You are far from being in a position to opine on anyone's education.
It was the CSA that reinforced the Constitution
The so-called Confederates blatantly violated the Constitution. The Constitution - which the states attempting to secede had fully ratified - says quite plainly that the act of ratification is an agreement that the Constitution is the law of the land.
And the Constitution plainly states that in any controversy between any of the states and the federal government, the dispute is left to the adjudication of the federal judiciary.
The seceding states did not even pretend to follow the Constitution they had ratified in seeking to separate.
the advice of Thomas Jefferson and many other early patriots
Thomas Jefferson had been dead for 34 years, and certainly offered no such advice.
Lincoln was at the mercy of usual suspects, the railroad and banking magnates and their desire for encompassing power over the existing and future states.
Hardly.
As the records and documents of the secession conventions show, the impetus for secession was the belief that the President-elect with the help of a possible majority of Congress would be able to successfully legislate a prohibition of the expansion of slavery to the federal territories.
Such a move would enable two or more free states to enter the Union during the course of Lincoln's presidency, which would end the ability of the slave states to block legislation in the Senate. The seceding states' future economic hopes were predicated on the aggressive expansion of plantation slavery to the Pacific.
So the economic powers that dictated disunion and war were the slaveholding class.
Northeastern bankers and railroad magnates owned more southern railroads, shipping and processing businesses in 1860 than they ever had before.
They had no economic interest in war: the war resulted in a complete interruption in commercial freight shipping to the slave states, the destruction of thousands of miles of existing tracks they had invested in, and the commandeering of railroads at below-market rates by the government for troop movements.
One of the key disagreements between free and slave states was whether the contemplated transcontinental railroad would be built below or above the 36'30" line. Northeastern railroad men and bankers didn't care, because they would have gotten the contracts no matter where it was built.
The hub of Northeastern banking and investment - New York City - itself almost tried to declare itself a neutral party in the war so it could trade with both sides and therefore its commerce would continue uninterrupted.
The Ives Expedition surveyed it out about 1855 or so?
Bankers and businessmen had no economic interest in the conflict? Now I've heard it all.
Your reply does not surprise me. Your role as a Union apologist was undoubtedly reinforced by your government revisionist schooling.
I simply don’t have time to correct your lack of education, so I’ll hope you have time to catch up on your reading about The War Between the States — from both sides of that Late Unpleasantness.