Ask Abe Lincoln. In the words of Henry Adams, he actively worked to frame that issue for his party's political advantages. In the meantime, I'll simply note that it is absurd to try and reduce the conflict to any one issue alone, be it tariffs or slavery or something else. You and others have attempted to do that repeatedly around slavery, seemingly because, holding all other things equal, you seek to use it to claim a moral advantage from the begining for your side. In reality though, the tariff speeches you and others have claimed not to exist are all there in the congressional record. That is because there existence is not the real issue here. Rather it is the conscious actions taken to by yankee apologists for the purpose of ignoring, supressing, and lying about those speeches to keep them from the consciousness of the American public. Your own behavior here indicates that either you have been duped by this crowd or you are an active participant in those very same acts of ignorance, suppression, and dishonesty.
On the other hand, if tairffs were such an issue what prevented the southern politicians from submitting Constitutional amendments to address their grievances?
Did you not read my previous post? By its very nature, the tariff debate was legislative. Why try and change the Constitution, which requires an unattainable 2/3rds majority, over an issue that could be settled by an also unattainable yet lesser 50% plus one majority?
But not a single one of them offered a compromise proposal to address them?
They did. Senator Hunter and his backers offered several amendments to the Morrill Act when he was fighting it on the senate floor. Senator Powell of Kentucky, who was also a prominent participant in the other compromise proposals, did the same during that debate. Time and time again the yankees shot them down just like they did with all compromises on any issue.