Changes

At the [[Constitutional Convention]], there was some debate over whether slaves should be counted as part of the population determining the number of seats in the [[House of Representative]] granted to each state.  The '''Three-Fifths Compromise''' (also referred to as the '''Three-Fifths Clause''') was the solution to this problem.  It determined that five [[slave]]s would count as three people in determining the [[population]] for [[tax]]ing and [[representation]].<ref>U.S Government and Politics</ref>

At the [[Constitutional Convention]], there was some debate over whether slaves should be counted as part of the population determining the number of seats in the [[House of Representative]] granted to each state.  The '''Three-Fifths Compromise''' (also referred to as the '''Three-Fifths Clause''') was the solution to this problem.  It determined that five [[slave]]s would count as three people in determining the [[population]] for [[tax]]ing and [[representation]].<ref>U.S Government and Politics</ref>

It was proposed in 1787 by [[James Wilson]] at the [[Constitutional Convention]]. The Compromise was introduced as a solution between the Southern and Northern States as a way to keep the union from splintering.

It was proposed in 1787 by [[James Wilson]] at the [[Constitutional Convention]]. The Compromise was introduced as a solution between the Southern and Northern States as a way to keep the union from splintering. The compromise is a part of [[United States Constitution:Article I|Article I]], Section 2 of the Constitution.

[[Image:King George III Allan Ramsay.jpg|right|thumb|150px|Lincoln noted that "Necessity" was the only argument they ever admitted in favor of slavery at the time of the Founding.<ref>[https://www.nps.gov/liho/learn/historyculture/peoriaspeech.htm Peoria Speech, October 16, 1854]</ref>]]

[[Image:King George III Allan Ramsay.jpg|right|thumb|150px|Lincoln noted that "Necessity" was the only argument they ever admitted in favor of slavery at the time of the Founding.<ref>[https://www.nps.gov/liho/learn/historyculture/peoriaspeech.htm Peoria Speech, October 16, 1854]</ref>]]

==Background==

==Background==

Historians, politicians, and activists have argued endlessly about the Three-Fifths Compromise, what it means, and its impact.

Historians, politicians, and activists have argued endlessly about the Three-Fifths Compromise, what it means, and its impact.

[[Frederick Douglass]] argued that the Constitution is a ''Glorious Liberty Document'', which includes this compromise.<ref>[http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/document/what-to-the-slave-is-the-fourth-of-july/ What to the Slave Is the Fourth of July?], July 5, 1852, "Fellow-citizens! there is no matter in respect to which, the people of the North have allowed themselves to be so ruinously imposed upon, as that of the pro-slavery character of the Constitution. In that instrument I hold there is neither warrant, license, nor sanction of the hateful thing; but, interpreted as it ought to be interpreted, the Constitution is a GLORIOUS LIBERTY DOCUMENT. Read its preamble, consider its purposes. Is slavery among them? Is it at the gateway? or is it in the temple? It is neither. While I do not intend to argue this question on the present occasion, let me ask, if it be not somewhat singular that, if the Constitution were intended to be, by its framers and adopters, a slave-holding instrument, why neither slavery, slaveholding, nor slave can anywhere be found in it."</ref> Abraham Lincoln, likewise, made a defense of the [[Abraham Lincoln#Founding Fathers|Founding Fathers]] on the grounds that the Founders had little choice but compromise, otherwise one or more states could have been lost to the British so shortly after victory in the [[Revolutionary War]].

[[Frederick Douglass]] was known for discussing controversial topics in a very public way, including this portion of the Constitution.  In the speech [[The Constitution of the United States: is it pro-slavery or anti-slavery]], Douglass argued:

 

 

Douglass also that the Constitution is a ''Glorious Liberty Document'', which includes this compromise.<ref>[http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/document/what-to-the-slave-is-the-fourth-of-july/ What to the Slave Is the Fourth of July?], July 5, 1852, "Fellow-citizens! there is no matter in respect to which, the people of the North have allowed themselves to be so ruinously imposed upon, as that of the pro-slavery character of the Constitution. In that instrument I hold there is neither warrant, license, nor sanction of the hateful thing; but, interpreted as it ought to be interpreted, the Constitution is a GLORIOUS LIBERTY DOCUMENT. Read its preamble, consider its purposes. Is slavery among them? Is it at the gateway? or is it in the temple? It is neither. While I do not intend to argue this question on the present occasion, let me ask, if it be not somewhat singular that, if the Constitution were intended to be, by its framers and adopters, a slave-holding instrument, why neither slavery, slaveholding, nor slave can anywhere be found in it."</ref> Abraham Lincoln, likewise, made a defense of the [[Abraham Lincoln#Founding Fathers|Founding Fathers]] on the grounds that the Founders had little choice but compromise, otherwise one or more states could have been lost to the British so shortly after victory in the [[Revolutionary War]].

