 Another set of radical changes introduced by the Committee of Detail proved far more contentious when the committee ’ s report was presented to the Convention . On the day the Convention had agreed to appoint the committee , Southerner Charles Cotesworth Pinckney , of South Carolina , had warned of dire consequences should the committee fail to include protections for slavery in the Southern states , or allow for taxing of Southern agricultural exports . Pinckney and his fellow Southern delegates must have been delighted to see that the committee had included three provisions that explicitly restricted the Congress ’ authority in ways favorable to Southern interests . The proposed language would bar the Congress from ever interfering with the slave trade . It would also prohibit taxation of exports , and would require that any legislation concerning regulation of foreign commerce through tariffs or quotas ( that is , any laws akin to England 's “ Navigation Acts ” ) pass only with two @-@ thirds majorities of both houses of Congress . While much of the rest of the committee ’ s report would be accepted without serious challenge on the Convention floor , these last three proposals would provoke outrage from Northern delegates and slavery opponents . 
