the barbarism of modern policy; that within that period, it will receive a considerable discouragement from the Federal Government, and may be totally abolished, by a concurrence of the few States which continue the unnatural traffic, in the prohibitory example which has been given by so great a majority of the Union.  Happy would it be for the unfortunate Africans, if an equal prospect lay before them of being redeemed from the oppressions of their European brethren!

“Attempts have been made to pervert this clause into an objection against the Constitution, by representing it on one side as a criminal toleration of an illicit practice, and on another, as calculated to prevent voluntary and beneficial emigrations from Europe to America.  I mention these misconstructions, not with a view to give them an answer, for they deserve none; but as specimens of the manner and spirit, in which some have thought fit to conduct their opposition to the proposed Government."[30]

38. Attitude of the State Conventions. The records of the proceedings in the various State conventions are exceedingly meagre.  In nearly all of the few States where records exist there is found some opposition to the slave-trade clause.  The opposition was seldom very pronounced or bitter; it rather took the form of regret, on the one hand that the Convention went so far, and on the other hand that it did not go farther.  Probably, however, the Constitution was never in danger of rejection on account of this clause.

Extracts from a few of the speeches, pro and con, in various States will best illustrate the character of the arguments.  In reply to some objections expressed in the Pennsylvania convention, Wilson said, December 3, 1787:  “I consider this as laying the foundation for banishing slavery out of this country; and though the period is more distant than I could wish, yet it will produce the same kind, gradual change, which was pursued in Pennsylvania."[31] Robert Barnwell declared in the South Carolina convention, January 17, 1788, that this clause “particularly pleased” him.  “Congress,” he said, “has guarantied this right for that space of time, and at its expiration may continue it as long as they please.  This question then arises—­What will their interest lead them to do?  The Eastern States, as the honorable gentleman says, will become the carriers of America.  It will, therefore, certainly be their interest to encourage exportation to as great an extent as possible; and if the quantum of our products will be diminished by the prohibition of negroes, I appeal to the belief of every man, whether he thinks those very carriers will themselves dam up the sources from whence their profit is derived.  To think so is so contradictory to the general conduct of mankind, that I am of opinion, that, without we ourselves put a stop to them, the traffic for negroes will continue forever."[32]