[PhilipFreneau]

>>>... if you’re referring to the fact that upwards of 90% of all tariff revenue was collected in Northern ports, indicating that the overwhelming majority of all imports were destined for Northern consumers then you are correct and there was an imbalance. The North paid the bulk of taxes on imports.<<<

Approximately 80% of tariff revenues fell on the South, while about 80% of the expenditures of the revenues benefited the North.

Some good articles on the Morrill Tariff:

http://www.lewrockwell.com/dilorenzo/dilorenzo17.html
http://www.ashevilletribune.com/archives/censored-truths/Morrill%20Tariff.html

There was also a FR article/discussion at:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1069109/posts

[Non-Sequitur]

Approximately 80% of tariff revenues fell on the South, while about 80% of the expenditures of the revenues benefited the North.

If 80% of the cost was born by the South then why was well over 90% of all tariff revenue collected in the North? In the year prior to the rebellion why did a single Northern port, New York City, collect 17 times as much in tariff revenue that did the busiest Southern port, New Orleans?

Some good articles on the Morrill Tariff...

You are aware that the Morrill tariff wasn't passed until after the South seceded aren't you?

[Sherman Logan]

Approximately 80% of tariff revenues fell on the South, while about 80% of the expenditures of the revenues benefited the North.

I've seen similar claims made many times. I've never seen any real quantification. If you have some I'd really like to see it.

The closest I have seen confuse the trade deficit or surplus with the tariff taxes. Prior to the war, by far the largest export item from the USA was raw cotton. But the US has never had any taxes on exports.