this clause does not satisfy my mind. I wish to see this abominable trade put an end to.

But in case it be thought proper to continue this abominable traffic for twenty years, yet I do not wish to see the tax on the importation extended to all persons whatsoever. Our situation is different from the people of the North. We want citizens; they do not.

Instead of laying a tax, we ought to give a bounty to encourage foreigners to come among us. With respect to the abolition of slavery, it requires the utmost consideration. The property of the Southern States consists principally of slaves. If they mean to do away slavery altogether, this property will be destroyed. I apprehend it means to bring forward manumission. If we must manumit our slaves, what country shall we send them to? It is impossible for us to be happy if, after manumission, they are to stay among us.

Mr. Iredell. Mr. Chairman: The worthy gentleman, I believe, has misunderstood this clause, which runs in the following words: "The migration or importation of such persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the year 1808; but a tax or duty may be imposed on such importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each person." Now, sir, observe that the Eastern States, who long ago have abolished slaves, did not approve of the expression slaves; they therefore used another, that answered the same purpose.

The committee will observe the distinction between the words migration and importation. The first part of the clause will extend to persons who come into this country as free people, or are brought as slaves. But the last part extends to slaves only. The word migration refers to free persons; but the word importation refers to slaves, because free people cannot be said to be imported. The tax, there

fore, is only to be laid on slaves who are imported, and not on free persons who migrate.

I further beg leave to say that the gentleman is mistaken in another thing. He seems to say that this extends to the abolition of slavery. Is there anything in this Constitution which says that Congress shall have it in their power to abolish the slavery of those slaves who are now in the country? Is it not the plain meaning of it, that after twenty years they may prevent the future importation of slaves? It does not extend to those now in the country.

There is another circumstance to be observed. There is no authority vested in Congress to restrain the States, in the interval of twenty years, from doing what they please. If they wish to prohibit such importation, they may do so. Our next assembly may put an entire end to the importation of slaves.

Article 4. The first section and two first clauses of the second section read without observation. The last clause read.

Mr. Iredell begged leave to explain the reason of this clause. In some of the Northern States they have emancipated all their slaves. If any of our slaves, said he, go there, and remain there a certain time, they would, by the present laws, be entitled to their freedom, so that their masters could not get them again. This would be extremely prejudicial to the inhabitants of the Southern States; and to prevent it, this clause is inserted in the Constitution. Though the word slave is not mentioned, this is the meaning of it.

The Northern delegates, owing to their particular scruples on the subject of slavery, did not choose the word slave to be mentioned.

Mr. Iredell, upon Art. 5th, said Mr. Chairman: This is a very important clause. In every other constitution of

government that I have ever heard or read of, no provision is made for necessary amendments.

The misfortune attending most constitutions which have been deliberately formed, has been, that those who formed them thought their wisdom equal to all possible contingencies, and that there could be no error in what they did.

The gentlemen who framed this Constitution thought with much more diffidence of their capacities; and, undoubtedly, without a provision for amendment, it would have been justly liable to objection, and the characters of its framers would have appeared much less meritorious.

This, indeed, is one of the greatest beauties of the system, and should strongly recommend it to every candid mind.

The constitution of any government which cannot be regularly amended when its defects are experienced, reduces the people to this dilemma-they must either submit to its oppressions, or bring about amendments, more or less, by a civil war. Happy this, the country we live in!

The Constitution before us, if it be adopted, can be altered with as much regularity, and as little confusion, as any act of Assembly; not, indeed, quite so easily, which would be extremely impolitic; but it is a most happy circumstance, that there is a remedy in the system itself for its own fallibility, so that alterations can without difficulty be made, agreeable to the general sense of the people. Let us attend to the manner in which amendments may be made. The proposition for amendments may arise from Congress itself, when two-thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary.

If they should not, and yet amendments be generally wished for by the people, two-thirds of the legislatures of the different States may require a general convention for the purpose, in which case Congress are under the necessity of convening one

Any amendments which either Congress shall propose, or which shall be proposed by such general convention, are afterwards to be submitted to the legislatures of the different States, or conventions called for that purpose, as Congress shall think proper, and upon the ratification of three-fourths of the States, will become a part of the Constitution. By referring this business to legislatures, expense would be saved; and in general, it may be presumed, they would speak the genuine sense of the people. It may, however, on some occasions, be better to consult an immediate delegation for that special purpose. This is therefore left discretionary. It is highly probable that amendments agreed to in either of these methods would be conducive to the public welfare, when so large a majority of the States consented to them.

And in one of these modes, amendments that are now wished for may, in a short time, be made to this Constitution by the States adopting it.

It is, however, to be observed, that the 1st and 4th clauses in the 9th section of the 1st article are protected from any alteration till the year 1808; and in order that no consolidation should take place, it is provided that no State shall, by any amendment or alteration, be ever de prived of an equal suffrage in the Senate without its own.

consent.

The first two prohibitions are with respect to the census, (according to which direct taxes are imposed,) and with respect to the importation of slaves. As to the first, it must be observed, that there is a material difference between the Northern and Southern States. The Northern States have been much longer settled, and are much fuller of people, than the Southern, but have not land in equal proportion, nor scarcely any slaves. The subject of this article was regulated with great difficulty, and by a spirit

of concession which it would not be prudent to disturb for a good many years.

In twenty years, there will probably be a great alteration, and then the subject may be reconsidered with less difficulty and greater coolness.

In the mean time, the compromise was upon the best footing that could be obtained. A compromise likewise took place in regard to the importation of slaves. It is probable that all the members reprobated this inhuman traffic; but those of South Carolina and Georgia would not consent to an immediate prohibition of it-one reason of which was, that, during the last war, they lost a vast number of negroes, which loss they wish to supply.

In the mean time, it is left to the States to admit or prohibit the importation, and Congress may impose a limited duty upon it.

EXTRACTS FROM THE DEBATES, IN THE CONVENTION OF SOUTH CAROLINA.

January 16, 1788. Hon. Rawlins Lowndes. It has been said that this new government was to be considered as an experiment. He really was afraid it would prove a fatal one to our peace and happiness. An experiment!

What risk the loss of political existence on experiments? No, sir; if we are to make experiments, rather let them be such as may do good, but which cannot possibly do any injury to us or our posterity.

So far from having any expectation of success from such experiments, he sincerely believed that, when this new Constitution should be adopted, the sun of the Southern States would set, never to rise again.

To prove this, he observed, that six of the Eastern States formed a majority in the House of Representatives. In the enumeration he passed Rhode Island, and included Pennsylvania.

Now, was it consonant with reason, with wisdom, with