Eleanor Finch
The US Constitution, which was ratified in 1787, included several clauses that directly or indirectly addressed slavery and the slave trade. Notably, Article 1, Section 9, Clause 1, prohibited the federal government from banning the importation of persons until 1808, a provision that was crucial for Southern states where slavery was a significant economic force. This clause, along with others like the Three-Fifths Clause and the Fugitive Slave Clause, reflected the compromise between Northern and Southern states, indicating that while many framers had moral qualms about slavery, they prioritized the formation of a strong central government. The Constitution's ambiguous stance on slavery, without explicitly mentioning the word slave, set the stage for future conflicts, as it did not directly address the immorality of the institution or take a firm stance against it.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| The Constitution prohibited Congress from outlawing the Atlantic slave trade | For 20 years |
| The Three-fifths Compromise | Thomas Jefferson would have lost the election of 1800 without it |
| Fugitive slave clause | Runaway slaves must be returned to their owners |
| Slave insurrections | The federal government was given the power to put down domestic rebellions |
| The slave trade clause | Article 1, Section 9 of the Constitution |
| The 13th Amendment | Abolished slavery and involuntary servitude |
| The Civil War | Between the USA and the Confederate States of America |
Explore related products
What You'll Learn
The Constitution's avoidance of the word slavery
The US Constitution did not include the word "slavery" or "slave" in its text, despite the fact that slavery was legal in the United States upon its founding in 1776. The framers of the Constitution consciously avoided using the word, recognising that it would sully the document.
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. By sidestepping the slavery issue, the framers sowed the seeds for future conflict.
The Constitution included several provisions that implicitly recognised slavery and offered protections for the practice. The Three-Fifths Compromise, for example, allocated Congressional representation based on the "whole number of free persons" and "three-fifths of all other persons". This gave the South extra representation in the House of Representatives and extra votes in the Electoral College. The Fugitive Slave Clause also ensured that slaves who escaped to another state did not become free but remained slaves.
The Constitution also prohibited Congress from outlawing the Atlantic slave trade for 20 years and gave the federal government the power to put down domestic rebellions, including slave insurrections.
The avoidance of the word "slavery" in the Constitution has been a source of controversy, with some arguing that it was a pro-slavery document, while others claim that it created a central government powerful enough to eventually abolish the institution.
Conservative View: US Constitution and Non-Citizens
You may want to see also
The Three-Fifths Clause
The Three-Fifths Compromise, also known as the Three-Fifths Clause or the Constitutional Compromise of 1787, was an agreement reached during the 1787 United States Constitutional Convention. The agreement was 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.
Slaveholding states wanted their entire population to be counted to determine the number of Representatives those states could elect and send to Congress. Free states wanted to exclude the counting of slave populations in slave states, since those slaves had no voting rights. The Three-Fifths 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, effectively giving the Southern states more power in the House relative to the North.
The Three-Fifths Compromise was proposed by James Madison, who explained the reasoning for the ratio in Federalist No. 54, "The Apportionment of Members Among the States" (February 12, 1788). Madison wrote, "We subscribe to the doctrine," might one of our Southern brethren observe, "that representation relates more immediately to persons, and taxation more immediately to property, and we join in the application of this distinction to the case of our slaves. But we must deny the fact, that slaves are considered merely as property, and in no respect whatever as persons."
The Three-Fifths Compromise was superseded and repealed by Section 2 of the Fourteenth Amendment in 1868. This amendment provided that "representatives shall be apportioned... counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed."
The Three-Fifths Compromise is often interpreted as the Constitution relegating Black people to "three-fifths of a person." However, this interpretation has been criticised as a misrepresentation of the Constitution. The Compromise did not refer to Black people as a whole, but specifically to slaves, and the Compromise did not refer to the worth or value of slaves, but to how they would be counted toward a state's total population for the purpose of apportionment.
Spending Money: Does It Make You a Member?
You may want to see also
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.
This clause was a compromise between free states and slave states. It allowed slaveholders to reclaim their slaves who had escaped to another state, even if that state had outlawed slavery. The clause was unanimously approved without debate, despite objections from some that it would require the use of public funds to seize fugitive slaves.
The Constitution's Ratification: A Complex Process
You may want to see also
Explore related products
$32 $31.99
The Slave Trade Act of 1794
The Act, however, did not prohibit the importation of slaves into the United States, which was addressed in subsequent legislation, such as the Act Prohibiting Importation of Slaves of 1807. The 1794 Act also did not affect the internal trade in states or between states, and slavery continued to persist within the country.
In conclusion, the Slave Trade Act of 1794 played a pivotal role in the history of slavery in the United States. By prohibiting the export of slaves and banning American ships from participating in the slave trade, the Act represented a significant shift in policy and laid the groundwork for future efforts to eradicate slavery altogether. While there were subsequent acts and amendments, the 1794 Act was a crucial milestone in the fight for human dignity and freedom.
Constitutional Rights: Our Daily Freedoms and Limitations
You may want to see also
The Act Prohibiting Importation of Slaves
The Act made it illegal to import slaves into any port or place within the jurisdiction of the United States from the specified date. It imposed heavy penalties on international slave traders, with fines of up to $20,000 for those involved in the slave trade, and it made the importation of slaves from abroad, even on foreign ships, a federal crime. This legislation was promoted by President Thomas Jefferson, who had been advocating for it since the 1770s and specifically called for its enactment in his 1806 State of the Union Address.
The Act was a compromise reached during the Constitutional Convention in 1787, where delegates debated the issue of slavery. It was agreed that the importation of slaves would be allowed until 1808, as outlined in Article 1, Section 9, Clause 1 of the Constitution, which prevented Congress from outlawing the importation of slaves before that year. This compromise allowed for a gradual approach to addressing the complex issue of slavery, giving states and slave traders time to adjust their practices.
In conclusion, the Act Prohibiting Importation of Slaves of 1807 was a pivotal moment in the history of the United States, taking concrete steps towards abolishing the international slave trade. While it did not end slavery entirely, it represented a significant shift in policy and public sentiment, paving the way for further legislative action and setting a precedent for the protection of human rights.
Citizens United v. FEC: Free Speech or Corruption?
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
The Constitution protected the slave trade because the framers believed that concessions on slavery were the price for the support of southern delegates for a strong central government. They were convinced that if the Constitution restricted the slave trade, South Carolina and Georgia would refuse to join the Union.
No, the word "slave" does not appear in the Constitution. The framers consciously avoided the word, recognising that it would sully the document. Instead, they referred to slaves as "persons".
The Constitution protected the slave trade through the Three-Fifths Clause, the ban on Congress ending the slave trade for twenty years, the fugitive slave clause, and the slave insurrection clause.
