said each state must have an equal vote, or the business of the convention was at an end. It having become apparent that this unhappy result could be avoided only by a compromise, Mr. Sherman, of Connecticut, moved the appointment of a committee of conference, to consist of one member from cach state, and the motion prevailed. The convention then adjourned for three days, thus giving time for consultation, and an opportunity to celebrate the anniversary of independence.

The report of this committee, which was made on the 5th of July, proposed, (1.) That in the first branch of the legislature, each state should have one representative for every forty thousand inhabitants, (three-fifths of the slaves being counted;) that each state not containing that number should be allowed one representative; and that money bills should originate in this branch. (2.) That in the second branch each state should have one vote. These propositions were reported, it is said, at the suggestion of Dr. Franklin, one of the committee of conference.

The report, of course, met with greater favor from the state rights party, than from their opponents. The equal vote in the senate continued to receive the most determined opposition from the national party. In relation to the rule of representation in the first branch of the legislature, also, a great diversity of opinion prevailed. The conflicting interests to be reconciled in the settlement of this question, however, were those of the northern and southern, commercial and planting, rather than the imaginary interests of small and large states.

In settling a rule of apportionment, several questions were to be considered. What should be the number of representatives in the first branch of the legislature ? Ought the number from each state to be fixed, or to increase with the increase of popplation ? Ought population alone to be the basis of apportionment? or should property be taken into account? Whatever rule might be adopted, no apportionment founded upon population could be made until an enumeration of the inhabitants should have been taken. The number of representatives was therefore, for the time being, fixed at sixty-five, and apportioned as directed by the constitution. [Art. I, 92.]

In establishing a rule of future apportionment, great diversity of opinion was expressed. Although slavery then existed in all the states except Massachusetts, the great mass of the slave population was in the southern states. These states claimed a representation according to numbers, bond and free, while the northern states were in favor of a representation according to the number of free persons only. This rule was forcibly urged by several of the northern delegates. Mr. Patterson regarded slaves only as property. They were not represented in the states; why should they be in the general government? They were not

a

allowed to vote; why should they be represented ? It was an encouragement of the slave trade. Said Mr. Wilson : “Are they admitted as citizens? then why not on an equality with citizens ? Are they admitted as property? then why is not other property admitted into the computation?" A large portion of the members of the convention, from both sections of the union, aware that neither extreme could be carried, favored the proposition to count the whole number of free citizens and three-fifths of all others.

Prior to this discussion, a select committee, to whom this subject had been referred, had reported in favor of a distribution of the members on the basis of wealth and numbers, to be regulated by the legislature. Before the question was taken on this report, a proviso was moved and agreed to, that direct taxes should be in proportion to representation. Subsequently a proposition was moved for reckoning three-fifths of the glaves in estimating taxes, and making taxation the basis of representation, which was adopted; New Jersey and Delaware against it, Massachusetts and South Carolina divided; New York not represented, her three delegates being all absent. Yates and Lansing, both of the state rights party, considering their powers explicitly confined to a revision of the confederation, and being chagrined at the defeat of their attempts to secure an equal vote in the first branch of the legislature, had left the convention, not to return. From that time, (July 11th,) New York had no vote in the convention. Mr. Hamilton had left before the others, to be absent six weeks; and though he returned, and took part in the deliberations, the state, not having two delegates present, was not entitled to a vote. On the 23d, Gilman and Langdon, the delegates from New Hampshire, arrived, when eleven states were again represented.

The term of service of members of the first branch was reduced to two years, and of those of the second branch, to six years; onethird of the members of the latter to go out of office every two years; the representation in this body to consist of two members from each state, voting individually, as in the other branch, and not by states, as under the confederation. Sundry other modifications were made in the provisions relating to this department.

The reported plan of the executive department was next considered. After much discussion, and several attempts to strike out the ineligibility of the executive a second time, and to change the term of office, and the mode of election, these provisions were retained.

The report of the committee of the whole, as amended, was accepted by the convention, and, together with the New Jersey plan, and a third drawn by Charles Pinckney, of South Carolina, was referred to a committee of detail, consisting of Messrs. Rutledge, Randolph, Gorham

a

Ellsworth, and Wilson, who, on the 6th of August, after an adjournment of ten days, reported the constitution in proper form, having inserted some new provisions, and altered certain others. Our prescribed limits forbid a particular account of the subsequent alterations which the constitution received before it was finally adopted by the convention. There is one provision, however, which, as it forms one of the great “compromises of the constitution," deserves notice.

To render the constitution acceptable to the southern states which were the principal exporting states, the committee of detail had inserted a clause, providing, that no duties should be laid on exports, or on slaves imported; and another, that no navigation act might to be passed, except by a two-thirds vote. By depriving congress of the power of giving any preference to American over foreign shipping, it was designed to secure cheap transportation to southern exports. As the shipping was principally owned in the eastern states, their delegates were equally anxious to prevent any restriction of the power of congress to

pass

navigation laws. All the states, except North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia, had prohibited the importation of slaves; and North Carolina had proceeded so far as to discourage the importation by heavy duties. The prohibition of duties on the importation of slaves was demanded by the delegates from South Carolina and Georgia, who declared that, without a provision of this kind, the constitution would not receive the assent of these states. The support which the proposed restriction received from other states, was given to it from a disposition to compromise, rather than from an approval of the measure itself. The proposition

. not only gave rise to a discussion of its own merits, but revived the opposition to the apportionment of representatives according to the threefifths ratio, and called forth some severe denunciations of slavery.

