Three - Fifths Compromise - wikipedia Three - Fifths Compromise The Three - Fifths Compromise was a compromise reached among state delegates during the 1787 United States Constitutional Convention. Whether, and if so, how, slaves would be counted when determining a state 's total population for legislative representation and taxing purposes was important, as this population number would then be used to determine the number of seats that the state would have in the United States House of Representatives for the next ten years. The compromise solution was to count 3 out of every 5 slaves as a person for this purpose. Its effect was to give the southern states a third more seats in Congress and a third more electoral votes than if slaves had been ignored, but fewer than if slaves and free persons had been counted equally, thus allowing the slaveholder interests to largely dominate the government of the United States until 1861. The compromise was proposed by delegates James Wilson and Roger Sherman. Contents 1 Enactment 2 Impact before the Civil War 3 After the Civil War 4 See also 5 References 6 Bibliography Enactment Part of a series on Slavery Contemporary Child labour Child soldiers Conscription Debt Forced marriage Bride buying Wife selling Forced prostitution Human trafficking Peonage Penal labour Sexual slavery Wage slavery Historical Antiquity Ancient Rome Babylonia Ancient Greece Topics and practices Atlantic slave trade Middle Passage Arab slave trade Ghilman Mamluk Saqaliba Aztec Blackbirding Byzantine Empire Coolie Corvée labor Field slaves in the United States House slaves Kholop Medieval Europe Panyarring Thrall Serfs History Russia Slave market Slave raiding Child soldiers Naval Galley slave Impressment Pirates Shanghaiing Slave ship By country or region Sub-Saharan Africa Contemporary Africa Slavery on the Barbary Coast Barbary slave trade Slave Coast Angola Chad Ethiopia Mali Mauritania Niger Somalia South Africa Sudan Seychelles North and South America Americas indigenous U.S. Natives Brazil Lei Áurea Canada Caribbean Barbados Code Noir Cuba Haiti revolt Restavek Latin America Puerto Rico Trinidad United States colonial maps female partus penal labor Slave codes interregional Human trafficking Virgin Islands Central, East, and South Asia Human trafficking in Southeast Asia Bhutan China Booi Aha Laogai India Debt bondage Chukri System Japan comfort women South Korea Yankee princess North Korea Vietnam Australia and Oceania Blackbirding in Australia Human trafficking in Australia Slave raiding in Easter Island Human trafficking in Papua New Guinea Blackbirding in Polynesia Europe and North Asia Sex trafficking in Europe Britain Denmark Dutch Republic Germany in World War II Malta Norway Poland Portugal Romania Russia Spain colonies Sweden North Africa and West Asia Iran Libya Human trafficking in the Middle East Ottoman Empire Yemen Religion Bible Christianity Catholicism Mormonism Islam 21st century Judaism Bahá'í Faith Opposition and resistance Timeline Abolitionism U.K. U.S. Anti-Slavery International Blockade of Africa U.K. U.S. Colonization Liberia Sierra Leone Compensated emancipation Freedman manumission Freedom suit Abolitionists Slave Power Underground Railroad songs Slave rebellion Slave Trade Acts International law 13th Amendment to the United States Constitution Related Common law Indentured servitude Unfree labour Fugitive slaves laws Great Dismal Swamp maroons List of slaves owners Slave narrative films songs Slave name Slave catcher Slave patrol Slave Route Project Treatment in U.S. breeding court cases Washington Jefferson Adams Lincoln 40 acres Freedmen 's Bureau bit Emancipation Day The Convention had unanimously accepted the principle that representation in the House of Representatives would be in proportion to the relative state populations. However, since slaves could not vote, leaders in slave states would thus have the benefit of increased representation in the House and the Electoral College. Delegates opposed to slavery proposed that only free inhabitants of each state be counted for apportionment purposes, while delegates supportive of slavery, on the other hand, opposed the proposal, wanting slaves to count in their actual numbers. The compromise that was finally agreed upon -- of counting `` all other persons '' as only three - fifths of their actual numbers -- reduced the representation of the slave states relative to the original proposals, but improved it over the Northern position. An inducement for slave states to accept the Compromise was its tie to taxation in the same ratio, so that the burden of taxation on the slave states was also reduced. The Three - Fifths Compromise is found in Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3 of the United States Constitution, which reads : Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, 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 three - fifths ratio originated with a 1783 amendment proposed to the Articles of Confederation. The amendment was to have changed the basis for determining the wealth of each state, and hence its tax obligations, from real estate to population, as a measure of ability to produce wealth. The