Buchanan The Feckless was opposed to secession but believed the office of president was powerless to stop it. He shrank from his duty to put up any opposition to the secessionists which only served to embolden them.
The only grievances that South Carolina referred to was the reticence of northern states to enforce and defend THEIR practice of the Peculiar Institution. I found it interesting when a lost causer proffered the argument that Prigg v. Pennsylvania represented an unwarranted federal intrusion into individual (southern) state sovereignty. As you’ll recall, Prigg v. Pennsylvania defended the slavers right of retrieval of slave-property from non-slave states.
So it appears that there was no pleasing some people when it came to owning other people.
Not quite. Most were 'property disputes' but others more troubling. "...the States of Ohio and Iowa have refused to surrender to justice fugitives charged with murder,...".
Not many of us are pleased when Mexico does likewise.