Eleanor Finch
The Three-Fifths Compromise, also known as the Three-Fifths Clause, was a compromise made by delegates during the 1787 Constitutional Convention in the United States regarding the counting of slaves as part of the population for representation purposes. The compromise stated that three-fifths of each state's slave population would be counted towards its total population, giving Southern states with large slave populations more representatives and electoral votes. This compromise was reached due to the disagreement between Southern and Northern states, with the former wanting slaves to be considered persons for representation but property for taxation, and the latter wanting to exclude slaves from the population count altogether.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Slaves counted as a fraction in the Constitution | Three-fifths of a state's slave population was counted towards representation |
| Basis of the fraction | An approximation of the wealth contributed by enslaved people to a state's economy |
| Purpose | To determine the number of representatives a state could send to Congress and the Electoral College |
| Impact | Gave Southern states with large slave populations an advantage in terms of representation and electoral votes |
| Supporters | Southern states, slaveholders |
| Opponents | Northern states, smaller states, delegates opposed to slavery |
| Compromise | The Three-Fifths Compromise, proposed by delegate James Wilson and seconded by Charles Pinckney |
| Superseded by | Section 2 of the Fourteenth Amendment (1868) |
Explore related products
$15.86 $29.95
What You'll Learn
The Three-Fifths Compromise
The compromise that was reached counted three-fifths of each state's slave population toward that state's total population for representation purposes. This gave Southern states with large slave populations an advantage in terms of representation in the House of Representatives and the Electoral College. The Three-Fifths Compromise was added to the United States Constitution as part of Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3.
How North Carolina Shaped the Constitution
You may want to see also
Southern states wanted slaves to count as full people
The Three-Fifths Compromise, also known as the Constitutional Compromise of 1787, was an agreement reached during the 1787 United States Constitutional Convention over the inclusion of slaves in counting 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.
The Southern states wanted slaves to be considered as full people when being counted, whereas the Northern states did not want them to be counted at all. The Southern states argued that slaves should be considered persons in determining representation, but wanted them considered property if the new government were to levy taxes on the states based on population. Counting slaves as full people would have given Southern states a greater number of members of Congress.
The Southern states had a large slave population and wanted enslaved people to count the same as free people. This would have given them a political advantage in terms of representation. The Northern states, however, wanted to exclude the counting of slave populations, as slaves had no voting rights.
The Three-Fifths Compromise was a compromise struck to resolve this impasse. The compromise counted three-fifths of each state's slave population toward that state's total population for the purpose of apportioning the House of Representatives. This gave the Southern states more power in the House relative to the North. The Three-Fifths Compromise was a concession to the Southern states, as they had wanted slaves to be counted as full people.
Benjamin Franklin's Influence on the US Constitution
You may want to see also
Northern states disagreed, comparing slaves to cattle
The Three-Fifths Compromise, which counted three-fifths of a state's slave population for representation, was adopted during the Constitutional Convention in 1787. This gave southern states with large slave populations an advantage in terms of representation and electoral votes. The northern states disagreed with this compromise, arguing that enslaved people were considered property without rights or privileges and should not be included in the population count for congressional representation. They realized that including slaves in the population count would distort the number of representatives that southern states sent to Congress.
The controversy over slavery and its inclusion in the Constitution was a complex issue that threatened the unity of the nation. While the southern states argued for the inclusion of slaves in the population count, the northern states compared slaves to cattle, emphasizing that they were property and should not be treated as humans. Oliver Ellsworth of Connecticut accused slaveholders from Maryland and Virginia of hypocrisy, claiming that they opposed the slave trade because it was cheaper for them to raise slaves than to import them. He argued that ending the slave trade would benefit slaveholders in the Chesapeake region by increasing the price of slaves.
The northern states' comparison of slaves to cattle reflected their moral and political objections to slavery. They believed that slavery was inconsistent with the principles of the American Revolution and dishonored the American character. Luther Martin of Maryland, a slaveholder himself, spoke out against the inclusion of slavery in the Constitution, arguing that it should be subject to federal regulation. He also believed that slavery was contrary to America's republican ideals. George Mason, a Virginia delegate who owned hundreds of slaves, spoke out against slavery, saying that it discouraged arts and manufactures and corrupted slaveholders.
