For Union? Yeah, I would say that I'm pretty well satisfied that that's why it was fought, for the Federalist side.
Remember: I'm a Texan ... through and through. I've done a good amount of reading and believe that I could make arguments going in both directions on who started the war and why. I think that the Confederate States were correct to push the issue, but shouldn't have been surprised when they found that their opponent was just as "bull-headed" as they were. Neither side was going to pull back on their basic positions; it could have only been decided on the battlefield.
Oh, if only Jackson hadn't been killed at Chancellorsville and, to add further to the dream, if Sherman had decided to stay with Louisiana at the beginning of the war.
And Hood was an idiot incompetent after being promoted to Corps/Army Command.
4/23/1861 According to an article in the Baltimore Sun of 23 on this date, Mr. Lincoln revealed his opposition to peace: Another effort was made to move Abraham Lincoln to peace. On the 22nd, a deputation of six members from each of the five Christian Associations of Young Men in Baltimore, headed by Dr. Fuller, and eloquent clergyman of the Baptist church, went to Washington and had an interview with the President. It was reported that he received them with a sort of rude formality.
Dr. Fuller said, that Maryland had first moved in adopting the constitution, and yet the first blood in this war was shed on her soil; he then interceded for a peaceful separation, entreated that no more troops should pass through Baltimore, impressed upon Mr. Lincoln the terrible responsibility resting on him that on him depended peace or war a fratricidal conflict or a happy settlement.
But, said Lincoln, what am I to do?
Let the country know that you are disposed to recognize the Southern Confederacy, answered Dr. Fuller, and peace will instantly take the place of anxiety and suspense and war may be averted.
And what is to become of the revenue? rejoined Lincoln, I shall have no government, no resources!