Conversely, [[William Lloyd Garrison]] argued that the Constitution was a "covenant with death" in regard to slavery.<ref>[http://www.archives.gov/publications/prologue/2000/winter/garrisons-constitution-1.html Garrison's Constitution], The Covenant with Death and How It Was Made</ref>  Other historians, such as Garry Wills, have argued that the Three-Fifths Compromise increased the power of the slave states.<ref>[http://www.hoover.org/research/slave-system-thomas-jefferson-and-slavery A SLAVE TO THE SYSTEM? Thomas Jefferson and Slavery], [[Hoover Institute]]</ref>

Conversely, [[William Lloyd Garrison]] argued that the Constitution was a "covenant with death" in regard to slavery.<ref>[https://www.archives.gov/publications/prologue/2000/winter/garrisons-constitution-1.html Garrison's Constitution], The Covenant with Death and How It Was Made</ref>  Other historians, such as Garry Wills, have argued that the Three-Fifths Compromise increased the power of the slave states.<ref>[http://www.hoover.org/research/slave-system-thomas-jefferson-and-slavery A SLAVE TO THE SYSTEM? Thomas Jefferson and Slavery], [[Hoover Institute]]</ref>

==Impact before the Civil War==

==Impact before the Civil War==

==Repeal==

==Repeal==

The Three-Fifths Compromise was abolished by the [[Thirteenth Amendment]], as was slavery.  The [[Fourteenth Amendment]] clarified this, with Article I, Section 2 of the amendment stating that "Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed."<ref>[http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_amendments_11-27.html#14 AMENDMENT XIV]</ref>

The Three-Fifths Compromise was abolished by the [[Thirteenth Amendment]], as was slavery.  The [[Fourteenth Amendment]] clarified this, with Article I, Section 2 of the amendment stating that "Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed."<ref>[https://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_amendments_11-27.html#14 AMENDMENT XIV]</ref>

==Legacy==

==Legacy==

Despite the facts, recognizing the historical facts have even gotten people in trouble.  E.W. Jackson, a Christian Minister and candidate for Lieutenant Governor of Virginia in 2012 noted that "the 3/5ths clause was an anti-slavery amendment. Its purpose was to limit the voting power of slave holding states."<ref>[https://www.cnsnews.com/blog/jen-kuznicki/ew-jacksons-correct-about-three-fifths-clause E.W. Jackson's Correct about the Three-Fifths Clause]</ref>

Despite the facts, recognizing the historical facts have even gotten people in trouble.  E.W. Jackson, a Christian Minister and candidate for Lieutenant Governor of Virginia in 2012 noted that "the 3/5ths clause was an anti-slavery amendment. Its purpose was to limit the voting power of slave holding states."<ref>[https://www.cnsnews.com/blog/jen-kuznicki/ew-jacksons-correct-about-three-fifths-clause E.W. Jackson's Correct about the Three-Fifths Clause]</ref>

[[Walter E. Williams]], a professor at George Mason University, argues that the Founders were 100% correct in limiting representation of the slave power.<ref>[http://www.nwitimes.com/news/opinion/columnists/guest-commentary/walter-williams-three-fifths-clause-was-percent-necessary/article_2bf39d65-3a43-556a-a22c-0cde5e59b10d.html?mobile_touch=true WALTER WILLIAMS: Three-fifths clause was 100 percent necessary]</ref>  He points to the fact that the South wanted to fully count slaves in their numbers for representation.  Had slaves been fully counted, the slave states would have had more representation than the free states did.  In 1793, the total count of representatives was 105.  With a full representation for slavery, the slave states would have had 56, leaving the free states with 49.

[[Walter E. Williams]], a professor at George Mason University, argues that the Founders were 100% correct in limiting representation of the slave power.<ref>[https://www.nwitimes.com/news/opinion/columnists/guest-commentary/walter-williams-three-fifths-clause-was-percent-necessary/article_2bf39d65-3a43-556a-a22c-0cde5e59b10d.html?mobile_touch=true WALTER WILLIAMS: Three-fifths clause was 100 percent necessary]</ref>  He points to the fact that the South wanted to fully count slaves in their numbers for representation.  Had slaves been fully counted, the slave states would have had more representation than the free states did.  In 1793, the total count of representatives was 105.  With a full representation for slavery, the slave states would have had 56, leaving the free states with 49.

==See also==

==See also==

==External links==

==External links==

* [http://tfdf.org/blog/2012/02/21/three-fifths-clause-did-it-institutionalize-the-notion-that-slaves-were-less-than-fully-human-2/ Three-Fifths Clause–Did it institutionalize the notion that slaves were less than fully human?], The Frederick Douglass Foundation

* [http://web.archive.org/web/20170728142456/http://tfdf.org/blog/2012/02/21/three-fifths-clause-did-it-institutionalize-the-notion-that-slaves-were-less-than-fully-human-2/ Three-Fifths Clause–Did it institutionalize the notion that slaves were less than fully human?], The Frederick Douglass Foundation

[[Category:United States Constitution]]

[[Category:United States Constitution]]

[[Category:United States Government]]

[[Category:United States Government]]