly wrong. No such taxes existed. They would be unconstitutional under Article 1, Section 9, "No Tax or Duty shall be laid on Articles exported from any State." What there was were tariffs on manufactured items from overseas, which were equally imposed on consumers throughout the US. And since the northern states had far more consumers, they paid far more in tariffs than the south did.
I'd really like to see some documentation of this. What were the taxes on southern commodities?
In actual fact, there were very, very few internal taxes. Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution requires that "...all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States." And they were.
The only internal taxes of which I'm aware were relatively low rates on excise taxes. These were on whiskey, rum, snuff and a few other things. They were abolished by Jackson after the debt from the War of 1812 was paid off and remained essentially at zero to the WBTS.
IOW, southern commodities were not taxed at all when sent north.
And northern finished goods were not taxed at all when shipped south.
What you are apparently confusing this idea with is the fact that tariffs on imports were the main taxes. (Tariffs on exports are prohibited by the Constitution.)
Some tariffs were set high enough that they helped to protect US industries. Such as, for instance, sugar and hemp, produced entirely or mostly in slave states.
But most of the protective tariffs worked to the benefit of northerners in those industries, both the owners and the workers.
But please note that northerners also had to pay the higher price for protected goods. An IA or PA farmer was affected exactly the same as a SC or TX plantation owner. The net impact was distributed by occupation, not region. The US was still well over 50% agricultural in the North as well as the South in 1860, but the South was more so. Therefore the protective tariffs had a disproportionately negative impact on the South.
But anybody could start a factory in the South and receive the benefits of the protective tariff by producing protected goods.
Now, let's take a look at the "tax the hell" out of the South.
In 1860 the federal budget was $60M, population was a little over 31M. A good bit of the budget was produced by land sales, but let's assume they were all from taxes. That's less than $2/person. Do you consider that "taxing the hell" out of the populace?
Let's further assume the South paid half of that amount, which is probably high. Consumption of imported items was more or less proportionate to population. But let's assume anyway.
White population of slave states was 8M, slaves were 4M.
If the 8M whites in the slave states paid half of the taxes of the federal government, they paid about $3.75 each per year.
Does that constitute excessive taxation, to your mind?
If I remember correctly, the total expenditures of the federal government in 1860 were well under 2% of GDP. The government simply didn't have the resources to be oppressive.
Today it's well over 20% and climbing.
What happens is we tend to unconciously project the present situation into the past. In the 1850s, about the only contact most people ever had in their lives with a federal employee was via the post office.
The Civil War was about slavery. The North went to war to preserve the Union and won. The South went to war to preserve slavery and lost everything.