The northern states' comparison of slaves to cattle also highlighted the economic implications of slavery. By including slaves in the population count, the southern states gained additional representation in Congress, creating the "Slave Power". This allowed bills favorable to the southern region to pass more easily in Congress. The northern states, on the other hand, sought to gain economic power by disallowing future states from becoming slave states, which would shift the balance of political power in their favor. Additionally, the northern states, including trading hubs like New York and Rhode Island, were influenced by the institution of slavery, which impacted their economies and the wealth of their leading residents.
FDR's Constitution Conundrum: Rules Broken?
You may want to see also
Explore related products
$9.99 $9.99
The compromise gave Southern states more power
The Three-Fifths Compromise, also known as the Three-Fifths Clause, was a compromise struck during the Constitutional Convention of 1787. It counted three-fifths of each state's slave population toward that state's total population for the purpose of apportioning the House of Representatives. This gave Southern states with large slave populations an advantage with more representatives and more electoral votes. The compromise was proposed by delegate James Wilson and seconded by Charles Pinckney of South Carolina. Pinckney proposed that for the purposes of apportionment, a "House of Delegates" be determined through the apportionment of "one Member for every thousand Inhabitants 3/5 of Blacks included."
The Three-Fifths Compromise was a result of the controversy over the representation of slaves in Congress. Enslaved people were considered property without rights or privileges, but Southern states argued that they should be included in the population count toward the state's number of delegates in the House of Representatives. Smaller and Northern states realised this would distort the number of representatives for the Southern states and protested on political and moral grounds. The Southern states wanted each slave to count as a full person, while the Northern states did not want them to be counted at all.
The Three-Fifths Compromise was not based on a belief that enslaved people were partially human, but rather on an approximation of the wealth that an enslaved person contributed to the state's economy. The concept predated the Constitutional Convention and had been debated in the Confederation Congress. However, it was added to a national government document for the first time in 1787. 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, Southern states like South Carolina and Georgia would refuse to join the Union.
Virginia Constitution: Does It Have a "To Arms" Clause?
You may want to see also
The 14th Amendment later repealed the compromise
The Three-Fifths Compromise was a compromise reached by the convention delegates in 1787, which counted three-fifths of a state's slave population for representation. This gave southern states with large slave populations an advantage in terms of representation and electoral votes. The Three-Fifths Compromise was not based on the belief that enslaved people were partially human, but rather on an approximation of the wealth that an enslaved person contributed to the state's economy.
The Fourteenth Amendment, passed by Congress on June 13, 1866, and ratified on July 9, 1868, extended liberties and rights granted by the Bill of Rights to formerly enslaved people. It granted citizenship to "all persons born or naturalized in the United States," thereby granting citizenship to formerly enslaved people. It also included the statement that "nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law."
The Fourteenth Amendment addressed many aspects of citizenship and the rights of citizens, with the most commonly used phrase being "equal protection of the laws." This phrase has been used in landmark cases such as Brown v. Board of Education (racial discrimination) and Roe v. Wade (reproductive rights). The amendment also included the Citizenship Clause, which broadly defines citizenship and supersedes the Supreme Court's decision in Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857), which held that Americans descended from African slaves could not become American citizens.
The Privileges or Immunities Clause was interpreted in the Slaughter-House Cases (1873) as preventing states from impeding federal rights, such as freedom of movement. The Due Process Clause builds on the Fifth Amendment to prohibit all levels of government from depriving people of life, liberty, or property without due process. The Equal Protection Clause requires each state to provide equal protection under the law to all people, including non-citizens, within its jurisdiction.
Therefore, the Fourteenth Amendment superseded and effectively repealed the Three-Fifths Compromise by apportioning the House of Representatives and Electoral College based on citizenship and equal protection under the law, rather than the slave population.
The Right to a Fair Trial: Constitutional Safeguards
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
Slaves were counted as three-fifths of a person in the US Constitution.
The three-fifths rule, or compromise, was adopted to resolve a dispute between slave states and free states. Slave states wanted slaves to be considered full people when determining representation in the House of Representatives, while free states did not want slaves to be counted at all.
The three-fifths compromise gave Southern states with large slave populations an advantage in terms of representation in the House of Representatives and the Electoral College. This allowed bills favourable to the Southern region to pass more easily in Congress.
The three-fifths compromise was repealed by Section 2 of the Fourteenth Amendment in 1868, which provided that "representatives shall be apportioned...counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed.".
No, the word "slave" does not appear in the US Constitution. The framers of the Constitution consciously avoided using the word, recognising that it would sully the document.
