The thirteen colonies lived under taxation without representation. Not so much with the Southern States in 1860. In fact, as I have shown, they actually controlled tarrif and taxation policy. They controlled the Supreme Court. In many of the years prior to the Civil War they controlled the White House.
The difference between 1830 and 1860 was that the Southern Democrats so feared Lincoln as an anti-slavery president that they refused to accept the results of the election.
What good would it have done the Colonies to have representation in which their interests are constantly outvoted by the remainder of the Parliament?
The adage about "Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner." is not far wrong. I have long lamented the fact that non-taxpayers get an equal say with those people who are paying the bills, and this just seems fundamentally unfair to me.
But I was sorta hoping you would get around to either confirming my math, or disputing it in some particular. (regarding the South paying 12 times the revenue per capita of the North)