One could equally well infer that the states who gave no details did so because they had no legal argument to justify their secession.
Keep in mind the context. I was responding to a post that claimed ALL the states said something - and that was an exaggeration. Out of the two posts in that exchange, I note your post opts not to contradict the one with the clear error. What should I infer from that?
For the Confederates, those states that did give reasons for secession made it clear that their primary reason was the preservation of slavery.
We are seceding PRIMARILY because you guys have been violating the Constitution
"...many and dangerous infractions of the constitution of the United States by many of the States and people of the Northern section," (AL)
and because you are going to keep doing it
"The guaranties of the Constitution will then no longer exist." (SC)
and SECONDARILY, because all these Constitutional violations are a threat to slavery.
Does it matter which is primary and which is secondary? Is that determination critical to judging whether or not Jefferson Davis is a traitor and whether he can have a statute on public property - like von Braun?