While I certainly can see how you might have reached such a conclusion given popular media portrayals and the state of public education, this is incorrect to the point of being laughable.
Slavery in one form or another had existed for all recorded history up to that point, with abolition sentiment slowly taking root among certain Protestant Christian groups in England, gradually spreading to some colonies and then states. There were slaves in every one of the original thirteen colonies thst became the first states. There were slaves in every one of the original states.
Outlawing slavery in the United States was a gradual thing, occurring over the course of early nationhood right into the nineteenth century, state by state.
The south as a region was far more agrarian and less densely populated. The institution of slavery was therefore much more difficult to abandon. However, I will point out to you for your edification that the self-same southern gentry you seem to view as some sort of evil force produced many of our Founders. Some freed their slaves. Some didn't.
Perpetuating ahistorical stereotypes on a forum that values traditional, Constitutional conservatism should be discouraged.
That statement was not made to imply that the acceptance of slavery originated with southern plantation owners, was limited to southern plantation owners, or was universal among Southerners in general - I’m well aware that significant regions in the South (most prominently the Appalachian regions) provided little support for the slave-holders.
And I’m well-aware that slavery has been a part of all of human history, that it is mentioned routinely in the Bible, and that it continues even today, most prominently in Muslim countries.
But like it or not, the price that was paid in this country for the sin of slavery was the blood shed in the Civil War (and yes, I realize state sovereignty and other larger issues were wrapped up in that sorry episode as well).
Decades of conflict over the toleration of slavery in the US came to a head with the election of Lincoln, and while there were many in the South who had little interest in slavery, and many who fought for the South who fought only for the the right of their states to manage their own affairs, to deny that the conflict hinged on the question of slavery would be just silly.
My point was (and is) that anytime one group of human beings decides that another group of human beings is less than human based on some externality (skin color, ancestry, stage of development) and uses that distinction as a basis of mistreatment, that sort of enterprise ends in disaster. If you can personify those responsible for that sort of travesty in the form of slavery in US history better than I have, great - go to it.