Eleanor Finch
The 1787 US Constitution addressed the issue of slavery in several ways, but the word slave was never mentioned. The Three-Fifths Clause, the African Slave Trade Clause, and the Fugitive Slave Clause were the most direct examples of this. The Three-Fifths Clause stated that representatives and direct taxes would be apportioned among the states according to the number of free persons and three-fifths of all other persons. This clause gave the South extra representation in the House of Representatives and extra votes in the Electoral College. The African Slave Trade Clause prohibited Congress from banning the slave trade prior to 1808, although it allowed them to tax enslaved Africans as property. The Fugitive Slave Clause stated that any person held in labour or service in one state who escaped to another would be returned to their owner, but it did not recognise a property in man and did not give national sanction to slavery. The slavery debate in the 1787 Constitution was a product of prolonged conflict, debate, and accommodation, and it is still a topic of controversy today.
Explore related products
$32 $31.99
What You'll Learn
The Three-Fifths Compromise
The delegates from the Northern states sought to make representation dependent on the size of a state's free population. On the other hand, Southern delegates threatened to abandon the convention if enslaved individuals were not counted. The Southern states wanted their entire population to be counted to determine the number of Representatives they could elect and send to Congress. The Northern states, on the other hand, wanted to exclude the counting of slave populations in slave states, as those slaves had no voting rights.
German Constitution: Is Free Speech Protected?
You may want to see also
The Fugitive Slave Clause
The exact wording of the clause was: "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" were notably absent from the clause, as they were from the rest of the Constitution. This was a conscious decision by the framers, who recognised that the inclusion of these words would sully the document.
The 1787 Constitution has been described as neither wholly anti-slavery nor wholly pro-slavery, but rather the product of prolonged and contentious conflict, debate, and accommodation. While it stopped short of creating a slaveholders' republic, it also fell short of satisfying those who wanted to see slavery abolished. Instead, it euphemistically acknowledged slavery's existence in some states, recognised slaveholders as a powerful interest group, and granted distinct privileges to slave states and slaveholders.
Congress' Powers: Constitutional Roots, Evolutionary Growth
You may want to see also
The African Slave Trade Clause
The slavery debate during the drafting of the 1787 Constitution resulted in a compromise known as the Slave Trade Clause, or the "Importation of Persons Clause." This clause, found in Article 1, Section 9, Clause 1 of the Constitution, prohibited the federal government from banning the importation of "persons" for twenty years after the Constitution took effect, until 1808.
The Slave Trade Clause was a compromise between the Southern states, where slavery was crucial to the economy, and the states where abolition was contemplated or had been achieved. It was included in the Constitution without explicitly mentioning "slavery" or "slaves," reflecting the contentious nature of the issue. This omission was intentional, as the framers recognized that explicitly including slavery in the document would sully it.
The delegates at the Constitutional Convention in 1787 fiercely debated the issue of slavery. Many of the framers had moral qualms about slavery, and some belonged to anti-slavery societies. On August 21, 1787, a contentious debate arose over a South Carolina proposal to prevent the federal government from regulating the Atlantic slave trade. Luther Martin of Maryland, a slaveholder, argued that the slave trade should be subject to federal regulation and was inconsistent with America's republican ideals.
The Slave Trade Clause effectively delayed federal action on the importation of slaves until 1808. In 1800, Congress passed an act making it illegal for Americans to engage in the slave trade between nations, and the “Act Prohibiting the Importation of Slaves" took effect in 1808. However, the domestic trade in slaves within the United States persisted even after 1808, and the slave trade continued through illegal means.
The inclusion of the Slave Trade Clause in the 1787 Constitution reflected the complex and contentious nature of the slavery debate at the time. While it did not immediately end the slave trade, it laid the groundwork for future efforts to abolish slavery and represented a compromise between conflicting interests and ideologies.
The First Steps of Nations: Government Plans and Names
You may want to see also
Explore related products
The role of slaveholding delegations
The 1787 US Constitution was drafted by 55 delegates, of whom about 25 owned slaves. The role of slaveholding delegations in the 1787 Constitution was significant, as they sought to protect and promote the interests of slaveholders. Many of the framers had moral qualms about slavery, and some, including Benjamin Franklin and Alexander Hamilton, became members of anti-slavery societies. However, the slaveholding delegations argued that slavery was a local issue and that a general government would empower the central states at the expense of smaller, remote states like Georgia. They also believed that the Southern states would stop importations of slaves if left alone and that the slave trade was a favourite prerogative of certain states.
