of 1833. "At the time of
the passage of this law," said he, "the sect known by the title of
'abolitionists' had not made their appearance. And, as I was sworn
then upon the constitution of my country, by all the obligations of
that oath, I affirm now that I do not believe that the principles and
designs ascribed to that party were in the contemplation of any human
being who voted for the law. I was myself not only never an
abolitionist, but never an emancipationist upon any plan which I ever
heard proposed."[314]

But the question was not settled for all time, for with the coming of
the abolitionist element there was a general tendency throughout the
State to enact stricter laws governing slaves. Many who had voted for
the enactment began to cry for a repeal of the law, but it was not
until the session of 1841 that it was seriously debated in the general
assembly. Then after a long and ardent discussion in the House of
Representatives a vote was taken on the ninth of January--with 34 in
favor of the repeal and 53 against it. Never within the previous
decade had a bill before the House produced such popular
interest.[315] It came up in the Senate at the session of 1843 but
after another warm debate it failed by a vote of 14 to 21. Sentiment
for the repeal continued to grow and in 1849 the law was amended so as
"no longer to prohibit persons from purchasing and bringing into the
State slaves for their own use."[316] This changed the situation back
to what it was before 1833, for it will be recalled that the main
feature of the law of 1833 compared with that of 1815 was the
prohibition of importation even for personal use. It could easily have
been predicted that such an amendment would pass, for the legislature
of 1847 had passed 27 distinct resolutions granting to as many
individuals the right to import slaves for personal use. The session
of 1848 made 24 similar provisions.

This apparently radical swing towards the side of the slave owner in
1849 was more than likely brought about by the very intense campaign
which was carried on by the emancipationists. Such a movement served
to unite the slave forces against any attack upon the institution.
This tendency was shown not only in the halls of the State legislature
but in the constitutional convention which met later in the same year.
Although the abolitionists had looked forward to some advanced
constitutional provisions on emancipation and the inclusion of the law
o