[Footnote: This was not a sudden movement on their part. The sectional difference between the North and the South had its source in the difference of climate, which greatly modified the character and habits of the people; also, while the agricultural pursuits and staple products of the South made slave labor profitable, the mechanical pursuits and the more varied products of the North made it unprofitable. These antagonisms, settled first by the Missouri Compromise of 1820, reopened by the tariff of 1828, bursting forth in the nullification of 1832, pacified by Clay's compromise tariff, increased through the annexation of Texas and the consequent war with Mexico, irritated by the Wilmot Proviso, lulled for a time by the compromise of 1850, awakened anew by the "squatter sovereignty" policy of 1853, roused to fury by the agitation in Kansas, spread broadcast by the Dred Scott decision, the attempted execution of the Fugitive Slave Law and the John Brown raid, had now reached a point where war was the only remedy. The election of Lincoln was the pivot on which the result turned. The cause ran back through thirty years of controversy to the difference in climate, in occupation, and in the habit of life and thought. Strange to say, each section misunderstood the other. The Southern people believed the North to be so engrossed in money-making and so enfeebled by luxury that it could send to the field only mercenary soldiers, who would easily be beaten by the patriotic Southerners. They said, "Cotton is King;" and believed that England and France were so dependent upon them for that staple, that their republic would be recognized and defended by those European powers. On the other hand, the Northern people did not believe that the South would dare to fight for slavery when it had 4,000,000 slaves exposed to the chances of war. They thought it to be all bluster, and hence paid little heed to the threat of secession or of war. Both sides sadly learned their mistake, only too late.]