Larger states generally opposed counting slaves for representation while supporting their counting for taxation, while smaller states tended to favor counting slaves for representation. This dynamic reflected the differing interests of states based on their population sizes and economic structures.
Larger states, like Virginia, were concerned about the political power that smaller slaveholding states would gain if slaves were counted for representation, as this would increase the number of representatives for these smaller states in Congress without providing them with corresponding political or tax burdens. Therefore, they often advocated that slaves should not be counted for representation but supported their counting for taxation to avoid disproportionately empowering smaller states.
Smaller states, on the other hand, often relied on the presence of enslaved populations to bolster their representation in Congress and thus favored counting slaves for representation purposes. This debate was a key issue during the Constitutional Convention in 1787 and led to the compromise known as the Three-Fifths Compromise, which allowed for three-fifths of the slave population to be counted for both representation and taxation.
2 answers