Okay, you are reading stuff into what I post that I never said. I never said there would be none, I said there would be no significant amounts of it because the profit wasn't there.
Of course if it was allowed, there would be some but nothing like that used in plantation farming.
Once slaveholding had a politically reliable core, slaveowners branched into other areas and activities. I told you that slaves were used in textile and iron production, in mining, in railroad construction. They were also used in shipbuilding, lumbering, potterymaking and other industries.
To some extent, but not on a large scale. If such a thing had been done on a large scale, it would have simply caused slavery to have even more opposition. The Northern whites were mostly opposed to slavery because they saw it as an unfair competition against their ability to earn wages. So long as they kept it down South on the farms doing jobs they didn't want, they would grumble about it, but if they saw it as taking large numbers of jobs away from them, they would have voiced an opposition verging on riot.
Moving slavery large scale into these other jobs in the territories would have stiffened and increased opposition to it even more than it was.
That was already happening. Slave owners thought it was their right to take their slaves anywhere they wanted to, especially to the territories.
They weren't going to be stopped by what Northerners thought. And the Northerners weren't going to stand for it. That's one reason why there was a war. So, no, concern for Northern opposition wouldn't have -- and didn't -- stopped slaveholders from trying to expand their territory.
But you just confuse the heck out of people. Some of the time you're talking about some hypothetical state when the country already split apart and the CSA was rolling in money. Now you're talking about another part of history, apparently before the Civil War. Very confusing.