[65] Ibid., p. 241.
[66] Ibid., p. 240.
[67] Ibid., p. 242.
[68] For further proceedings, see Annals
of Cong., 8 Cong. 1
sess. pp. 240-55,
1038-79, 1128-9, 1185-9. For the law, see
Statutes at
Large, II. 283-9.
[69] First, a bill was introduced applying the
Northwest
Ordinance to the
Territory (Annals of Cong., 8 Cong. 2 sess.
pp. 45-6); but
this was replaced by a Senate bill (Ibid., p.
68; Senate
Journal, repr. 1821, 8 Cong. 2 sess. III.
464).
For the petition
of the inhabitants, see Annals of Cong., 8
Cong. 2 sess.
p. 727-8.
[70] The bill was hurried through, and there
are no records of
debate. Cf.
Annals of Cong., 8 Cong. 2 sess. pp. 28-69,
727,
871, 957, 1016-20,
1213-5. In Senate Journal (repr. 1821),
III., see Index,
Bill No. 8. Importation of slaves was allowed
by a clause erecting
a Frame of Government “similar” to that
of the Mississippi
Territory.
[71] Annals of Cong., 9 Cong. 1 sess.
p. 443. The whole
trade was practically
foreign, for the slavers merely entered
the Negroes at
Charleston and immediately reshipped them to
New Orleans.
Cf. Annals of Cong., 16 Cong. 1 sess. p. 264.
[72] House Journal (repr. 1826), 9 Cong.
1 sess. V. 264;
Annals of Cong.,
9 Cong. 1 sess. pp. 445, 878.
[73] House Reports, 9 Cong. 1 sess. Feb. 17, 1806.
[74] House Bill No. 123.
[75] Annals of Cong., 16 Cong. 2 sess.
pp. 73-7. This report
covers the time
from Jan. 1, 1804, to Dec. 31, 1807. During
that time the
following was the number of ships engaged in the
traffic:—
From Charleston, 61 From Connecticut, 1 " Rhode Island, 59 " Sweden, 1 " Baltimore, 4 " Great Britain, 70 " Boston, 1 " France, 3 " Norfolk, 2 202
The consignees of these slave
ships were natives of
Charleston 13
Rhode Island 88
Great Britain 91
France 10
——
202
The following slaves were imported:—
By British vessels 19,949
" French " 1,078
------
21,027
By American vessels:— " Charleston merchants 2,006 " Rhode Island " 7,958 " Foreign " 5,717 " other Northern " 930 " " Southern " 1,437 18,048 ------ ------
Total number of slaves imported, 1804-7 39,075
It is, of course, highly probable
that the Custom House
returns were much below the actual figures.
[76] McMaster, History of the People
of the United States,
III. p. 517.