The story of the Loyal servant has been grossly undertold. mainly because it does not fit the agenda that justified a war of aggression.

Don't get me wrong I am not defending the institution of slavery. But the only way to prevent chaos is to estblish rules of law and live by those laws. And when necessary change those laws according to the prescribe methods provided under that same law.

That was NOT done in the case of Slavery and the War for Southern Independence. Under the Constitution the institution of Slavery was to be regulated by the individual States. It was a State Right under the Constitution, and an Individual Right in the States which allowed that institution.

Every State in the Union had the right to outlaw Slavery at any time a majority of the people of that State chose to do so. Attempts by the United States Congress to regulate what states would be a slave state and which would not be, such as the 1820 Missouri Compromise, were ultimately ruled to have been UNconstitional by none other authority than the United States Supreme Court.

The problem was that abolishionist could NOT get the laws changed by the legal method prescribed for changing of those laws. Or at least it was not fast enough for them. Even at the end of the War there was considerable opposition in the United States Congress to the passage of the 13th Amendment. I wonder why?

I also wonder how many southern Slave owners would had accepted the $300 "bonus" for each of their slaves in 1860?
The going price for the US Government to purchase a slaves freedom in Washington DC in 1860 was only $100, But then they were "colonized" to Liberia.