The southern states were prosperous and the north was hording the tax revenue from that prosperity. Taxation but little representation.
Pea Ridge and others have posted articles giving me much greater insight into the causes and conflicts occurring during the buildup to the Civil War.
He points out that New York businessmen of the time were horrified at the low Tariffs the seceded Southern ports were allowing for goods. They thought it would utterly wreck their businesses in New York.
In the case of the slaves, none at all . . . which is the irony of the "3/5 of a person" critique of the Constitution. Emancipation required the temporary elimination of the voting rights of all southerners, before universal male suffrage could be instituted. Since only the proslavery men were voting and the slaves were not, any "representation" at all was worse than none.
Wrong. Southern states were overrepresented by 6% from 1788-1865 by virtue of the 3/5 rule.
Baloney. The south dominated national politics through most of the country’s first 70 years.