Sorry Walt, but that is simply not so. It passed the House with practically every single southern congressman opposing it. In the senate there was an even split IF every southerner opposed it. The VP would then break the tie for the tariff. You've been told of this many times, Walt, yet you spew the same nonsense and tell the same fibs.
Senator Robert Hunter of Virginia was there on the senate floor in 1861 fighting the thing. He admitted its passage was inevitable ever since Pennsylvania and the Republican Party united on the issue. He told his colleages "I believe it has been generally understood that the adhesion of the State of Pennsylvania to the Republican party was upon the condition of the passage of this Morrill-tariff bill. Still, I owe it, perhaps, to those whose opinions I represented on this committee, and to my constituents, to expose, if I can, the shallow pretexts on which it is sought to adopt this measure, and strip itt of those disguises in the shape of specific duties, under which its enormous taxation is hidden."
He then gave a thoroughly detailed speech outlining all the problems with the tariff, reiterating that "No, sir, this bill will pass. And let it pass into the statute-book; let it pass into history, that we may know how it is that the South has been dealt with when New England and Pennsylvania held the power to deal with her interests."
Contrary to your chronic dishonesty and habitual tendency toward fraud, Walt, the south knew the inevitable was coming with that tariff. They knew The Lincoln was planning to hammer it through at all costs. They knew that it would bring devastation to their economy. And they knew that they couldn't mount a majority to stop it in the senate, the only place remaining for it to gain approval as of December 1860.
That is why the slave power insisted that a slave state be admitted for every free state -- so they could block any legislation they wanted.
This was a tactic to keep sectional balance, Walt. It worked on making the senate evenly split between north and south. But it was NOT a guarantee to block legislation. When the senate votes split 50%-50%, the Vice President comes in and breaks the tie. The Lincoln's VP Hamlin would have voted for the tariff.
The tariff issue was not an important or even periphial cause of the war.
I suppose that is why Senators Wigfall, Toombs, and Hunter all spoke at length about their grievances with the tariff? Sorry Walt, but when you ignore the tariff issue you ignore history. You lie, fib, and defraud your way around that issue because you do not want to address its truth. Read Senator Hunter's speech if you doubt me. It starts on page 898 of the congressional globe for that session and goes on for seven more pages - ALL of it devoted to the tariff. Read that speech, Walt, and say it with a straight face that the tariff was not an issue. Then we shall all know if you are simply a liar or a mentally incompetant fool who cannot tell the difference between the fantasy he desires and the reality he observes.
What compromises did Lincoln offer in his first inaugural address on the tariff? None.
Exactly. And that is because The Lincoln wanted his tariff bill intact. He said so when he pledged to make it his top legislative priority two weeks earlier. Henry Adams also noted that The Lincoln intentionally framed his "compromises" during secession around slavery to gain political advantage even though the tariff issue was there.
But he did offer to support a constitutional amendment protecting slavery.
Yeah, the one he personally guided through congress and helped author. Read the southern responses to that amendment though, Walt. Wigfall, the last remaining deep south senator when it passed, said it would not help the situation because the yankees had already driven the first seven states away. He then pleaded with the yankees to cease their drum beating for war, let those seven states go peaceably, and both hope and actively work to retain the border states in the union by a similar offer of peace. He then told them that if they chose war, it would be a harsh and bloody war because, contrary to their assumptions at the time, the south would resist and defend itself from an invasion. The yankees ignored his prediction and sure enough it came true.
You can see this in how little attention is given to tariffs -after- the start of hostilites.
Your continual fibbing amazes me, Walt. Newspaper reports came in constantly after the first year of Morrill about its impact on trade. When the stats came out for '61 and '62, it became clear that Morrill had virtually killed off trade with Europe. The Times of London and the New York Times alike reported this fact and closely examined trends of declining imports related to it.
What were the issues in 1861-62? The return of fuguitive slaves, the revokation of the emancipation acts of Generals Butler and Fremont, the use of free blacks in the Union army, and so on. Lincoln worked in this time and spent a lot of effort on colonization and compensated emancipation.
Yeah. All those lovely civil rights minded actions by the non-racist Lincoln.
There is no noise on the tariff issue.
The bill was passed, Walt. The noise about it came not in policy but in effects of that policy - the gutting of trade with Europe.
What about the famous letter to Greeley in August, 1862? Where are the references to "the policy I seem to be pursuing"? They involve slavery, not tariffs.
Lincoln already had his tariffs at that time. Try again, Walt.
Lincoln already had his tariffs at that time. Try again, Walt.
The idea we were discussing was the breaking of the Union. The idea was to restore the Union. There seems to be virtually no discussion of the tariff when restoration of the national authority throughout the country is mentioned.
Your position is complete nonsense. It's not supported in the record.
And your response I quote above can only be seen as an attempt not at honest discussion, but Nazi/Soviet style disinformation.
Walt
A split is a failure, of course. It's not baseball. A tie doesn't go to the runner in voting.
There were a number of protectionists in the north, in any case. There were not enough votes to carry the Morrill tariff if southerners had kept their seats.
Walt
Your continual fibbing amazes me, Walt. Newspaper reports came in constantly after the first year of Morrill about its impact on trade.
Peace feelers between the two governments throughout the ACW apparently have no discussion regarding tariffs whatsoever as a condition of reunion.
You are the one lying about these events and throwing up blue smoke and mirrors to hid the fact that your position is complete nonsense.
Walt