9. An Agreement To Count Slaves As Three-Fifths Of A Person Was Related To

The three-fifths compromise was a compromise reached between state delegates at the 1787 United States Constitutional Convention. Delegates argued over whether and how slaves would be counted in determining a state`s total population, as this figure would determine a state`s number of seats in the House of Representatives and how much taxes it would pay. The compromise counted three out of five slaves as a people, giving the Southern states one-third more seats in Congress and one-third more votes than if slaves had been ignored, but less than if slaves and free men had been counted in the same way. The compromise was proposed by delegate James Wilson and seconded by Charles Pinckney. [1]:143 Section 2 of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution (1868) then replaced Article 1, Section 2, clause 3 and expressly annulled the compromise. It provides that “the representatives will be distributed. count the total number of people in each state, with the exception of untaxed Indians. A later provision of the same clause reduced representation in Congress for states that denied adult males the right to vote, but this provision was never effectively enforced. [19] (The Thirteenth Constitutional Amendment, passed in 1865, had already eliminated almost all persons from the jurisdiction of the original clause by prohibiting slavery; the only remaining persons subject to it were those sentenced to penal servitude for a crime, which precluded the amendment of the prohibition.) By including three-fifths of slaves (who did not have the right to vote) in the legislative division, the three-fifths compromise offered additional representation in the House of Representatives of slave states over free states. In 1793, for example, the slave states of the South had 47 seats out of the 105, but 33 if seats had been allocated on the basis of free populations. In 1812, the slave states had 76 seats out of 143 instead of the 59 they would have had; 1833 98 seats out of 240 instead of 73. As a result, until the U.S. Civil War, the southern states had additional influence over the presidency, the speaker of the House of Representatives, and the Supreme Court. [15] In addition, the southern states` insistence, maintained until 1850, on an equal number of slave and free states, secured the southern bloc in the Senate and the votes of the electoral college.

The disenfranccy of black citizens eventually caught the attention of Congress, and in 1900 some members proposed removing seats in the South, which is related to the number of people excluded from the vote. [20] In the end, Congress did not act to change the division, mainly because of the power of the southern bloc. The Southern bloc was made up of Southern Democrats, elected by white voters and who formed a powerful bloc of votes in Congress until the 1960s. Their representatives, re-elected several times by one-party states, have controlled many important committee chairs in both chambers on the basis of seniority and have given them, among other things, control over rules, budgets, and important patronage projects. Their power allowed them to defeat federal legislation against racist violence and abuse in the South[21] until it was overcome by the civil rights movement. . . .