The slaveholding delegations played a crucial role in the debates leading up to the Constitution. On August 22, 1787, Charles Pinckney of South Carolina, who enslaved over a hundred people, argued that slavery was justified by the example of the rest of the world. He also stated that if the Southern states were left to their own devices, they would likely stop importing slaves. Another South Carolina delegate, Charles Cotesworth Pinckney, who enslaved 250 people, argued that even with their signatures on the Constitution, it would be challenging to get South Carolina to ratify it if Congress could ban the slave trade.
The slaveholding delegations also had a significant influence on the specific clauses in the Constitution. One of the most contentious issues was 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 additional votes in the Electoral College. The slaveholding delegations also ensured that the word "slave" was not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution, recognising that it would sully the document. Instead, they used euphemisms to acknowledge slavery's existence in some states and granted distinct privileges to slave states and slaveholders.
The slaveholding delegations also played a role in the Northwest Ordinance of 1787, which banned slavery in what would become Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois. However, they also voted to permit slavery in the Southwest Territory, which became the slave state of Tennessee in 1796. The first federal Congress reflected the haphazard emergence of federalism, with North Carolina agreeing to cede lands for the Southwest Territory on the condition that Congress refrained from prohibiting slavery there. The slaveholding delegations' influence extended to the international slave trade clause, where a consensus emerged that the federal government had the power to prohibit the trade but could not do so until 1808.
Overall, the role of slaveholding delegations in the 1787 Constitution was complex and contentious. While some delegates expressed moral objections to slavery, others defended it as a positive good and sought to protect and expand the institution. The final document reflected a series of conflicts, accommodations, and compromises, falling short of creating a slaveholders' republic but nonetheless granting privileges to slaveholders and implicitly recognising slavery's existence.
Drafting a Constitution: A Guide for Associations
You may want to see also
The founding fathers' intentions
The founding fathers of the United States Constitution had differing views on slavery, with some founding fathers owning slaves themselves. Many of the founding fathers had moral qualms about slavery, with some, including Benjamin Franklin and Alexander Hamilton, becoming members of anti-slavery societies.
The issue of slavery was not on the agenda for the Constitutional Convention in 1787, but it could not be avoided. The convention saw bitter debates over the issue of slavery, with no delegates defending the morality of slavery. The southern states wanted to protect and promote the interests of slaveholders, while the northern states wanted to limit slavery's influence. The founding fathers sought to achieve their highest goal of a stronger union of republican self-government, and so a compromise was made. The Three-Fifths Compromise stated that representatives and direct taxes would be apportioned among the states according to the number of free persons and "three-fifths of all other persons". The compromise did not validate slavery nationally, but it was a victory for the southern slave power in national politics.
The founding fathers also debated the importation of enslaved Africans, with Congress unable to ban the slave trade prior to 1808, although it could tax enslaved Africans as property. The Fugitive Slave Clause, which stated that "No Person held to Service or labour in one State, under the Laws thereof, escaping into another... shall be delivered up on Claim of the Party to whom such Service or Labour may be due", was also included in the Constitution. This clause did not recognise property in man and did not give national sanction to slavery, but it did cause ambiguity over who was responsible for enforcing it.
The US Constitution: Shaping the Economy
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
The delegates at the 1787 Constitutional Convention were divided between the Northern and Southern States over the issue of slavery. While the Northerners opposed slavery, the Southerners wanted to protect and promote the interests of slaveholders.
The three most significant clauses in the 1787 Constitution that addressed slavery were the Three-Fifths Clause, the African Slave Trade Clause, and the Fugitive Slave Clause. The Three-Fifths Clause stated that representatives and direct taxes would be apportioned among the states based on the number of free persons and "three-fifths of all other persons". The African Slave Trade Clause prohibited Congress from banning the slave trade until 1808, although it allowed them to tax enslaved Africans as property. The Fugitive Slave Clause stated that escaped fugitives "shall be delivered up on Claim of the Party to whom such Service or labor may be due", but did not recognise people as property and did not compel free states to participate in the recapture.
Historians disagree on whether the 1787 Constitution was pro-slavery or anti-slavery. Some see it as an example of systemic racism, while others believe it reflected the anti-slavery sentiment of the time and laid the foundation for the eventual abolition of slavery. Notable figures such as Frederick Douglass and Abraham Lincoln defended the idea that the Constitution was anti-slavery and supported the principles of liberty and equality.
The slavery debate resulted in a series of compromises that addressed the issue of slavery without using the word "slave". The Three-Fifths Clause was a concession to the Southern states, giving them extra representation in the House of Representatives and the Electoral College. The Fugitive Slave Clause was another compromise that attempted to balance the interests of free and slave states. Overall, the 1787 Constitution created a central government powerful enough to eventually abolish slavery, but it also temporarily strengthened the institution of slavery.
