OCR Text |
Show 146 'flllli ~~1 A'l'E COSVl~N'J'lONS. this clan e does uot satisfy my miud. I wish to see this abominable trade put an end to. But in case it be thought proper to continue this abominaule traffic for twenty years, yet I do not wish to see the tux on the importation extended to all persons what~oevcr. Our situation is different from the people of the N orlb. 'VP want citizens; they do not. In tead of laying a tax, we ought to give a bounty to encourage foreigners to come among us. With reRpect to the abolition of slavery, it requires the utmost consideratio1l. 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 uring forward manumission. If we must manumit our slaves I what country shall we send them to? It is impossiulc for us to be happy if, after man omission, they are to slay nmong ns. Ml'. Iredell. Mr. Chairman : The worthy genL1cman, I believe, bas 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 Congres. 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 Stales, 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 betweeu 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 tJlC last part extends to slaves only. The word migration refers to free persons ; but the word impo11 tation refers to sln ves, because free people cannot be said to be imported. The tax, there· THE STATE CONVENTIONS. 14-7 fore, is only to be laid on slaves who arc imported, and not on free persons who migr·ate. I fnrthcr beg leave to !'ay that the gentleman is mistaken in another thing. Tic seems to say that this extends to the aholi tion of slavery. Is there anything in this Constitution which says that Congress shall have it in their power to abolish tho slavery of those slaves who arc now in the country? Is it not the plain meaning of it, that after twenty years they may prevcn t the fn ture im porlation of sla Yes ? It does not extend to those now in the country. '£here is another cirenmstance to be observed. There is no authority veste1l 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 eu tire end to the importation of slaveA. Article 4. rrhe first section and two first clauses of the second section read without observation. rrhe last clanse read. Mr. Iredell begged lea vc to explain the reason of thiH clause. In some of the Northern States they have emancipated all their slal es. If any of our slaves, sn.id he, go there, and remain there a certain time, they would, by the present laws, be entitled to their freedom, so that their ma5- ters 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. rl'hough the word slave is not mentioned, this is the meanin()' of it. The Northern delegates, owing to their particular scruples on the subject of slavery, did not choose the word 8laoe to be mentioned. Mr. Iredell, upon Art. 5th, said-Mr. Chairman: This is a very important clause. In every other constitution of . f' I~ I ~ ~ I I I , .. .\ .~. ' I "v,, ! I • 'i t : I |