Isabella Carter
The omission of slavery from the US Constitution has been a topic of historical debate. While the word slavery is absent from the document, its presence was felt and the institution of slavery was protected in several ways. The Three-Fifths Clause, for instance, gave extra representation in Congress to states with a large slave population, and the Fugitive Slave Clause ensured that escaped slaves could be returned to their owners. Many of the framers of the Constitution owned slaves and had conflicting views on the issue. Some believed that slavery contradicted the natural rights of all Americans, while others wanted to leave the decision to own slaves up to the people. The question of slavery was a contentious one, and its omission from the Constitution reflected the complexities of the time.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Reason for omitting slavery | Slave owners among the delegates, moral qualms about slavery, and the belief that slavery contradicted the natural rights of all |
| Who supported the omission | Luther Martin of Maryland, a slaveholder |
| Who opposed the omission | Benjamin Franklin (a former slaveholder), Alexander Hamilton (born in a slave colony), Thurgood Marshall, Frederick Douglass, Abraham Lincoln |
| The outcome | The word "slavery" was omitted from the Constitution, but enslaved people were included. The three-fifths clause gave the South extra representation in the House of Representatives and Electoral College. The Fugitive Slave Clause did not recognize property in man and left slavery to state and local law. |
Explore related products
What You'll Learn
The Three-Fifths Compromise
Slaveholding states wanted their entire population to be counted to determine the number of Representatives they could elect and send to Congress. Free states, on the other hand, wanted to exclude the counting of slave populations in slave states, since those slaves had no voting rights. The compromise struck was to count 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 North. This compromise was proposed by James Madison and is part of Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3 of the United States Constitution.
Hardship Withdrawals from an IRA: Understanding Eligibility
You may want to see also
Fugitive Slave Clause
The Fugitive Slave Clause, also known as the Slave Clause or the Fugitives From Labour Clause, is Article IV, Section 2, Clause 3 of the United States Constitution. The clause requires a "person held to Service or Labour" who escapes to another state to be returned to their master in the state from which they escaped. The 13th Amendment, which abolished slavery, has since rendered the clause mostly irrelevant.
The Fugitive Slave Clause states:
> 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 clause was unanimously approved by the convention without further debate. However, James Wilson and Roger Sherman objected that this would require state executives to seize fugitive slaves at public expense. The Fugitive Slave Clause was also controversial because it did not use the words "slave" or "slavery", which some argue was a political compromise to avoid overtly validating slavery at a federal level.
The Fugitive Slave Clause was enforced by the Fugitive Slave Act of 1793, which was strengthened as part of the Compromise of 1850. The Supreme Court interpreted the clause as giving slave owners the right to seize and repossess their slaves in another state, and that state laws that penalised this seizure were unconstitutional. Northern states increasingly resisted the enforcement of the clause in the 19th century, and several passed personal liberty laws to protect free Black residents from kidnapping.
The World's Oldest Functioning Constitution: Which Country?
You may want to see also
Federal protections of property
The word "slavery" does not appear in the US Constitution, but its presence was felt everywhere. The Constitution did not protect a property in man, nor did it provide for national validation of the institution. The framers consciously avoided the word, recognising that it would sully the document. Many of the framers harbored moral qualms about slavery, and some became members of anti-slavery societies.
The Constitution supported the concept of "freedom national, slavery local", meaning that slavery was to remain a matter of state and local law. The federal government, therefore, could not interfere with the institution in the states where it already existed. This was a tenuous compromise that had significant consequences for the history of the United States.
The Fugitive Slave Clause, which read: "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", did not recognise a property in man, did not compel free states to participate in the recapture, and did not give national sanction to slavery because it stated the institution was under state law. The Fugitive Slave Law of 1850 made highly controversial changes to this understanding, causing outrage and resistance in the North.
The Three-Fifths Compromise was another critical aspect of the Constitutional Convention. The final version 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 gave the South extra representation in the House of Representatives and extra votes in the Electoral College. While the compromise did not validate slavery nationally, it was a victory for the southern slave power in national politics.
In conclusion, while the Constitution did not explicitly protect slavery as property, it did include provisions that supported the institution of slavery and protected the property rights of slave owners. The framers of the Constitution had to navigate a complex political landscape, balancing the interests of the northern and southern states, and the moral questions surrounding slavery. The result was a document that, while not explicitly pro-slavery, fell short of abolishing the institution and ultimately contributed to the Civil War.
Newton's Impact on the Constitution's Structure
You may want to see also
Explore related products
The role of the federal government
The issue of slavery was highly contentious, with the interests of the small northern states aligning with the Deep South against the middle states. The southern states threatened to reject the proposed Constitution if it included the abolition of slavery. This was a significant consideration, as slavery was critical to the economy of the Deep South, with slaves making up 25% to 43% of the population in the largest slave-holding states.