proposal by a committee of the Congress had suggested that taxes `` shall be supplied by the several colonies in proportion to the number of inhabitants of every age, sex, and quality, except Indians not paying taxes ''. The South immediately objected to this formula since it would include slaves, who were viewed primarily as property, in calculating the amount of taxes to be paid. As Thomas Jefferson wrote in his notes on the debates, the southern states would be taxed `` according to their numbers and their wealth conjunctly, while the northern would be taxed on numbers only ''. After proposed compromises of one - half by Benjamin Harrison of Virginia and three - fourths by several New Englanders failed to gain sufficient support, Congress finally settled on the three - fifths ratio proposed by James Madison. But this amendment ultimately failed, falling two states short of the unanimous approval required for amending the Articles of Confederation ( only New Hampshire and New York were opposed ). A contentious issue at the 1787 Constitutional Convention was whether slaves would be counted as part of the population in determining representation of the states in the Congress or would instead be considered property and, as such, not be considered for purposes of representation. Delegates from states with a large population of slaves argued that slaves should be considered persons in determining representation, but as property if the new government were to levy taxes on the states on the basis of population. Delegates from states where slavery had become rare argued that slaves should be included in taxation, but not in determining representation. The proposed ratio was, however, a ready solution to the impasse that arose during the Constitutional Convention. In that situation, the alignment of the contending forces was the reverse of what had obtained under the Articles of Confederation. In amending the Articles, the North wanted slaves to count for more than the South did because the objective was to determine taxes paid by the states to the federal government. In the Constitutional Convention, the more important issue was representation in Congress, so the South wanted slaves to count for more than the North did. Much has been said of the impropriety of representing men who have no will of their own... They are men, though degraded to the condition of slavery. They are persons known to the municipal laws of the states which they inhabit, as well as to the laws of nature. But representation and taxation go together... Would it be just to impose a singular burden, without conferring some adequate advantage ? -- Alexander Hamilton Impact before the Civil War The Three - Fifths Compromise gave a disproportionate representation of slave states in the House of Representatives relative to the voters in free states until the American Civil War. In 1793, for example, Southern slave states had 47 of the 105 members but would have had 33, had seats been assigned based on free populations. In 1812, slave states had 76 out of 143 instead of the 59 they would have had ; in 1833, 98 out of 240 instead of 73. As a result, Southern states had disproportionate influence on the presidency, the speakership of the House, and the Supreme Court in the period prior to the Civil War. Along with this must be considered the number of slave and free states, which remained mostly equal until 1850, safeguarding the Southern bloc in the Senate as well as Electoral College votes. Historian Garry Wills has postulated that without the additional slave state votes, Jefferson would have lost the presidential election of 1800. Also, `` slavery would have been excluded from Missouri... Jackson 's Indian removal policy would have failed... the Wilmot Proviso would have banned slavery in territories won from Mexico... the Kansas - Nebraska bill would have failed. '' While the Three - Fifths Compromise could be seen to favor Southern states because of their large slave populations, for example, the Connecticut Compromise tended to favor the Northern states ( which were generally smaller ). Support for the new Constitution rested on the balance of these sectional interests. After the Civil War Section 2 of the Fourteenth Amendment ( 1868 ) later superseded Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3 and explicitly repealed the compromise. It provides that `` representatives shall be apportioned... counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. '' A later provision of the same clause reduced the Congressional representation of states who denied the right to vote to adult male citizens, but this provision was never effectively enforced. ( The Thirteenth Amendment, passed in 1865, had already eliminated almost all persons from the original clause 's jurisdiction by banning slavery ; the only remaining persons subject to it were those sentenced for a crime to penal servitude, which the amendment excluded from the ban. ) After the Reconstruction Era came to an end in 1877, however, the former slave states subverted the objective of these changes by using various strategies to disenfranchise their black citizens, while obtaining the benefit of