You’re confused. The idea that the North fought to free the slaves is almost as absurd as the South succeeding for states right. The South succeeded to preserve slavery, and the North fought them to preserve the union.
I think your answer is somewhat simplistic. In truth, imho, and in many other’s esteemed opinions, it was about, (as usual), money and control.
One other point, slavery still exists today, everywhere, even though we’ve turned a blind eye and/or euphemistically call it by some other name.
[In President Lincoln’s first inaugural address, he said, “I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the states where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so.”
A precursor for a War Between the States came in 1832, when South Carolina called a convention to nullify tariff acts of 1828 and 1832, referred to as the “Tariffs of Abominations.” A compromise lowering the tariff was reached, averting secession and possibly war. The North favored protective tariffs for their manufacturing industry. The South, which exported agricultural products to and imported manufactured goods from Europe, favored free trade and was hurt by the tariffs. Plus, a northern-dominated Congress enacted laws similar to Britain’s Navigation Acts to protect northern shipping interests. Shortly after Lincoln’s election, Congress passed the highly protectionist Morrill tariffs.
That’s when the South seceded, setting up a new government. Their constitution was nearly identical to the US. Constitution except that it outlawed protectionist tariffs, business handouts and mandated a two-thirds majority vote for all spending measures.
The only good coming from the War Between the States was the abolition of slavery. The great principle enunciated in the Declaration of Independence that “Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed” was overturned by force of arms. By destroying the states’ right to secession, Abraham Lincoln opened the door to the kind of unconstrained, despotic, arrogant government we have today, something the framers of the Constitution could not have possibly imagined.]
http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3a89a0fa34c2.htm