The delegates debated how slaves would be counted in the census and whether the states or the federal government would control the institution of slavery. The Three-Fifths Compromise, which counted three-fifths of a state's slave population for representation, gave the South extra representation in Congress and the Electoral College. This compromise did not validate slavery nationally but was a victory for the southern slave power in national politics.
The Fugitive Slave Clause, which stated that escaped slaves should be returned to their owners, further reflected the federal government's role. While it did not give national sanction to slavery, it did provide protections for slave owners, stating that slavery was under state law. The federal government, therefore, could not interfere with slavery in states where it existed.
The Constitution's ambiguous stance on slavery, with the word itself omitted from the document, allowed for varying interpretations. While some, like abolitionist William Lloyd Garrison, viewed it as a pro-slavery document, others, like Frederick Douglass, argued it was anti-slavery. The Constitution's creation of a powerful central government also laid the foundation for the eventual abolition of slavery, demonstrating the complex role of the federal government in addressing this contentious issue.
A Stronger Union: Constitution's Role in Perfecting America
You may want to see also
The Founding Fathers' beliefs
Recognition of Inconsistency: The Founding Fathers, including the framers of the Constitution, recognized the inherent contradiction between slavery and the principles of liberty and equality espoused in the Declaration of Independence. They were aware that slavery conflicted with the natural rights of all individuals and the ideals of a republic. This recognition set the stage for their deliberations during the Constitutional debates.
Criticism of Slavery: Many of the Founding Fathers, including James Madison, referred to as the "Father of the Constitution," were vocal critics of slavery. Madison stated, "We have seen the mere distinction of colour made in the most enlightened period of time, a ground of the most oppressive dominion ever exercised by man over man." George Mason, a slave owner himself, believed that slavery brought "the judgment of heaven on a country." These statements reflect a moral opposition to slavery among some of the Founding Fathers.
Avoiding the Word "Slavery": The Founding Fathers consciously avoided using the word "slavery" in the Constitution, opting instead for terms like "other persons" or "persons held to Service or Labour." This choice of wording was not due to their support for slavery but rather a recognition that the inclusion of the word would sully the document. They understood the moral repugnance associated with slavery and attempted to navigate the complexities of building a nation founded on liberty while grappling with the reality of slavery's existence.
The Three-Fifths Compromise: One of the most contentious issues during the Constitutional debates was the Three-Fifths Compromise, which stated that representatives and taxes would be apportioned based on the number of free persons and "three-fifths of all other persons." While this compromise did not validate slavery nationally, it gave the South extra representation in Congress and was a concession to the southern slave power. It reflected a pragmatic approach to addressing slavery within the context of state interests and political compromise.
Fugitive Slave Clause: The Founding Fathers included the Fugitive Slave Clause in the Constitution, which stated that individuals held to service or labor in one state who escaped to another would be returned to their owners. This clause did not recognize a property in man and did not provide national sanction for slavery, instead leaving it under state law. The ambiguity of this clause would later lead to controversy and outrage, particularly with the Fugitive Slave Law of 1850.
Balancing National Unity and Slavery: The Founding Fathers were faced with the challenge of creating a unified nation while navigating the divisive issue of slavery. They understood that including the abolition of slavery in the Constitution would lead to the southern states refusing to join the union. As a result, they made compromises that allowed slavery to persist as a local institution, with the belief that it would eventually die out. This decision, however, had significant consequences for the nation's future, including the Civil War.
In conclusion, the Founding Fathers' beliefs during the Constitutional debates were complex and multifaceted. While they recognized the moral repugnance of slavery and criticized the institution, they also made compromises and avoided direct confrontations to maintain national unity. Their actions reflected a pragmatic approach to governance, balancing idealistic principles with the realities of the time.
Liberals, Constitution, and Change: A Complex Relationship
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
The word "slavery" was omitted from the US Constitution because the Founding Fathers believed that the institution of slavery contradicted the natural rights of all Americans and went against the idea of consent in a republic. Many of the Founding Fathers were plantation owners who owned large numbers of slaves, and they wanted to preserve their right to own slaves.
The word "slave" was consciously avoided in the US Constitution because the framers recognized that it would sully the document. Instead, slaves were referred to as "other persons", "such persons", or "persons held to Service or Labour".
The Three-Fifths Compromise was a concession reached after a debate between delegates from Southern (slaveholding) states and Northern (free) states. The 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" (slaves). This gave the Southern states extra representation in Congress and the Electoral College.
The Fugitive Slave Clause, also known as the Fugitive Slave Law, was a part of the US Constitution that allowed slave owners to recover their slaves if they escaped to another state. The clause did not recognize a property in man and did not compel free states to participate in the recapture, but it did not give national sanction to slavery either.
