The Three-Fifths Compromise and Commerce Powers

Representation and the Three-Fifths Compromise

• Congressional Representation and Population Counting:

  • Representation in Congress was established to be calculated based on state population, making total population counts directly determinative of how much legislative power each state possessed in Congress.

  • A fundamental debate arose over the question: How should enslaved people be counted in the population?

• Demographics and Regional Positions in $1790$:

  • By the year $1790$, more than $680,000$ enslaved people resided in The United States, with the vast majority concentrated in the South.

  • Southern Position: Southern states insisted that each enslaved person should be counted fully as one person ($1$ person) toward the total state population. This full count would give Southern states significantly larger calculated populations and greater representation in Congress.

  • Northern Position: Northern states argued that enslaved people should not be counted at all ($0$ count) for representation purposes. They asserted that if enslaved people were counted, Southern states would gain disproportionately large populations and unequal legislative control in Congress.

• The Three-Fifths Compromise:

  • To resolve the issue, James Wilson of Pennsylvania proposed a solution that became known as the Three-Fifths Compromise.

  • Under the terms of the Three-Fifths Compromise, each enslaved person would be counted as three-fifths ($\frac{3}{5}$) of a person.

  • Rather than fully counting or completely excluding enslaved individuals, only a fractional portion ($\frac{3}{5}$) of the enslaved population was added to a state's total population when determining congressional representation.

Commerce and the Slave Trade Compromise

• Disagreements Over Federal Trade Authority:

  • Northern Position: Northern states advocated giving Congress the power to regulate trade, known as the commerce power. They also maintained that Congress should be granted the authority to regulate the slave trade.

  • Southern Position: Southern states refused to agree to granting Congress commerce power. Furthermore, Southern states firmly opposed giving Congress the authority to regulate the slave trade, fearing that federal oversight would lead to the trade being banned.

• Terms of the Commerce and Slave Trade Compromise:

  • To bridge the divide between Northern and Southern states, delegates reached an agreement known as the Commerce and Slave Trade Compromise.

  • Commerce Power Granted: Under the terms of the agreement, Congress was granted the authority to regulate commerce.

  • Twenty-Year Restriction on Slave Trade Regulation: Congress was prohibited from regulating or banning the slave trade for a period of $20$ years, protecting the trade until the year $1808$.

  • Outcome: This compromise provided both sides with partial concessions, successfully moving the Constitution forward.