[Footnote 5:  In the printed Journals, Connecticut, Virginia, and Georgia, voted in the affirmative.]

The first part of the Report was then agreed to, amended as follows:  “The migration or importation of such persons as the several States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Legislature prior to the year 1808,”—­

New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, aye—­7; New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Virginia, no—­4.

Mr. Baldwin, in order to restrain and more explicitly define, “the average duty,” moved to strike out of the second part the words, “average of the duties and on imports,” and insert “common impost on articles not enumerated;” which was agreed to, nem. con.

Mr. Sherman was against this second part, as acknowledging men to be property, by taxing them as such under the character of slaves.

Mr. King and Mr. Langdon considered this as the price of the first part.

Gen. Pinckney admitted that it was so.

Col.  Mason.  Not to tax, will be equivalent to a bounty on, the importation of slaves.

Mr. Gorham thought that Mr. Sherman should consider the duty, not as implying that slaves are property, but as a discouragement to the importation of them.

Mr. Gouverneur Morris remarked, that, as the clause now stands, it implies that the Legislature may tax freemen imported.

Mr. Sherman, in answer to Mr. Gorham, observed, that the smallness of the duty showed revenue to be the object, not the discouragement of the importation.

Mr. Madison thought it wrong to admit in the Constitution the idea that there could be property in men.  The reason of duties did not hold, as slaves are not, like merchandise, consumed, &c.

Col.  Mason, in answer to Mr. Gouverneur Morris.  The provision as it stands, was necessary for the case of convicts; in order to prevent the introduction of them.

It was finally agreed, nem. con., to make the clause read:  “but a tax or duty may be imposed on such importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each person;” and then the second part, as amended, was agreed to. pp. 1427 to 30.

Tuesday, August 28, 1787.

Article 14, was then taken up.

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 Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, aye—­9; South Carolina, no—­1; Georgia, divided.

Article 15, 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.