As I have pointed out before, the word "Tariffs" is an inexact term for a whole host of financial changes that would have occurred with Southern secession.
You want to know where the 40% greater profits would come from. Well, 13% taxation instead of 50% taxation, or thereabouts. Some of it would come from handling shipping contracts that were previously being handled by Northern shipping interests. Some of it would have been from savings created by no longer having to comply with existing Federal statutes governing trade.
Where would the profits go? To the European shippers, traders and to the Southern buyers and sellers of imports and exports. Where they wouldn't be going is to the New York and Washington DC corruptocracy which is still corruptly running the nation today. Pssst! This is why the corruptocracy of Washington DC wanted a war!
Yet the CSA had their own tariffs, so there couldn't have been 40% additional profits based on that.
It was like 13% if I recall correctly. Big difference between 13% and 45 or 50%.
Then you'll argue that the tariffs of the CSA benefited the South, while the tariffs of 1857 only benefited the North. But there's no evidence of that.
There is quite a lot of evidence for that. You just haven't seen it. I have seen some of it, but you can tell simply by the numbers who was paying the majority of the taxes. Here's a quick excerpt.
Works out to 73% of all trade was created by the South. The South represented 1/4th the population of the North, yet they were paying 73% of the taxes.
The federal government paid for mail service across the South...
Paid Northern shipping interests to deliver the mail in the South.
Then you'll say the South would no longer have to pay Northern shipping interests. Then admit they'd pay British shipping interests instead.
You only read the parts of what I write that you like, and never seem to read the whole thing. If you had been paying attention, you would have noticed that I said the Northern shipping interests set the prices for their services just below the cost of using Foreign ships and the associated fines for doing so. (regular shipping costs plus 50cents per Ton if I recall correctly.)
These rates represented gouging, but because the Northern shipping interests had a captured market, they could gouge with the blessing of the Federal government.
The British and other nation's shipping services would not have gouged. They would have set normal rates with no "protectionism" costs, and they would therefore be cheaper than Northern rates *WITH* protectionism costs.
Free market spurs competition, and competition causes lower prices.
Pretty fundamental conservative doctrine there. Aren't you familiar with it?