Replies

From the Congressional Research Service: Between 1832 and the Civil War, tariff policy fluctuated between high tariffs and low tariffs. Between 1832 and 1842, there was a gradual reduction in tariffs, only to be followed by a strongly protectionist period to 1846. The Tariff Act of 1846 reduced tariffs, and tariffs were again reduced by the Tariff Act of 1857. (U.S. Federal Government Revenues: 1790 to the Present September 25, 2006, Thomas L. Hungerford Specialist in Public Sector Economics Government and Finance Division) So, with tariffs reduced in 1846 and again in 1857, how can it credibly be claimed that tariffs were the reason for secession? Might the preservation of slavery be the reason, just as Southerners said at the time?

The Walker tariff lowered tariff rates to about 25%. Note that the Confederate Constitution only allowed a tariff for revenue - not a protective tariff. A tariff for revenue allows a maximum of just 10%. So even the "compromise" tariff rate was still orders of magnitude higher than would have been in the best interest of the Southern states.

But of course the Morrill tariff promised to greatly increase tariff rates. It passed the House in 1860 and was just one or two senators short of being able to pass the Senate in 1861. With the usual tactic of allowing a special carve out or some other lucrative benefit to appease the commercial interests in the district of one or two more Senators, it would pass. Of course, there would be pressure on each senator to agree lest somebody else take the deal on offer to him and his state be shut out completely. Lincoln himself was staunchly in favor of a high protectionist tariff. As it turns out, the Morrill Tariff passed and was signed into law before Lincoln took office.

Why would preservation of slavery have been a real concern when there was no real popular support to abolish it and considerable opposition to doing so everywhere as well as no power to do so?

Note that the Confederate Constitution only allowed a tariff for revenue - not a protective tariff. A tariff for revenue allows a maximum of just 10%. So even the "compromise" tariff rate was still orders of magnitude higher than would have been in the best interest of the Southern states.

Here’s your maximum of 10% in the Confederate tariff rates.

ACT
TO PROVIDE REVENUE FROM COMMODITIES IMPORTED FROM FOREIGN COUNTRIES.
SECTION 1.
The Congress of the Confederate States of America do enact, That from and after the 31st day of August next, a duty shall be imposed on all goods, products, wares and merchandize imported from abroad into the Confederate States of America, as follows:
On all articles enumerated in Schedule A, an ad valorem duty of twenty-five per centum. On all articles enumerated in Schedule B, an ad valorem duty of twenty per centum. On all articles enumerated in Schedule C, an ad valorem duty of fifteen per centum. On all articles enumerated in Schedule D, an ad valorem duty of ten per centum. On all articles enumerated in Schedule E, an ad valorem duty of five per centum. And that all articles enumerated in Schedule F, a Specific Duty as therein named. And that all articles enumerated in Schedule G, shall be exempt from duty: to wit:

Your can read the whole thing here.

Confederate States Tariffs

According to you, a 25% rate is far above what is necessary for revenue. So we’re the confederats protecting domestic industries. And was the war really about Tariff rates when the vast majority of the South’s population never paid a penny in tariffs.

The Walker Tariff reduced rates and was in effect until the Tariff of 1857, which reduced rates further. The Morrill Tariff raised rates in 1861, signed into law by President Buchannan just before Lincoln's inauguration.

The Morrill Tariff had been bottled up in the Senate by Southern states and would not have passed except for secession. Blaming secession on the Morrill Tariff confuses cause and effect.

Go read the articles of secession by the Southern states. They do not refer to tariffs but repeatedly refer to the protection of slavery as the reason for secession.

With some justification, slaveholders feared that abolitionist agitations would inspire slaves to flee North or to revolt. Slavery required Southern whites to support a strong apparatus of enforcement, control, and repression lest the large slave population turn on them.