Apportionment and Slavery: Northern and Southern Views
by
From the speeches of Rawlins Lowndes to the South Carolina
ratifying convention on January 16, 17, and 18, 1788.
.… six of the Eastern States formed a majority in the House of
Representatives. In the enumeration he passed Rhode Island, and included
Pennsylvania. Now, was it consonant with reason, with wisdom, with policy, to
suppose, in a legislature where a majority of persons sat whose interests were
greatly different from ours, that we had the smallest chance of receiving
adequate advantages? Certainly not. He believed the gentlemen that went from
this state, to represent us in Convention, possessed as much integrity, and
stood as high in point of character, as any gentlemen that could have been
selected; and he also believed that they had done every thing in their power to
procure for us a proportionate share in this new government; but the very little
they had gained proved what we may expect in future—that the interest of the
Northern States would so predominate as to divest us of any pretensions to the
title of a republic. In the first place, what cause was there for jealousy of
our importing Negroes? Why confine us to twenty years, or rather why limit us at
all? For his part, he thought this trade could be justified on the principles of
religion, humanity, and justice; for certainly to translate a set of human
beings from a bad country to a better, was fulfilling every part of these
principles. But they don't like our slaves, because they have none themselves,
and therefore want to exclude us from this great advantage. Why should the
Southern States allow of this, without the consent of nine states? …
We had a law prohibiting the importation of Negroes for three years, a law he
greatly approved of; but there was no reason offered why the Southern States
might not find it necessary to alter their conduct, and open their ports.
Without Negroes, this state would degenerate into one of the most
contemptible in the Union; and he cited an expression that fell from General
Pinckney on a former debate, that whilst there remained one acre of swampland in
South Carolina, he should raise his voice against restricting the importation of
Negroes. Even in granting the importation for twenty years, care had been taken
to make us pay for this indulgence, each negro being liable, on importation, to
pay a duty not exceeding ten dollars; and, in addition to this, they were liable
to a capitation tax. Negroes were our wealth, our only natural resource; yet
behold how our kind friends in the north were determined soon to tie up our
hands, and drain us of what we had! The Eastern States drew their means of
subsistence, in a great measure, from their shipping; and, on that head, they
had been particularly careful not to allow of any burdens: they were not to pay
tonnage or duties; no, not even the form of clearing out: all ports were free
and open to them! Why, then, call this a reciprocal bargain, which took all from
one party, to bestow it on the other!
Major [Pierce] BUTLER observed, that they were to pay five per cent impost.
This, Mr. LOWNDES proved, must fall upon the consumer. They are to be the
carriers; and, we being the consumers, therefore all expenses would fall upon
us. A great number of gentlemen were captivated with this new Constitution,
because those who were in debt would be compelled to pay; others pleased
themselves with the reflection that no more confiscation laws would be passed;
but those were small advantages, in proportion to the evils that might be
apprehended from the laws that might be passed by Congress, whenever there was a
majority of representatives from the Eastern States, who were governed by
prejudices and ideas extremely different from ours.…
Great stress was laid on the admirable checks which guarded us, under the new
Constitution, from the encroachments of tyranny; but too many checks in a
political machine must produce the same mischief as in a mechanical one—that of
throwing all into confusion. But supposing we considered ourselves so much
aggrieved as to reduce us to the necessity of insisting on redress, what
probability had we of relief? Very little indeed. In the revolving on
misfortune, some little gleams of comfort resulted from a hope of being able to
resort to an impartial tribunal for redress; but pray what reason was there for
expectancy that, in Congress, the interest of five Southern States would be
considered in a preferable point of view to the nine Eastern ones?
BUTLER and LOWNDES