The Anti-Slavery Examiner
Chapter 231 : TUESDAY, August 28, 1787.Article 14, was then taken up.[5][Footnote 5: Article 14 was,

TUESDAY, August 28, 1787.

Article 14, was then taken up.[5]

[Footnote 5: Article 14 was,--The citizens of each State shall be ent.i.tled to all privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States.--EDITOR.]

General PINCKNEY was not satisfied with it. He seemed to wish some provision should be included in favor of property in slaves.

On the question on Article 14,--New Hamps.h.i.+re, Ma.s.sachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, aye--9; South Carolina, no--1; Georgia, divided.

Article 15,[6] being then taken up, the words, "high misdemeanor,"

were struck out, and the words, "other crime," inserted, in order to comprehend all proper cases; it being doubtful whether "high misdemeanor" had not a technical meaning too limited.

[Footnote 6: Article 15 was,--Any person charged with treason, felony or high misdemeanor in any State, who shall flee from justice, and shall be found in any other State, shall, on demand of the Executive power of the State from which he fled, be delivered up and removed to the State having jurisdiction of the offence.--EDITOR.]

Mr. BUTLER and Mr. PINCKNEY moved to require "fugitive slaves and servants to be delivered up like criminals."

Mr. WILSON. This would oblige the Executive of the State to do it, at the public expense.

Mr. SHERMAN saw no more propriety in the public seizing and surrendering a slave or servant, than a horse.

Mr. BUTLER withdrew his proposition, in order that some particular provision might be made, apart from this article.

Article 15, as amended, was then agreed to, _nem. con_.--_pp_. 1447-8.

WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 29, 1787.

Article 7, Section 6, by the Committee of Eleven reported to be struck out (see the twenty-fourth inst.) being now taken up,--

Mr. PINCKNEY moved to postpone the Report, in favor of the following proposition: "That no act of the Legislature for the purpose of regulating the Commerce of the United States with foreign powers, among the several States, shall be pa.s.sed without the a.s.sent of two-thirds of the members of each House." He remarked that there were five distinct commercial interests.

The power of regulating commerce was a pure concession on the part of the Southern States. They did not need the protection of the Northern States at present.--_p_. 1450.

General PINCKNEY said it was the true interest of the Southern States to have no regulation of commerce; but considering the loss brought on the commerce of the Eastern States by the Revolution, their liberal conduct towards the views[7] of South Carolina, and the interest the weak Southern States had in being united with the strong Eastern States, he thought it proper that no fetters should be imposed on the power of making commercial regulations, and that his const.i.tuents, though prejudiced against the Eastern States, would be reconciled to this liberality. He had, himself, he said, prejudices against the Eastern States before he came here, but would acknowledge that he had found them as liberal and candid as any men whatever.--_p_. 1451.

[Footnote 7: He meant the permission to import slaves. An understanding on the two subjects of _navigation_ and _slavery_, had taken place between those parts of the Union, which explains the vote of the motion depending, as well as the language of General Pinckney and others.]

Mr. PINCKNEY replied, that his enumeration meant the five minute interests. It still left the two great divisions of Northern and Southern interests.

Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS opposed the object of the motion as highly injurious.--A navy was essential to security, particularly of the Southern States;--

Mr. WILLIAMSON. As to the weakness of the Southern States, he was not alarmed on that account. The sickliness of their climate for invaders would prevent their being made an object. He acknowledged that he did not think the motion requiring two-thirds necessary in itself; because if a majority of the Northern States should push their regulations too far, the Southern States would build s.h.i.+ps for themselves; but he knew the Southern people were apprehensive on this subject, and would be pleased with the precaution.

Mr. SPAIGHT was against the motion. The Southern States could at any time save themselves from oppression, by building s.h.i.+ps for their own use.--_p_. 1452.

Mr. BUTLER differed from those who considered the rejection of the motion as no concession on the part of the Southern States. He considered the interests of these and of the Eastern States to be as different as the interests of Russia and Turkey. Being, notwithstanding, desirous of conciliating the affections of the Eastern States, he should vote against requiring two-thirds instead of a majority.--_p_. 1453.

Mr. MADISON. He added, that the Southern States would derive an essential advantage, in the general security afforded by the increase of our maritime strength. He stated the vulnerable situation of them all, and of Virginia in particular.

Mr. RUTLEDGE was against the motion of his colleague. At the worst, a navigation act could bear hard a little while only on the Southern States. As we are laying the foundation for a great empire, we ought to take a permanent view of the subject, and not look at the present moment only.

Mr. GORMAN. The Eastern States were not led to strengthen the Union by fear for their own safety.

He deprecated the consequences of disunion; but if it should take place, it was the Southern part of the Continent that had most reason to dread them.

On the question to postpone, in order to take up Mr. PINCKNEY's motion,--

Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, Georgia, aye--4; New Hamps.h.i.+re, Ma.s.sachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, South Carolina, no--7. The Report of the Committee for striking out Section 6, requiring two-thirds of each House to pa.s.s a navigation act, was then agreed to, _nem. con_.

Mr. BUTLER moved to insert after Article 15, "If any person bound to service or labor in any of the United States, shall escape into another State, he or she shall not be discharged from such service or labor, in consequence of any regulations subsisting in the State to which they escape, but shall be delivered up to the person justly claiming their service or labor,"--which was agreed to, _nem.

con_.--_p_. 1454-5-6.

THURSDAY, August 30, 1787.

Article 18, being taken up,

On a question for striking out "domestic violence," and inserting "insurrections," it pa.s.sed in the negative,--New Jersey, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, aye--5; New Hamps.h.i.+re, Ma.s.sachusetts, Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, no--6.--_pp_. 1466-7.

MONDAY, September 10, 1787.

Mr. RUTLEDGE said 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, and prejudiced against it. In order to obviate this objection, these words were added to the proposition: "provided that no amendments, which may be made prior to the year 1808 shall in any manner affect the fourth and fifth sections of the seventh Article:"--_p_. 1536.

TUESDAY, September 13, 1787.

Article 1, Section 2. On motion of Mr. RANDOLPH, the word "servitude"

was struck out, and "service" unanimously[8] inserted, the former being thought to express the condition of slaves, and the latter the obligations of free persons.

[Footnote 8: See page 372 of the printed journal.]

Mr. d.i.c.kENSON and Mr. WILSON moved to strike out, "and direct taxes,"

from Article 1, Section 2, as improperly placed in a clause relating merely to the Const.i.tution of the House of Representatives.

Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS. The insertion here was in consequence of what had pa.s.sed on this point; in order to exclude the appearance of counting the negroes in the _representation_. The including of them may now be referred to the object of direct taxes, and incidentally only to that of representation.

On the motion to strike out, "and direct taxes," from this place,--

New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, aye--3; New Hamps.h.i.+re, Ma.s.sachusetts, Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, no--8.--_pp_. 1569-70.

SAt.u.r.dAY, September 15, 1787.

Article 4, Section 2, (the third paragraph,) the term "legally" was struck out; and the words, "under the laws thereof," inserted after the word "State," in compliance with the wish of some who thought the term _legal_ equivocal, and favoring the idea that slavery was legal in a moral view.--p. 1589.

Mr. GERRY stated the objections which determined him to withhold his name from the Const.i.tution: 1-2-3-4-5-6, that three-fifths of the blacks are to be represented, as if they were freemen.--p. 1595.