Plausability of Constitution that makes all slavery issues a federal question

My thought for a TL is that the Constitutional Convention has a much bolder hard line anti-slavery faction, which also gains sympathy and some support from Washington. The anti slavery delegates are pragmatic, but are able to negotiate a compromise that allows slave states to count slaves as a whole person for representation purposes. In return though, they get a constitution that includes an article that gives Congress exclusive jurisdiction over the rights, safety, and welfare of slaves throughout the states and territories. This includes passing any law that emancipates or manumits slaves.

With Washington supporting this compromise, Virginia, Maryland, and North Carolina have no problem ratifying the Constitution. With threats from Spain and Indians, Georgia also ratifies. While South Carolina holds out, eventually, it also ratifies the Constitution.

With the times still being marked by thoughts that all men are created equal and that slavery is and needs to die out, the new Congress in 1790 passes a series of bills that become laws that grant certain rights and protections to slaves - eventually called the Slave Codes. They include -
1. Slaves have the right to marry, and a slave family - father, mother, and children under 18 years of age, cannot be broken up by sale, transfer, or gift/inheritance.
2. Slaves cannot be denied the right to read and write and have an education, nor could anyone be punished for teaching slaves to read and write.
3. Slaves were entitled to adequate shelter, food and clothing, could not be worked for more than 13 hours a day, 6 days a week, and could not be beaten for certain minor offenses (This is a little vague right now - but could be worked on).

There might be additional laws that grant slaves additional protections, etc. However, with slaves having more rights and protections, they are seen over time as human with dignity, and not as property. As a result, racism among the planter population and whites in general is much less, and that by the 1840s, following the lead of Britain, there is a movement to gradually emancipate.

Question 1 - is my scenario for a POD with a change to the constitution plausible?
Question 2 - with the POD as I have described, does this change the culture and thinking in America enough over time to bring about emancipation in the 1840s?
 
With Washington supporting this compromise, Virginia, Maryland, and North Carolina have no problem ratifying the Constitution.



Virginia had problems about the Constitution even without these provisions. Iirc, ratification only squeezed through by ten votes, despite Washington's support. NC didn't ratify until well into 1789. Add anything as controversial as this, and you can probably forget it.

How about a clause extending the Northwest Ordinance to all territories hereafter acquired? No doubt LA and later FL will legalise slavery as soon as they become states, but MO and perhaps even AR might not. And the Wilmot Proviso would be in the CONUS from the start. Any chance the South might swallow that?
 
Your better bet is to add a provision banning slavery in any new states. The ave states might go with his, as they did support the exact same thing in the northwest territory, on the grounds hat more slave states meant more competition. I don't tjink its very likely, but it is more likely.
 
Top