ich the adherents of slavery claimed it
was recognized is paragraph 3, Section 2, Article I., which provided
that:
"Representation and direct taxes shall be apportioned among the
several States . . . according to their respective numbers, which
shall be determined by adding to the whole number of free persons,
including those bound to service for a term of years, and excluding
Indians not taxed, _three fifths of all other persons_."
The "other persons" referred to here, if only slaves, are very
delicately described. But this clause, too, came to be recognized
by all the departments of the government as referring to slaves.
It is quite sure that if the good and plain men of the Revolutionary
period had been dealing with a subject not shocking to their
consciences, sense of justice, and humanity, they would have dealt
with it in plain words, of direct and not doubtful import.
The clause of the Constitution giving representation in the House
of Representative of Congress and in the Electoral College in the
choice of President and Vice-President, came soon to be regarded
as unjust to the free States. Three fifths of all slaves were
counted to give representation to free persons of the South; that
is, three fifths of all _slave property_ was counted numerically,
and thus, in many Congressional districts, the vote of one slaveholder
was more than equal to two votes in a free State. For example, in
1850, the number of free inhabitants in the slave States was
6,412,605, and in the free States, 13,434,686, more than double.
The representation in Congress from the slave States was 90 members,
from the free States 144. Three fifths of the slaves were 1,920,182,
giving the South 20 (a fraction more) members, the ratio of
representation then being 93,420. If the 234 representatives had
been apportioned equally, according to free inhabitants, the North
would have had 159 and the South 75, a gain of fifteen to the free
and a loss of that number to the slave States, a gain of 30 to the
North.
The same injustice was shown in levying direct taxes. (All this,
however, has been changed by the Fourteenth Amendment to the
Constitution.)
The same discriminating language is used (Sec. 9, Art. I.) when
obviously referring to the African slave trade. A strong sentiment
existed in favor of putting an end at once to the traffic in human
being; the Christian consciences of our forefathers revolted at
its wickedness, and there wa
|