Page:The History of Slavery and the Slave Trade.djvu/424

 conscience would allow permission to the states to continue the slave-trade. King thought the subject should be considered in a political light only. If two southern states would not consent to the prohibition, neither would other slates to the allowance. "The exemption of slaves from duty while every other import was subject to it, was an inequality that could not fail to strike the commercial sagacity of the northern and middle states."

This hint about a tax was not thrown away. Charles Pinckney, of S. C, would consent to a tax equal to that imposed on other imports, and he moved a commitment with that view. Rutledge seconded the motion. Gouverneur Morris proposed that the whole article, including the clauses relating to navigation laws and taxes on exports, should be referred to the same committee. "These things," he remarked, "may form a bargain among the northern and southern states." Sherman suggested that a tax on slaves imported would make the matter worse, since it implied they were property. Randolph supported the commitment in hopes that some middle ground might be hit upon. He would rather risk the constitution than support the clause as it stood. Ellsworth advocated the article as it was." This widening of opinions had a threatening aspect. He was afraid we should lose two states, with such others as might be disposed to stand aloof, should fly into a variety of shapes and directions, and most probably into several confederations — not without bloodshed." The motion for reference prevailed, and the article was referred to a grand committee of one from each state. The report of this committee retained the prohibition of export duties, but struck out the restriction on the enactment of navigation laws. Until the year 1800 it allowed the unrestrained migration or importation of such persons as the states might see fit to receive, subject, however, to the imposition of a duty by congress, the maximum of which was presently fixed at ten dollars.

Williamson, of N. C, declared himself, both in opinion and practice, against slavery; but he thought it more in favor of humanity, from a view of all circumstances, to let in South Carolina and Georgia on these terms, than to exclude them from the union. Sherman, of Ct., again objected to the tax as acknowledging men to be property. Gorham, of Mass., replied that the duty ought to be considered, not as implying that men are property, but as a discouragement to their importation. Sherman said the duty was too small to bear that character. Madison thought it "wrong to admit, in the constitution, the idea that there could be property in a man," and the phraseology of one clause was subsequently altered to avoid any such implication. Gouverneur Morris objected that the clause gave congress power to tax freemen imported; to which Mason replied that such a power was necessary to prevent the importation of convicts. A motion to extend the time from 1800 to 1808, made by C. C. Pinckney and seconded by Gorham, was carried against the votes of New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware and Virginia; Massachusetts, Connecticut, and New Hampshire voting this time with Georgia and South Carolina. That part of the report which struck out the restriction on the enactment of navigation acts was opposed by Charles Pinckney in a set speech, in which he