Simone Lawson
The United States Constitution's relationship with slavery is a highly contested topic. The Constitution, drafted in 1787 and ratified in 1789, did not contain the words slave or slavery within its text, but it dealt directly with American slavery in at least five of its provisions and indirectly protected the institution in others. The Constitution's protection of slavery is considered by many to be its biggest flaw. The specific clauses related to slavery were the Three-Fifths Clause, the ban on Congress ending the slave trade for twenty years, the Fugitive Slave Clause, and the Slave Insurrection Clause. The Framers' conflicted stance towards slavery led them to deliberately avoid using direct language about the institution in the Constitution.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Avoided using the words "slave" or "slavery" | :"We the People" was used instead of "All Men are Created Equal" |
| Concessions on slavery | Support of southern delegates for a strong central government |
| Three-Fifths Clause | Counted three-fifths of a state's slave population in apportioning representation |
| Ban on Congress ending the slave trade | For 20 years |
| Fugitive Slave Clause | Required states to return fugitive slaves |
| Slave Insurrection Clause | Included in Article I, Section 8 |
| Protection of slavery | Implicit and explicit |
| Abolition of slavery | Not addressed |
Explore related products
What You'll Learn
The Constitution's protection of slavery
The Constitution of the United States was drafted in 1787 and ratified in 1789. At the time, slavery was banned in several states, including New England, Pennsylvania, and the Northwest Territory. However, the Southern states were economically dependent on slavery, and this created a moral and political dilemma for the framers of the Constitution. As a result, the Constitution included several clauses that protected and institutionalized slavery.
One of the most well-known clauses related to slavery is the Three-Fifths Clause, which counted three-fifths of a state's slave population when apportioning representation. This gave the South extra representation in the House of Representatives and extra votes in the Electoral College, thereby entrenching slavery in the national political framework. The framers of the Constitution also included a ban on Congress ending the slave trade for twenty years, the Fugitive Slave Clause, and the Slave Insurrection Clause. These clauses reflected a compromise between the Northern and Southern states that was necessary for the ratification of the Constitution and the formation of the Union.
The framers of the Constitution deliberately avoided using the words "slave" or "slavery" in the document, instead referring to slaves as “persons held to service or labor." They recognized that slavery was morally wrong and wanted to avoid sullying the document with a permanent moral stain. However, their attempts to sidestep the issue of slavery ultimately contributed to a moral and legal crisis that would lead to the Civil War.
While the Constitution protected slavery, it also created a central government powerful enough to eventually abolish the institution. The 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments, adopted after the Civil War, abolished slavery, guaranteed equal protection under the law, and granted voting rights to African-American men, respectively.
In conclusion, the Constitution of the United States included several clauses that protected and institutionalized slavery. The framers of the Constitution made compromises to secure the support of the Southern states, and their attempts to avoid directly addressing slavery ultimately contributed to a moral and legal crisis. While the Constitution protected slavery, it also laid the foundation for its eventual abolition.
Get Your Hands on a Constitution Copy
You may want to see also
The Founding Fathers' views on slavery
Other Founding Fathers, such as Benjamin Franklin, became members of anti-slavery societies. During the Constitutional Convention in 1787, several Founding Fathers spoke out against slavery. James Madison, often referred to as the "Father of the Constitution," attacked slavery, stating that it was "the most oppressive dominion ever exercised by man over man." Another Virginian, George Mason, who owned hundreds of slaves, also spoke out against slavery, fearing that it would bring "the judgment of heaven on a country." Gouverneur Morris, one of the most vocal opponents of slavery among the Founding Fathers, called slavery a "nefarious institution" and "the curse of heaven on the States where it prevailed."
However, the Founding Fathers' views on slavery were often influenced by political and economic considerations. The framers of the Constitution believed that concessions on slavery were necessary to gain the support of southern delegates for a strong central government. They were convinced that if the Constitution restricted the slave trade, states like South Carolina and Georgia would refuse to join the Union. As a result, the Constitution included several clauses related to slavery, such as the Three-Fifths Clause, which counted three-fifths of a state's slave population when apportioning representation, giving the South extra representation in the House of Representatives.
While some Founding Fathers may have personally opposed slavery, they were unable or unwilling to take decisive action to abolish it. Thomas Jefferson, for example, wrote about the injustice of the slave trade in his initial draft of the Declaration of Independence. However, he owned slaves throughout his life and never freed them, even expressing a sense of powerlessness to change the situation.
In summary, the Founding Fathers' views on slavery were complex and influenced by a range of factors, including personal beliefs, political considerations, and economic interests. While some Founding Fathers spoke out against slavery and expressed a desire for its gradual abolition, they were unable or unwilling to take the bold action necessary to eradicate it from American society.
