You are correct:
It was the 36th Congress which began in 1859 with 234 members, of whom 113 were Republicans, 82 Democrats and 39 in four other parties.
Southern representatives included 33 from the Deep South, 33 from the Upper South and 24 from Border States = 90 total.
The Morrill Tariff Act passed the House on May 10, 1860 by a vote of 105 to 64 with 55 abstentions and 10 absenses.
Voting against Morrill included two Republicans and 14 northern Democrats.
So the bill could easily have been defeated, if all 90 Southern Representatives plus those 16 northerners had voted against, and/or the 14 northern Democrats who voted for Morrill switched sides.
However over half the 90 Southern representatives voted for the Morrill Tariff, or abstained, or played hookey.
That's why Morill passed the House.
Regardless of the House, the Morrill Tariff could not possibly have passed the Senate over the South's objections, and it did not pass until after the South seceded.
Nor did President "Dough-Faced" Buchanan sign Morrill until after the South declared itself seceded.
Furthermore, the Morrill Tariff had nothing to do with the South's secession, because it wasn't law when the South seceded, and could never have become law over the South's objections.
On top of all that, the Morrill tariffs were not particularly high for the time.
Morrill raised tariffs from about 17% to 26% -- still less than over 50% before 1830.
And Morrill's purposes included Federal revenues plus protections for US manufacturers -- who could just as easily have been Southern as Northern.
So there was no necessary discrimination against the South in these tariffs.
The Morrill Tariff was not mentioned in any Southern Declaration of Causes of Secession.
The cause of secession -- the only cause of any consequence -- was the South's purpose to protect and expand slavery.
All the rest is just Neo-Confederate Lost Causer nonsense, pal.
This is all so much smoke and mirrors. John Calhoun said during the fracas over the Tariff of Abominations words to the effect (please don’t make me go look up a quotation) that “we all know that the tariff is not the issue, it’s only symbolic of the issue, which is slavery.”
>>>However over half the 90 Southern representatives voted for the Morrill Tariff, or abstained, or played hookey. That’s why Morill passed the House . . . The Morrill Tariff was not mentioned in any Southern Declaration of Causes of Secession.<<<
Read very carefully:
“The material prosperity of the North was greatly dependent on the Federal Government; that of the the South not at all. In the first years of the Republic the navigating, commercial, and manufacturing interests of the North began to seek profit and aggrandizement at the expense of the agricultural interests. Even the owners of fishing smacks sought and obtained bounties for pursuing their own business (which yet continue), and $500,000 is now paid them annually out of the Treasury. The navigating interests begged for protection against foreign shipbuilders and against competition in the coasting trade. Congress granted both requests, and by prohibitory acts gave an absolute monopoly of this business to each of their interests, which they enjoy without diminution to this day. Not content with these great and unjust advantages, they have sought to throw the legitimate burden of their business as much as possible upon the public; they have succeeded in throwing the cost of light-houses, buoys, and the maintenance of their seamen upon the Treasury, and the Government now pays above $2,000,000 annually for the support of these objects. Theses interests, in connection with the commercial and manufacturing classes, have also succeeded, by means of subventions to mail steamers and the reduction in postage, in relieving their business from the payment of about $7,000,000 annually, throwing it upon the public Treasury under the name of postal deficiency. The manufacturing interests entered into the same struggle early, and has clamored steadily for Government bounties and special favors. This interest was confined mainly to the Eastern and Middle non-slave-holding States. Wielding these great States it held great power and influence, and its demands were in full proportion to its power. The manufacturers and miners wisely based their demands upon special facts and reasons rather than upon general principles, and thereby mollified much of the opposition of the opposing interest. They pleaded in their favor the infancy of their business in this country, the scarcity of labor and capital, the hostile legislation of other countries toward them, the great necessity of their fabrics in the time of war, and the necessity of high duties to pay the debt incurred in our war for independence. These reasons prevailed, and they received for many years enormous bounties by the general acquiescence of the whole country. “ — from the Georgia Declaration of Causes, Jan 29, 1861
“It has recently obtained control of the Government, by the prosecution of its unhallowed schemes, and destroyed the last expectation of living together in friendship and brotherhood.” - Mississippi Causes of Secession, Jan 9, 1861
“On the 4th day of March next, this party will take possession of the Government. It has announced that the South shall be excluded from the common territory, that the judicial tribunals shall be made sectional, and that a war must be waged against slavery until it shall cease throughout the United States. The guaranties of the Constitution will then no longer exist; the equal rights of the States will be lost.” - South Carolina Secession Causes, Dec 24, 1860.
>>>”All the rest is just Neo-Confederate Lost Causer nonsense, pal.”<<<
What on earth is a “Neo-Confederate”, pal? Sounds like liberal Yankee talk, to me (e.g., like “Neo-Conservative”). Either you believe the South was justified in secession, or you don’t believe in the Declaration of Independence. Sure, Lincoln name-dropped the Declaration on occasion, but he was no more sincere than William Jefferson Clinton when Clinton declared the Democrat party to be the “Party of Jefferson”.
Note: Thomas Jefferson was darn-near an anti-Federalist, in that he had little trust in the federal government. He was the founder of the first Republican Party (an anti-big-government party). He and James Madison founded the National Gazette, an anti-big-government newspaper. Philip Freneau was hired as the Editor. Freneau’s greatest work, and one of the greatest political articles of all time, in my opinion, is the 1792 editorial satire titled, “Rules for changing a limited republican government into an unlimited hereditary one”. Read at: http://hiwaay.net/~becraft/FRENEAUbanking.html