Really? Well then someone should have told the rebel leadership that.
Voted down were proposals to reopen the Atlantic slave trade . . .
Included were protections for slave imports from the U.S.
...and to prohibit the admission of free states to the new Confederacy. . . .
Article IV, Section 2 of the Confederate Constitution said, "The Confederate States may acquire new territory...In all such territory the institution of negro slavery, as it now exists in the Confederate States, shall be recognized and protected be Congress and by the Territorial government; and the inhabitants of the several Confederate States..." So the Confederate Constitution guaranteed slavery in the territories. How could non-slave states then be created from slave-holding territories? Article IV Section 2 also mandated, "The citizens of each State shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States; and shall have the right of transit and sojourn in any State of this Confederacy, with their slaves and other property; and the right of property in said slaves shall not be thereby impaired." So how could a Confederate state decide to become a non-slave state if the constitution protected the right of people from other states to bring their slaves into any state they wanted?
“The resulting constitution was surprisingly similar to that of the United States. Most of the differences merely spelled out traditional southern interpretations of the federal charter. . . .
If you overlook the ten references to slaves or slavery, and the lengths which the constitution went to in order to protect it. The U.S. Constitution, on the other hand, has not a single reference to slaves.
“. . . it was clear from the actions of the Montgomery convention that the goal of the new converts to secessionism was not to establish a slaveholders’ reactionary utopia.
Then why the need to protect slavery to the extent it did?
Really? Well then someone should have told the rebel leadership that.
Yes really and noone needed to tell them. They knew full well why they were leaving
Included were protections for slave imports from the U.S.
So states that had slavery could continue to sell across state lines just as they had done previously. Big deal.
Nonslaveholding states could be admitted - just as was said and contrary to what you claimed.
Except for the fugitive slave clause and the 3/5ths compromise. The Confederate Constitution essentially had the Corwin Amendment. Not much was different.
They wanted to provide each member state the leeway to manage it as they saw fit without interference from the central confederate government.
You left out a much more strict interpretation of the general welfare clause as well as expressly limiting tariffs to 10% as well as very tight restrictions on the ability of the central government to spend money such as a line item veto, a ban on riders being attached to bills, term limits etc. They were specifically addressing many of the ills they had seen in the US constitution. We would be better of today if many of these provisions had been adopted into the US constitution. Their objections went way beyond slavery.