The Constitution and Women: A Mention or Omission?
You may want to see also
The Three-Fifths Clause
The Three-Fifths Compromise was an agreement reached during the 1787 United States Constitutional Convention over the inclusion of slaves in a state's total population. This count would determine the number of seats in the House of Representatives, the number of electoral votes each state would be allocated, and how much money the states would pay in taxes.
Slaveholding states wanted their entire population to be counted to determine the number of Representatives they could elect and send to Congress. Free states wanted to exclude the counting of slave populations in slave states, as those slaves had no voting rights. A compromise was struck to resolve this impasse, counting three-fifths of each state's slave population toward that state's total population for the purpose of apportioning the House of Representatives. This effectively gave the Southern states more power in the House relative to the Northern states.
The Three-Fifths Compromise was part of Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3 of the U.S. Constitution, which states: "Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons." The "other Persons" referred to in this clause were slaves.
The Three-Fifths Compromise was a highly debated topic during the year-long struggle over the ratification of the Constitution. It gave a disproportionate representation of slave states in the House of Representatives, with Southern states having more power relative to Northern states. This compromise also impacted the number of presidential electors each state would have in the Electoral College.
While some interpret the Three-Fifths Compromise as relegating black people to "three-fifths of a person" status, this is considered a distorted interpretation by some scholars. The Constitution did not explicitly use the word "slave" or "slavery", and the compromise was intended to address the moral and systemic evils of slavery while preserving the union of the nascent United States.
Founding Fathers' Fears: Threats to the Constitution
You may want to see also
Explore related products
$56.51 $27.95
The Fugitive Slave Clause
> No Person held to Service or Labour in one State, under the Laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in Consequence of any Law or Regulation therein, be discharged from such Service or Labour, but shall be delivered up on Claim of the Party to whom such Service or Labour may be due.
The words "slave" and "slavery" are notably absent from the clause, which historian Donald Fehrenbacher believes was intentional, indicating that slavery existed only under state law, not federal law. The clause was proposed by Pierce Butler and Charles Pinckney of South Carolina, who sought to "require fugitive slaves and servants to be delivered up like criminals". Despite objections from some, including James Wilson and Roger Sherman, the provision was approved unanimously without further debate.
Chief Citizen: Checks and Balances Enforcer
You may want to see also
The Slave Insurrection Clause
The US Constitution, drafted in 1787, contained several clauses related to slavery, including the Three-Fifths Clause, the ban on Congress ending the slave trade for twenty years, the Fugitive Slave Clause, and the Slave Insurrection Clause. The Slave Insurrection Clause, found in Article I, Section 8, gave the chief executive the power and duty to suppress "riots or insurrections" to maintain law and order.
While the Constitution did not explicitly use the word "slave" or "slavery," the Slave Insurrection Clause was understood to include slave insurrections. The framers of the Constitution consciously avoided direct references to slavery, recognizing that it contradicted the founding principles and natural rights of all Americans. They believed that slavery would eventually become extinct and did not want a permanent moral stain on the document.
The inclusion of the Slave Insurrection Clause in the Constitution reflected the framers' compromise to ensure support from all states, including those where slavery was a significant part of the economy. The Southern states, such as North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia, refused to sign the Constitution without guarantees related to slavery. By sidestepping the issue, the framers laid the foundation for future conflicts, as noted by Thurgood Marshall, the first African American Supreme Court justice.
It is important to note that the Constitution's approach to slavery was complex and influenced by the political and economic realities of the time. While the Slave Insurrection Clause addressed the suppression of insurrections, it did not legitimize slavery as a federal institution. The framers of the Constitution believed that slavery was morally wrong and worked towards building a constitutional republic that protected the rights of all Americans.
Executive Power: Filling the Vacancy
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
No, the Constitution did not use the words 'slave' or 'slavery' but it did deal directly with American slavery in at least five of its provisions and indirectly protected the institution elsewhere in the document.
The Constitution's protection of the institution of slavery is considered its "biggest flaw". The Constitution's great compromise between Northern and Southern states was essential to the formation of the Union, but it also entrenched slavery. The Three-Fifths Clause, the ban on Congress ending the slave trade for twenty years, the Fugitive Slave Clause, and the Slave Insurrection Clause are all specific clauses of the Constitution related to slavery.
The Framers of the Constitution believed that slavery contradicted the natural rights of all and denied the idea of consent in a republic. Many Framers, including James Madison and George Mason, criticized the institution of slavery. However, they prioritized political unity over abolition, and some believed that the Constitution should not regulate the slave trade, but rather leave it to the states.
