lections, by
consulting both manuscript & printed sources of information on
the subjects of your enquiry. Of these, however, I have not been
able to avail myself, but very partially.

As to the intention of the framers of the Constitution in the
clause relating to "the migration and importation of persons &c"
the best key may perhaps be found in the case which produced it.
The African trade in slaves had long been odious to most of the
States, and the importation of slaves into them had been
prohibited. Particular States however continued the importation,
and were extremely adverse to any restriction on their power to
do so. In the Convention the former States were anxious, in
framing a new constitution, to insert a provision for an
immediate and absolute stop to the trade. The latter were not
only averse to any interference on the subject; but solemnly
declared that their constituents would never accede to a
constitution containing such an article. Out of this conflict
grew the middle measure providing that Congress should not
interfere until the year 1808; with an implication, that after
that date, they might prohibit the importation of slaves into the
States then existing, & previous thereto, into the States not
then existing. Such was the tone of opposition in the States of
S. Carolina & Georgia, & such the desire to gain their
acquiescence in a prohibitory power, that on a question between
the epochs of 1800 & 1808, the States of N. Hampshire, Massatts,
& Connecticut, (all the eastern States in the convention); joined
in the vote for the latter, influenced by the collateral motive
of reconciling those particular States to the power over commerce
& navigation; against which they felt, as did some other States,
a very strong repugnance. The earnestness of S. Carolina &
Georgia was further manifested by their insisting on the security
in the V. article against any amendment to the Constitution
affecting the right reserved to them, & their uniting with the
small states who insisted on a like security for their equality
in the Senate.

But some of the States were not only anxious for a constitutional
provision against the introduction of Slaves. They had scruples
against admitting the term "Slaves" into the Instrument. Hence
the d