The Three-Fifths Compromise was an agreement made at the Constitutional Convention in 1787 about how enslaved people would be counted in the new federal government. It mattered because population numbers determined seats in the House of Representatives and votes in the Electoral College. Southern slaveholding states wanted enslaved people counted for representation, even though they denied them rights and freedom.
The compromise was a moral failure because it gave extra political power to slaveholding states while treating enslaved people as less than fully human under law.
Key Facts
- The compromise counted three out of every five enslaved people toward a state's population for representation and direct taxation.
- Formula: counted population from enslaved people = 3/5 x enslaved population.
- A state with 50,000 enslaved people added 30,000 people to its representation count because 3/5 x 50,000 = 30,000.
- The compromise increased the power of slaveholding states in the House of Representatives and the Electoral College.
- Enslaved people received no voting rights or political representation for themselves under the compromise.
- The Three-Fifths Compromise was repealed by the Fourteenth Amendment after the Civil War.
Vocabulary
- Three-Fifths Compromise
- An agreement in the U.S. Constitution that counted three-fifths of the enslaved population for representation and direct taxation.
- Constitutional Convention
- The 1787 meeting in Philadelphia where delegates wrote the U.S. Constitution.
- Representation
- The way people are counted or served by elected officials in government.
- Direct taxation
- A type of tax assigned to states based on population under the Constitution.
- Fourteenth Amendment
- A post-Civil War constitutional amendment that granted citizenship and required the whole number of persons in each state to be counted for representation.
Common Mistakes to Avoid
- Saying the compromise gave enslaved people three-fifths of a vote is wrong because enslaved people were not allowed to vote and had no political rights under this rule.
- Saying the compromise reduced slavery is wrong because it protected and strengthened slaveholding political power in the federal government.
- Treating the compromise as a fair middle ground is wrong because it balanced political interests while ignoring the humanity and rights of enslaved people.
- Forgetting the Electoral College effect is wrong because counting enslaved people increased not only House seats but also presidential electors for slaveholding states.
Practice Questions
- 1 A state had 80,000 free people and 30,000 enslaved people in 1790. Using the Three-Fifths Compromise, what population would count for representation?
- 2 Two states each had 100,000 free people. State A had 0 enslaved people, and State B had 60,000 enslaved people. How many more people would State B count for representation under the Three-Fifths Compromise?
- 3 Explain why the Three-Fifths Compromise increased the political power of slaveholding states while denying enslaved people representation for themselves.