[BroJoeK]

DiogenesLamp: "No, it's filled with euphemisms, but no honest reading of the document could conclude it meant anything other than slaves.
It used nicey nice language to mean slaves, but it was talking about slaves none the less."

No, unlike the Confederate Constitution, when the US Constitution used a term like "Person held to Service or Labour", it could refer to African slaves, indentured servants or prisoners.
By contrast, the Confederate Constitution made clear when it referred specifically to African slaves.

[DiogenesLamp]

No, unlike the Confederate Constitution, when the US Constitution used a term like "Person held to Service or Labour", it could refer to African slaves, indentured servants or prisoners.

And do you whistle when you walk through a graveyard?

By contrast, the Confederate Constitution made clear when it referred specifically to African slaves.

Yes, the confederate constitution made it very clear, and I presume they did this because they were fed up with people pretending the US constitution wasn't also clear.