You may want to look up the italicized word "hereafter" and compare it to "heretofore". One sees that if there is to be a change hereafter a different situation obtained heretofore.
Take comfort, however, in the fact that truth in history of the South was lacking for me too because winners of wars get to rewrite the history taught in most schools. So untruth becomes true for those taught who will teach others in turn. The losers are demonized and vicious, romantic or stupid suppositions replace facts.
Of course I was born in Connecticut and schooled in NJ through the undergraduate experience. What should I have known about Virginia? The majority of our (Northern) blacks were marginalized and in ghettos.
A Virginian today, I can introduce you to descendants of black Confederate soldiers who are proud of the service of their grandfathers, uncles, (whatever). These were free black men of property and business who owned slaves most of whom had never been slaves themselves. (In fact some of their ancestors had also fought in the Revolution.)
These descendants also comprehend and honor the term "free black". To them it is not an epithet, neither would they stoop to refer to themselves as African-American.
I presume that you may not know that only a super miniscule percentage of white Confederate soldiers owned slaves. Please let's not allow the Jesse propaganda wipe away all truth and convince us that we should all presume that empty lies are that truth.
But that's not really a good standard for assessment. How many soldiers in our recent wars had owned any stocks or real property? Most of them were too young. But, if I remember correctly, close to one in two families in South Carolina or Mississippi owned slaves. There was a smaller percentage of slaveowning families in other states and it does depend on how one defines "family," but your standard doesn't fit the situation.
You may want to look up the italicized word "hereafter" and compare it to "heretofore"
The actual wording of that clause dates from a piece of legislation called the Virginia Manumission Law of 1806. Since Virginia rewrote her Constitution in Virginia rewrote her Constitution twice prior to 1861, in 1830 and 1851. The ratification in 1861 was a hasty convention called to remove all reference of the United States from the document and substitute confederate states. The part I quoted was most likely added in either 1830 or 1851.
These were free black men of property and business who owned slaves most of whom had never been slaves themselves.
There have been several studies on the subject and the researchers have found that in many, if not most, of the cases of black slave ownership the purchaser was buying a member of his or her immediate family as a way to get around the manumission clauses of the Virginia constitution.
A Virginian today, I can introduce you to descendants of black Confederate soldiers who are proud of the service of their grandfathers, uncles, (whatever).
I have no doubt that blacks served the confederate army, some willingly and many unwillingly. But they were in a supporting role, teamsters, servants, cooks, what have you. Blacks were legally barred from combat roles throughout almost all the war. One just has to look at the way Northern black combat soldiers were treated at the hands of the south to realize that there were no large numbers of southern black combat soldiers.