Mr. King, in reference to the admission of slaves as a part of the representative population, remarked : “ He had not made a strenuous opposition to it heretofore, because he had hoped that this concession would have produced a readiness, which had not been manifested, to strengthen the general government. The report of the committee put an end to all those hopes. The importation of slaves could not be prohibited; exports could not be taxed. If slaves are to be imported, shall not the exports produced by their labor supply a revenue to help the government defend their masters ? There was so much inequality and unreasonableness in all this, that the people of the northern states could never be reconciled to it. He had hoped that some accommodation would have taken place on the subject; that at least a time would have been limited for the importation of slaves. He could never agree to let them be imported without limitation, and then he represented in the national legis

a

lature. Either slaves should not be represented, or exports should be taxable.”

Gouverneur Morris pronounced slavery "a nefarious institution. It was the curse of Heaven on the states where it prevailed. Compare the free regions of the middle states, where a rich and noble cultivation marks the prosperity and happiness of the people, with the misery and poverty which overspread the barren wastes of Virginia, Maryland, and the other states having slaves. Travel through the whole continent, and you behold the prospect continually varying with the appearance and disappearance of slavery. The admission of slaves into the representation, when fairly explained, comes to this, that the inhabitant of Georgia and South Carolina, who goes to the coast of Africa in defiance of the most sacred laws of humanity, tears away his fellow-creatures from their dearest connections, and damns them to the most cruel bondage, shall have more votes in a government instituted for the protection of the rights of mankind, than the citizen of Pennsylvania and New Jersey, who views with a laudable horror so nefarious a practice. And what is the proposed compensation to the northern states for a sacrifice of every principle of right, every impulse of humanity? They are to bind themselves to march their militia for the defense of the southern states, against those very slaves of whom they complain. The legislature will have indefinite power to tax them by excises and duties on imports, both of which will fall heavier on them than on the southern inhabitants ; for the Bohea tea used by a northern freeman, will pay more tax than the whole consumption of the miserable slave, which consists of nothing more than his physical subsistence and the rag which covers his nakedness. On the other side, the southern states are not to be restrained from importing fresh supplies of wretched Africans, at once to increase the danger of attack and the difficulty of defense ; nay, they are to be encouraged to it by an assurance of having their votes in the national government increased in proportion, and, at the same time, are to have their slaves and their exports exempt from all contributions to the public service." Mr. Morris moved to make the free population alone the basis of representation.

Mr. Sherman, who had on other occasions manifested a disposition to compromise, again favored the southern side. He “did not regard the admission of the negroes as liable to such insuperable objections. It was the freemen of the southern states who were to be represented according to the taxes paid by them, and the negroes are only included in the estimate of the taxes."

After some farther discussion, the question was taken upon Mr. Morris' motion, and lost, New Jersey only voting for it.

a

With respect to prohibiting any restriction upon the importation of slaves, Mr. Martin, of Maryland, who moved to allow a tax upon slaves imported, remarked : “As five slaves in the apportionment of representatives were reckoned as equal to three freemen, such a permission amounted to an encouragemement of the slave trade. Slaves weakened the union which the other parts were bound to protect; the privilege of importing them was therefore unreasonable. Such a feature in the constitution was inconsistent with the principles of the revolution, and dishonorable to the American character."

Mr. Rutledge “ did not see how this section would encourage the importation of slaves. He was not apprehensive of insurrections, and would readily exempt the other states from every obligation to protect the south. Religion and humanity had nothing to do with this question. Interest alone is the governing principle with nations. The true question at present is, whether the southern states shall or shall not be parties to the union. If the northern states consult their interest, they will not oppose the increase of slaves, which will increase the commodities of which they will become the carriers."

Mr. Ellsworth said : “Let every state import what it pleases. The morality or wisdom of slavery is a consideration belonging to the states. What enriches a part enriches the whole, and the states are the best judges of their particular interests."

Mr. C. Pinckney said : “South Carolina can never receive the plan if it prohibits the slave trade. If the states be left at liberty on this subject, South Carolina may perhaps, by degrees, do of herself what is wished, as Maryland and Virginia already have done."

Mr. Sherman concurred with his colleague, (Mr. Ellsworth.) “He disapproved the slave trade; but as the states now possessed the right, and the public good did not require it to be taken away, and as it was expedient to have as few objections as possible to the proposed scheme of government, he would leave the matter as he found it. The abolition of slavery secmed to be going on in the United States, and the good sense of the several states would probably, hy degrees, soon complete it."

Mr. Mason said: “Slavery discourages arts and manufactures. The poor despise labor when performed by slaves. They prevent the immigration of whites, who really enrich and strengthen a country. They produce a pernicious effect on manners. Every master of slaves is born a petty tyrant. They bring the judgment of Heaven on a country. He lamented that some of our eastern brethren, from a lust of gain, had embarked in this nefarious traffic. As to the states being in possession of the right to import, that was the case of many other rights now to be given up. He held it essential, in every point of view, that the general government should have power to prevent the increase of slavery."