"[20]
Martin and Williamson of North Carolina, Butler of South Carolina, and
Mason of Virginia defended the proposition, insisting that it would be a
dangerous concession on the part of the South to leave navigation acts
to a mere majority vote. Sherman of Connecticut, Morris of Pennsylvania,
and Spaight of North Carolina declared that the very diversity of
interest was a security. Finally, by a vote of 7 to 4, Maryland,
Virginia, North Carolina, and Georgia being in the minority, the
Convention refused to consider the motion, and the recommendation of the
committee passed.[21]
When, on September 10, the Convention was discussing the amendment
clause of the Constitution, the ever-alert Rutledge, perceiving that
the results of the laboriously settled "bargain" might be endangered,
declared that he "never could agree to give a power by which the
articles relating to slaves might be altered by the states not
interested in that property."[22] As a result, the clause finally
adopted, September 15, had the proviso: "Provided, that no amendment
which may be made prior to the year 1808 shall in any manner affect the
1st and 4th clauses in the 9th section of the 1st article."[23]
36. ~Settlement by the Convention.~ Thus, the slave-trade article of the
Constitution stood finally as follows:--
"Article I. Section 9. 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
one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a Tax or duty may be
imposed on such Importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each
Person.
Pages:
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112