Framers And The Constitution Analysis

Obviously, that would be greatly unfair to the northern states because the south would have more seats in the House of Representatives meaning unfair representation. As a result, many northern states refused to allow this happen so both regions came to an agreement that allowed slaves to be counted as 3/5 of a person, when doing a census for determining seats in the House of Representatives. Finally, Article 1, Section 2, Paragraph 3 was put into the Constitution making the compromise official. The whole Convention was deadlocked on the slave representation issue which almost completely fell apart if nothing was to be done, but lucky the compromise kept the Constitutional Convention together. Moreover, the men who opposed slavery, but accepted the 3/5 clause did so knowing the Constitution had more good to give than some of the evils written in it. They could have thought the Constitution had provisions written down that could eventually outlaw slavery or maybe they realized this new government was greatly beneficial to all Americans. Although, we can now all agree that even though the 3/5th clause is wrong, it gave America a chance to become a great

Framers had a heated debate arouse the slavery issue about would the slavery be permitted or prohibited in the Constitution. After a close look at the Constitution, it points out that the slavery issue was neither legitimized nor forbidden. The fact that using other words replaced slaves, the three-fifths compromise and importation of slaves all indicated the obscure attitude of the framers treated to slavery issue and they were more likely to not accept the slavery.

The Three-Fifths Compromise of the Constitution was an agreement between Southern and Northern states in which three-fifths of the population of slaves would be counted for representation purposes for the distribution of taxes and the apportionment of the members of the United States House of Representatives. Those who opposed slavery generally wished to count only the free inhabitants of each state. Those who supported slavery wanted to count slaves in their actual numbers. The so-called compromise of counting "all other persons" as only three-fifths was for the benefit of Southern power

When drafting the Constitution, as mentioned before, the founders never specifically mention the institution of slavery in the written document as a means to satisfy and placate the arguments of the Southern states. However, the Constitution did, in fact, safeguard the international slave trade until 1808 ultimately prohibiting any regulations on slavery but it did not impede on future conversations regarding the problem. Due to the fact that the Constitution could not prohibit debate over the issue of slavery, this in turn gave the House of Representatives the ability to lawfully dispute the inquiry following

The United States of America, a symbol for freedom and liberty throughout the world, was built upon the backs of millions of vulnerable slaves. By the time we became a country in 1776, slavery was engrained in many of our founding fathers minds as the source of economic wellbeing. Each state, community and individual had their own ideas about the institution and whether it was morally or constitutionally right. It is one of the highest debated topics in the history of our country. Slavery, controversial as it may be, was an integral part of the maturation of our young nation.

During that time, slavery was an issue in the United States. The Southern states wanted their population, including their slave population to be counted toward their representation in the House of Representatives, the reason for this was because the higher the population, the more representatives they would receive; on the other hand, the Southern States did not want their slave population counted toward their taxes, this was because, the higher the population, the more taxes the south would have to pay; the Northern States disagreed with the Southern States on both matters, there were fewer slave states in the north so the sum of the slaves and the ordinary people would not help the northern states earn representation. Secondly, the northern states felt that if the southern states were allowed to count slaves as part of their population for representation, they should also be counted for taxation. The solution for this confusion was the Three-Fifths Compromise, which each slave would count as three-fifths of a person for both representation and taxation

Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction." –Thirteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution

Until this compromise, the issues of slavery had not been extensively debated. Newspapers would comment, people would argue, and a few fights would go to a higher government level, but for the most part the North let the South govern itself and its slaves. When the issues finally began affecting them, the Northerners could not ignore slavery anymore. Until that point, it had seemed to be a non-issue. Some disagreed with it, but it supported the Southern economy and failed to do any harm to Northern white men. When the argument of votes in Congress came along, spurred by the Great Compromise and its two house system, it quickly became a heated debate. The power to have that many extra votes for Congress seemed outrageous to the North, who argued that if slaves could not vote, it made no sense for them to be

