One thing Mr. Wood wrote in my post above that got me thinking, he wrote, "[the argument was] whether Slavery should be protected in the Territories, when really there was no territory whatever, since the settlement of the question in Kansas, where slavery was likely to go." He was right and and I never thought of that before, there were no immediate territories for slavery expansion, what territories were the Southern Democrats wanting protection for slavery? Kansas was a done deal. The Utah and New Mexico Territory was off limits, not to mention useless, for slavery; California was already a state, so was Oregon; Oklahoma already had slavery; that leaves the Washington/Idaho, Dakotas, and Nebraska Territories.
I cannot think of any reason to bring slaves to any of these Territories other than domestic servants, due to many reasons neither of these Territories could be profitable using the traditional slave system--- not in 1860.
So what territories were in dire need of a slave system in 1860?