1. And slavery was still legal in the other states. Black codes were still in being enforced and New England slave ships still were running.

2. I actually have a different account of what may have happened. From "Fighting for the Confederacy" by Genl. Edward Porter Alexander, CSA. Page 19 paragraph 2.
"the first hostile act of either side was the act of Major Robert Anderson who, without orders or authority & actual reasons that God only knows, about Christmas 1860 spiked the guns at Fort Moultrie, where he was stationed and moved secretly by night into Fort Sumpter."

Genl. Alexander goes on to tell how Fort Sumpter was useless to everyone by the state of South Carolina, and that Anderson attempted to justify his actions based on the fear that South Carolina would strike the first blow.

In paragraph 4&5 Genl. Alexander tells how Major Anderson was allowed to buy provisions in the Charleston market on the personnel pledge of Secretary Seward!!!! All this time Lincoln refuses to meet with peace delegates.

Now were all of the ships sent to support Fort Sumpter supply ships? Again, not according to Genl. Alexander.

This book and other sources I have read state the exact thing. These facts can only lead me to believe that the North made the first aggressive move.

3. And interpretations, like our opinions can be wrong.

4. Well you are partly right---

From

http://members.tripod.com/~greatamericanhistory/gr02013.htm

I looked until I could find a site that has the same belief as you-- slavery was the cause of the war. This is what they wrote. Now the right to choose is under attack just as I said.

"Up until the middle 1800s, slavery was kept as a background issue that remained largely the concern of political leaders of the South, and abolitionists of the North. But in 1854, the Kansas-Nebraska Act, sponsored by Democrat Stephen A. Douglas, brought slavery to the forefront of national attention. Kansas-Nebraska eliminated the old Missouri Compromise (which in 1820 had designated areas of the new territories in which slavery could and could not be introduced) and made it possible
for slavery to be introduced in virtually any new territory. Douglas called the concept of allowing residents of the territories to decide the slavery issue for themselves Popular Sovereignty. Kansas-Nebraska caused a firestorm to errupt in the North, awakening many people to the danger of the potential spread of slavery. Moderate politicians such as Abraham Lincoln became active in the cause of fighting both the Kansas-Nebraska Act and the spread of slavery."

Also if I am not mistaken, during this time (1850-1861) Kansas had two governments, Texas and New Mexico was admitted to the Union with no mention of slavery, California was admitted as a free state. I think Oregon and maybe a couple more northern states were admitted as free, the balance of power was shifting.

Back to the old "might makes right" argument? The South did not want war. I believe I show that above, and besides by your own admission Lincoln refused to see the peace delegation.

GP