I'll just address this: that the south didn't want slaver. Yep, we all know that. It didn't want slaves so much it merely kept 3.5 million of them for 200 years, with absolutely no constitutional, moral, or even market-based economic reason to do so. (Returns in southern industry were 22% by the 1850s). There is only one reason the south had slaves---it WANTED to have slaves.
First, I don't think Mr. Chase or Mr. Webster were ranting. I didn't say these things. The POINT was it was the in Constitution, it was LAW. The property in question, could have been mules, chickens or pigs. Just so happened it was slaves.
(From post 1228:Instead of upholding and enforcing the constitutional guarantee which I have read, many States of the North enacted laws making it a criminal offence for any official to comply with his oath of office and comply with the terms of the Constitution, so far as it affected this question.)
The source was at the bottom, if you had read the article. In case you missed it.
Source: Southern Historical Society Papers. Vol. XXII. Richmond, Va., January-December. 1894