When the supremacy and nationality of the intended government were settled, Yates and Lansing (who with Hamilton formed the delegation from New York) on July 3d left the convention, and in their letter to Governor Clinton,[43] stated that they did so because they were chosen to revise the Articles of the Confederation and that the principles of the Constitution sanctioned by the convention met with their “decided and unreserved dissent,” as would any system “which had in object the consolidation of the United States into one government”; and that “a persuasion that their further attendance would be fruitless and unavailing rendered them less solicitous to return.” [43] 1 Elliot, 480. We find after equal representation in the Senate had been granted to the smaller States, that their delegates took a prominent part in enlarging and strengthening the powers of the General Government. Luther Martin, who throughout the session of the convention had been the most able and persistent opponent to a national government, expressed his dissatisfaction at the close and was one of the four who refused to sign. The three Southern States, North and South Carolina and Georgia, as was stated in the convention, had exalted opinions of their future population, and had been often on the side of the larger States. They had obtained their wishes--representation for their slaves, the right to import them until 1808,[44] the prohibition of export duties on their rice, indigo, and tobacco, yielding only the taxation of imports. [44] Virginia opposed the importation of slaves. Mason particularly condemned it. 5 Elliot, 458. General Charles Cotesworth Pinckney of South Carolina, towards the close of the convention, expressed the satisfaction of the South at the liberal conduct shown to them, and that it was for the interest of the weak Southern States to be united with the strong Eastern States, that the government should have the power of making commercial regulations, and that though he had had his prejudices against the Eastern States, “he had found them as liberal and candid as any men whatever.”[45] [45] 5 Elliot, 489. Washington, the presiding officer, who had been advised by his best friends not to accept the nomination as a member of the convention, and who from a sense of duty assented to act, spoke but seldom. At the close of the proceedings he urged an amendment that removed the objections of some members, which was agreed to unanimously.