Replies

There is much truth to the article you posted, however, I think its author is being disingenuous in stating that the conflict between Union and Confederacy was solely over slavery.

The political and intellectual father (or at least grandfather, as he died before secession) of the Confederacy was not Jefferson Davis, but John C. Calhoun. His principal objection to unionism was his belief that states have the right to negotiate their own trade agreements with one another and with foreign governments. Since the south was predominantly agrarian, planters resented the tariff that effectively forced them to purchase goods manufactured in the north instead of cheaper British or European goods.

While this was not the flashpoint that caused shots to be exchanged at Fort Sumter, disagreement over trade and taxes tilled the soil for secession over other issues, including slavery.

ek_hornbeck: "states have the right to negotiate their own trade agreements with one another and with foreign governments.
Since the south was predominantly agrarian, planters resented the tariff that effectively forced them to purchase goods manufactured in the north instead of cheaper British or European goods."

Your argument has been posted on CW threads many times, and every time refuted based on:

First of all, tariffs in 1860 (15%) were lower than any time since 1840, and were the same as in 1792, when George Washington was president.
So they can no-way be considered "too high" in 1860.
You mention John C. Calhoun, who served in Federal office from 1811 until his death at age 68 in 1850.
During those 39 years, the peak tariff rates of 35% came in 1830, while South Carolinian Calhoun was Vice President under Southern Democrat President Andrew Jackson.
So there's something about the claim that "Southerners all hated high tariffs" which doesn't quite ring true.
Most important, words like "tariff" (never) and "tax" (only once re: slave-tax) don't appear in secessionist documents -- so they were not matters Southerners would secede over.
Words which do appear, continuously, throughout all those documents are "slavery" and "institution", along with concerns to protect those against possible hostility from "Black Republicans."

His principal objection to unionism was his belief that states have the right to negotiate their own trade agreements with one another and with foreign governments.

No. His main complaints were #1... Agitation against slavery, and #2, the fact that the growing population of the North vs the South and the addition of free states threatened the institution of slavery because slave states were outnumber by free states, even though in 1850, members of Congress did not necessarily vote upon those lines.

You can read Calhoun's last speech in the Senate (which he had Jeff Davis read for him because he was too frail to deliver himself) during the debate of the 1850 Compromise. Calhoun died a few weeks later.

Here's the first paragraph to get you started.

I have, senators, believed from the first that the agitation of the subject of slavery would, if not prevented by some timely and effective measure, end in disunion. Entertaining this opinion, I have, on all proper occasions, endeavored to call the attention of both the two great parties which divided the country to adopt some measure to prevent so great a disaster, but without success. The agitation has been permitted to proceed with almost no attempt to resist it, until it has reached a point when it can no longer be disguised or denied that the Union is in danger. You have thus had forced upon you the greatest and gravest question that can ever come under your consideration: How can the Union be preserved?

Calhoun was right. Just the simple existence of opposition to the institution of slavery was enough to break the Union. That is how tied the power structure in many southern states were to preserving slavery at any cost. They saw any opposition as a mortal threat.