The macroeconomic effects were less clear and less discussed. High tariffs diminish trade and make competing industrial countries less prosperous. But the question for early 19th century America was whether they would simply be exporters of raw materials and importers of finished goods from Britain, the economic powerhouse of the time, or develop their own industries. The desire to use tariffs to promote manufactures at home was understandable.
Carlander and Majewski address an ignored aspect of the problem. Confederate tariff rates were lower, but would be applied to a larger percentage of goods, since the South had so few industries. Therefore, this lower tariff would have had a protective effect and inhibit trade, given the wide volume of goods that would have to be examined and taxed, until the South were able to develop its own industries. Because so many products and such a large percentage of goods would be taxed, the dichotomy of the protectionist North and free trade South isn't as clear cut as one might think. Virginia manufacturers were quite happy with the lower tariff, because they recognized that it would make Northern manufactures less competitive.
It's also intriguing that it was not Lincoln, but Buchanan, who would have gone far to preserve the peace, who signed the Morrill tariff.
Isn't Grover Cleveland most famous for having a baseball player named after him?
Walt
You are correct. There was a speech sometime in the 1840's where John Calhoun discussed the concept at length and describing essentially the curve itself with a revenue maximization point and protectionism or revenue raising to either side of it. Before him Alexander Hamilton discussed the concept way back in the Federalist papers, which are mentioned in that journal article.
The desire to use tariffs to promote manufactures at home was understandable.
That is what the protectionists argued and that is at least one major desire of them by pushing the issue, but it is also an economically fallacious argument beyond very basic and limited levels. When trade is not impeded, comparative advantages emerge, the nation as a whole is economically better off from the free trade, and industry develops anyway. That is what the yankee protectionists never understood. Protectionism worked great for them in their own little protected industrial enclaves, but for everybody else, and pardon my wording for lack of a better phrase, it just plain sucked.
By that stage in the game I think Buchanan was of the belief that the union was already gone. He thought he was going to be the last president and that the United States would dissolve permanently only 2 days later. Thinking this and knowing that Lincoln would sign it anyway if he did not, Buchanan signed it.