Thank you for a well-done synopsis.
Whether it is the War of Northern Aggression or the Civil War is one’s point of view. A recent point of view considered the economic reasons for succession. Taking slaves away in the South would have a similar economic effect as taking away horses and plows in the North.
Leaving aside for a moment the difference between a human being and a plow, nobody was trying to take the South's slaves away. Lincoln didn't have the authority to do that and he knew it. All they wanted to do was keep slavery contained to areas where it currently existed.
I don't even concede that much.
The war was only conceivably one of "Norther Aggression" if you first look at in in, say 1863: then yes, most (but not all) major battles were fought within the Confederacy.
I'm saying, if you go back to it's beginning, November 1860, when secessionists first organized their conventions: for six months thereafter every aggression was that of secessionists against the United States -- culminating in their formal declaration of war, on May 6, 1861.
The first Confederate soldier was not killed in battle until June 10, 1861.
At that point, the Union finally began to respond to the War of Southern Aggression against the United States.
MosesKnows: "A recent point of view considered the economic reasons for succession.
Taking slaves away in the South would have a similar economic effect as taking away horses and plows in the North. "
My main source on this particular discussion is James Huston's 2003 book, "Calculating the Value of Union: Slavery, Property Rights and Economic Origins of the Civil War"
Huston presents data from the 1860 census and argues that Southerners, particularly in the Deep South, were far better off in 1860 than most people understand.
Indeed, on average, they were better off than their northern cousins.
The reasons include two huge economic benefits from their "peculiar institution", slavery:
And just as today you might take out a home-equity loan on the rising value of your house, so in 1860 slave-holders took out "slave-equity" loans which allowed them to live more comfortably than, for example, average Northerners.
My point is: any disruption in that economy, reducing demand for slaves or cash crops, would bring their entire economic house crashing down -- and that was their key concern in November 1860, when Deep South secessionists first organized conventions to make declarations of disunion.
Except Lincoln didn’t intend to end slavery in the southern states. He thought it was evil, but beyond his powers, at least until the war started. The president is mostly uninvolved in the admendment process.
War powers of the president are greater.