rustbucket post #341: "On an inflation adjusted basis [Northern] tariff revenue fell significantly during the war as the papers critical to the Morrill tariff had forecast even though the tariff rate kept being adjusted higher and higher during the war."
First of all, according to this source, the Confederacy's anti-Morrill tariff was 15%, the same as the old US Tariff of 1857, except Confederates also taxed items previously "imported" duty-free from the Union.
Second, as shown here, annual US tariff revenues during the 1850s ran around $50 million, which was roughly 90% of total revenues.
Third, according to this source:
In 1864 alone, the Morrill Tariff produced revenues over $100 million -- double the 1850s era averages.
Furthermore, tariffs remained very high for decades after the war, while the US economy grew at high rates not seen since then (you may remember recent Candidate Patrick Buchanan invoked this period to justify his call for higher protective tariffs).
Fourth, the Morrill Tariff was intended to protect not only Northern industry, but also agriculture nationwide, including Southern sugar growers.
That is why opposition to higher tariffs was not 100% among Democrats, or even throughout the South.
Indeed, fifth, there were more than enough House votes among Democrats and Southerners to defeat Morrill in 1860, if they had really stood united in opposition.
And there were enough Senators to block passage in 1860, if Confederates had not walked out of Congress.
Furthermore, sixth, Morrill was signed by Dough-Faced Northern Democrat President Buchanan just before leaving office.
Point is: neither Democrats as a whole, nor Southerners overwhelmingly, solidly opposed Morrill, certainly not strongly enough to make it a leading cause of secession.
Finally, we need to again stop and consider: the Confederacy reduced tariffs back to the old 15%, but also imposed new tariffs on "imports" from the Union, and then embargoed exports of their biggest single income source: cotton -- which meant Confederate citizens had no money to buy imports, regardless of how low their government set tariffs!
So efforts to float the idea that Confederacy was somehow all about "free trade" founder on rocks of ridiculousness, I'd say.
But who truly did care a lot about US tariff rates were: the Brits.
To Brits, US protective tariffs were matters of economic life-and-death, a fact which Southern propagandists played up in Britain hoping to win British recognition and support.
And they got a lot of it, notably from Britain's most popular author: Charles Dickens.
It just wasn't quite enough to overcome British natural revulsion to slavery, and so our British friends remained officially neutral, effectively pro-Union.
Should say: "...in early 1861."
This is not entirely accurate. The Confederate government never officially put an embargo into effect. It was a purely voluntary effort by southerners, though the force of public opinion made compliance with it almost universal.
Most of the effect of the embargo was lost because of the immense cotton exports of previous years, which meant European warehouses were bulging with cotton. This raw material had to be used up before the South's longed-for "cotton famine" really hit home.
You know, I hadn't thought of that before.
This meant that Confederate citizens would now be paying tariff duty on almost everything they used aside from agricultural products. Leaving the Union peacefully would probably have meant that they would have paid more in tariffs than if they had stayed and paid the infamous Morrill duties.
I've been reading about the Tariff of Abominations. The neo-Confederates around here seem to be under the impression it was passed for the benefit of New England industrialists. This is more than a little out of the chronological sequence. In 1828 New England was by no means heavily industrial.
In fact, New England reps in the House voted 23 to 16 against the measure.
South voted 50 to 3 against.
Mid-Atlantic vote was 57 to 11 for.
The West voted 17 to 1 for.
The Southwest (KY and TN) 12 to 9 for.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tariff_of_1828
IOW, the voting did not even vaguely resemble the myth of a solid North using its numbers to crush and oppress a solid South.
The greatest support for the measure was in the West, not the Northeast. Which is kind of odd, since the West was still pretty solidly agricultural at this time.
This leaves out of the story that the passage of the bill was the result of a failed parliamentary maneuver by Calhoun and his cronies.