y to
the subject of slaves. He spoke with the more confidence on this
point, as there was scarcely one to which his attention had been
so particularly called at the time. In making the Federal
Constitution, when it was determined that it should be a
Government possessing Legislative powers, the delegates from the
two Southern States, of which he was one, were so fully persuaded
that those powers would be used to the destruction of their
property in slaves, that for some time they thought it would not
be possible for them to be members of it: to that interesting
state of the subject he had before alluded. In the progress of
the business, other obstacles occurring, which he need not
repeat, it was concluded to give to the delegates of those States
the offer of preparing a clause to their own minds, to secure
that species of property. He well remembered that when the clause
was first prepared, it differed in two respects from the form in
which it now stands. It used the word "slaves" instead of
"migration", or "importation," or persons, and instead of "ten
dollars," it was expressed "five percent ad valorem on their
importation," which it was supposed would be about the average
rate of duties under this Government. Several persons had
objections to the use of the word "slaves, as Congress had
hitherto avoided the use of it in their acts, and not
acknowledged the existence of such a condition. It was expressly
observed at the time, that making use of the form of expression
as it now stands, instead of the word slaves, would make the
meaning more general, and include what we now consider as
included; this did not appear to be denied, but still it was
preferred in its present form. He had more confidence than common
in his recollection on this point, for the reasons which he had
before stated. He gave it as the result of his very clear
recollection. Any other member of that body was doubtless at
liberty to say he did not recollect it. Still that would not
diminish the confidence he felt on this occasion....[576]

In a letter to Robert Walsh November 27, 1817, Madison said:

Your letter of the 11th was duly recd, and I should have given it
a less tardy answer, but for a succession of particular demands
on my attention, and a wish to assist my recol