“That Confederacy would have inconvenienced Mississippi River traffic but would have posed no other threat than perhaps an economic one of lower tariffs.”
“How would that have posed a threat?”
Before 1803 the Spanish used to restrict Mississippi river trade when they controlled New Orleans. Northern traders using the Ohio and Mississippi were always very concerned about being able to freely access New Orleans and the gulf.
Lower tariffs in the South would have drawn trade away from northern ports, a real concern at a time when tariffs funded the government.
“The balance of power in Congress would have shifted dramatically to the North.”
“Without the southern states that would be pretty much a given.”
That was my point. With seven southern states gone abolition would have passed easily in 1861. The North would have rid itself of the Fugitive Slave Act. The Underground Railway would
“Only in the U.S. was one section of the country willing to go to war to protect slavery.”
That must be why they called up 75,000 troops with the goal of forcing the North into the Confederacy.
Trade relations between the United States and the confederacy are an interesting area of speculation. Would the south have charged an import tariff on midwestern goods bound for New Orleans and overseas export? That would most likely have had the effect of spurring railroad growth to the eastern seaboard to bypass New Orleans, greatly diminishing port traffic there. Almost certainly they would have charged a tariff for goods imported from the US to confederate consumers, and southern goods entering the United States would have been subject to tariff as well.
Why? Goods destined for Northern consumers would have to be delivered to a North eventually and the tariff would be collected then.
That must be why they called up 75,000 troops with the goal of forcing the North into the Confederacy.
Whatever the goals of the Confederacy was, it is a fact that they started the war by firing on Sumter and that they seceded to protect their slave property.