Craig --

Very well-worded and informative post. As much as I'd like to agree with Doyle, he's off target on the analysis of slave ownership in Arkansas. In 1862 the Bureau of the Census published data from the Eighth Census of the U.S. used by Carl H. Moneyhon in the studies mentioned:

http://encyclopediaofarkansas.net/encyclopedia/entry-detail.aspx?entryID=1275

It's fairly easy for anyone to use and learn from the published census tables, which demonstrate the extent and limits of slavery in each county and state. For instance, we can readily see how many households included a single slave, as opposed to the number of households having a hundred or more. It becomes readily apparent that the largest number of slaves could be found on plantations of twenty or more slaves, but the typical slave owner in the state owned five or fewer slaves.

Depends on how we want to view the situation: number of slaves per typical household, or where the largest number of slaves could be found. Both views are equally valid, and both are equally important.

Between 1850 and 1860, the number and cash value of slaves in the United States had increased markedly. From a different perspective, when Abraham Lincoln asked Benjamin Butler how many ships would be required to colonize slaves in the Southern states, Butler replied that even if every ship in the navy should be so employed, slaves being born in this country would still outnumber those being taken to foreign lands.

We also oversimplify votes for or against secession. Some interpret a vote against secession as a vote in favor of remaining in the Union no matter what. A study of period literature serves to demonstrate the error in that statement. The major question in every Southern state concerned the timing of secession rather than a simple 'yes' or 'no' on the issue. Those who favored immediate secession were called "straight-outs", opposed by co-operationists who wanted to adopt a "wait-and-see" attitude and let events take their course.

In Arkansas for instance, had either of the earlier votes been taken as settling the question one way or another, there would have been no need to consider the question again after a short interval of time.