This thought process is similar to the colonies thought process when it came to the intolerable acts. No taxation without representation. But the nonslave states argued that slaves should be counted the same as citizens to have a fair share of the tax burden. So in order to compromise they split the differences and came up with the Three-Fifths Compromise which made each slave get taxed as 3/5 of a citizen. But when it came to slave’s congressional representation both sides changed. The nonslave states didn’t want the slaves to count in determining the number of House representatives, but the slave states felt that each slave should be counted like every citizen was. So the Framers had to use the Three-Fifths Compromise again to settle this dispute. Both sides acted really hypocritical when it came to these two disputes has the nonslave states wanted slaves to count for taxes but not representation and then the slave states wanted them not to be taxed but be used in figuring the number of House representatives. At the time it is somewhat understandable because they needed to get rid of the Articles of Confederation but still wanted what was best for their

During the antebellum period, the Constitution had become a source of sectional discord between the North and the South. As it had once been framed as an instrument of national unity, the Constitution had developed different interpretations that provided the validity for ideas in both the North and South. The largest problem with the Constitution at this point, were the unaddressed issues that the Constitution never mentions. Different interpretations lead to different opinions whether something was legal. If the Constitution didn’t mention something, was it legal because it never said it wasn’t legal, or was it illegal because it was unconstitutional? The tensions between the groups of people who had differing ideas about the Constitution

The differences mainly between the northern states and the southern states. However, a compromise was reached after an extended debate. This gave the congress an authority to tax imports but not exports and not prohibiting slave trade for time being. The three-fifths compromise was the most controversial trade-off as it relates directly to apportionment of taxes and seats in the House of Representatives (Patterson, 2013). Southern states wanted to count slaves for purpose of House seats where the Northern states kicked against it. They claimed that slaves had no legal rights. They finally reached a compromise that saw slave as three-fifths of a person, which would be effective for the purpose of taxation and congressional appointment (Patterson, 2013). The compromises, put tighter, have led to the current form of congress in the United

There were many disagreements and compromises that occurred while in the process of creating the Constitution. Some were: the debate over slavery, the debate of the Virginia plan and the New Jersey plan, and the disagreement about the amount of time the president should work. There was a huge debate over slavery and the states were torn between abolishing slavery and owning slaves. A three-fifths clause was created so that slaves would be considered part of the state’s population. Three-fifths of the slave population was a compromise where some of the slaves would be counted “in determining each state’s representation in the House of Representatives and its

Certain interests do not change over time in our society. Over 200 years ago, the prominent concern that led to the framing of the Constitution regarded the establishment of a government that was “for the people and by the people.” The framers of the Constitution, with concern of an over powering central government in mind, provided a basis for the structure of the federal government of the United States. The powers of the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of government are laid out strategically in a way that no one branch can have more power than the other. The national concern of maintaining a legitimate government has not shifted since the initial days of the framers. Although the capacity of the government has grown over time, the system of checks and balances that was adapted in the framing of the Constitution allows for the structure and powers of the federal government to remain in order today. Other than providing a structural map for how the government will operate, however, the additional aspects of the Constitution fail to administer practical framework for addressing 21st century interests. This document was written over 200 years ago and it has not been altered substantially since then (Lazare). While certain Amendments have been added to assist the Constitution in staying relevant, such as the abolishment of slavery and the addition of women’s right to vote, there has been practically nothing added to help in applying the framers’ intentions

In 1787, delegates arrived in Philadelphia to begin work on revising the Articles of Confederation. Most states agreed that the Articles had not provided the country with the type of guidelines that it needed to run smoothly. There were many things missing, and many issues that needed further consideration. One of the most controversial topics at the Constitutional Convention was figuring out the country's policy towards slavery. When all was said and done, slavery was still legal after the Convention because the southern economy depended on it and because most people decided that this was an issue that should be decided by each individual state, rather than the country as a whole.

The next, more vital to the future of America, was the Three Fifths clause. The Three Fifths clause was set in place so that the southern states, which had significantly less people, get more say in the House of Representatives than their free, white population warranted. The Three Fifths clause added three fifths of the total slave population to the free population of the state in order to be more equal to the northern states whose population of free men was overwhelming to the amount in the southern states.