apportionment of representatives on the basis of the total populations. These measures effectively gave white Southerners even greater voting power than they had in the antebellum era, inflating the number of Southern Democrats in the House of Representatives as well as the number of votes they could exercise in the Electoral College in the election of the president. The disenfranchisement of black citizens eventually attracted the attention of Congress, and in 1900 some members proposed stripping the South of seats, related to the number of people who were barred from voting. In the end, Congress did not act to change apportionment, largely because of the power of the Southern bloc. The Southern bloc comprised Southern Democrats voted into office by white voters and constituted a powerful voting bloc in Congress until the 1960s. Their representatives, re-elected repeatedly by one - party states, controlled numerous chairmanships of important committees in both houses on the basis of seniority, giving them control over rules, budgets and important patronage projects, among other issues. Their power allowed them to defeat federal legislation against racial violence and abuses in the South. See also United States portal Section 127 of the Australian Constitution, excluding Aboriginal people from the census for purposes of determining allocation of seats in Parliament ; repealed in 1967. Slave Trade Acts References Jump up ^ `` We Hold These Truths to be Self - evident ; '' An Interdisciplinary Analysis of the Roots of Racism & slavery in America Kenneth N. Addison ; Introduction p. xxii Jump up ^ Paul Finkelman, `` How The Proslavery Constitution Led To The Civil War '', Rutgers Law Journal Volume 43 Fall / Winter 2013 Number 3, p405 Jump up ^ Wills pg. 51 Jump up ^ Hannis Taylor ( 1911 ). The Origin and Growth of the American Constitution : An Historical Treatise. Houghton Mifflin Company. p. 131. Jump up ^ Wills pp. 51 -- 52 Jump up ^ Wills pg 53. Jump up ^ Jonathan Elliot, ed. ( 1866 ). The Debates In The Several State Conventions On The Adoption Of The Federal Constitution, As Recommended By The General Convention At Philadelphia, In 1787. J.B. Lippincott & Co. Washington : Taylor & Maury. p. 237. ^ Jump up to : Wills pp. 5 -- 6. Jump up ^ Banning, Lance ( August 31, 2004 ). `` Three - Fifths Historian ''. The Claremont Institute. Retrieved 2008 - 01 - 21. Jump up ^ Friedman, Walter ( January 1, 2006 ). `` Fourteenth Amendment ''. Encyclopedia of African - American Culture and History. -- via HighBeam Research ( subscription required ). Retrieved June 12, 2013. Jump up ^ Committee At Odds on Reapportionment, The New York Times, December 20, 1900, accessed March 10, 2008 Jump up ^ Richard H. Pildes, `` Democracy, Anti-Democracy, and the Canon '', Constitutional Commentary, Vol. 17, 2000, p. 10, accessed 10 Mar 2008 Bibliography Wills, Garry ( 2003 ). `` Negro President '' : Jefferson and the Slave Power. Boston : Houghton Mifflin. ISBN 0 - 618 - 34398 - 9. Walton, Hanes, Jr. ; Smith, Robert C. ( 2006 ). American Politics and the African American Quest for Universal Freedom ( 3rd ed. ). New York : Pearson Longman. ISBN 0 - 321 - 29237 - 5. Wiencek, Henry ( 2004 ). An Imperfect God : George Washington, His Slaves, and the Creation of America. New York : Farrar, Straus, and Giroux. ISBN 0 - 374 - 52951 - 5. Report of the Brown University Steering Committee on Slavery and Justice United States Constitution Articles Preamble II III IV V VI VII Amendments Ratified Bill of Rights 5 6 7 8 9 10 Others 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Pending Congressional Apportionment Titles of Nobility Corwin Amendment Child Labor Repealed Eighteenth Amendment Unsuccessful Equal Rights District of Columbia Voting Rights List of Amendments Bill of Rights ( Amendments 1 -- 10 ) Reconstruction Amendments ( Amendments 13 -- 15 ) Amendment proposals in Congress Convention to propose amendments State ratifying conventions Formation History Articles of Confederation Mount Vernon Conference Annapolis Convention Philadelphia Convention Virginia Plan New Jersey Plan Connecticut Compromise Three - Fifths Compromise Committee of Detail Signing Independence Hall Syng inkstand The Federalist Papers Anti-Federalist Papers Massachusetts Compromise Virginia Ratifying Convention Hillsborough Convention Rhode Island ratification Drafting and ratification timeline Clauses Appointments Appropriations Assistance of Counsel Bills of credit Case or Controversy Citizenship Commerce Compact Compulsory Process Confrontation Congressional enforcement Contract Copyright and Patent Double Jeopardy Due Process Equal Protection Establishment Exceptions Excessive Bail Ex post facto Extradition Free Exercise Free Speech Fugitive Slave Full Faith and Credit General Welfare Guarantee Impeachment Import - Export Ineligibility Militia Natural - born citizen Necessary and Proper New States No Religious Test Oath or Affirmation Origination Petition Postal Presentment Privileges and Immunities Privileges or Immunities Recess appointment Recommendation Self - Incrimination Speech or Debate Speedy Trial State of the Union Supremacy Suspension Take Care Takings Taxing and Spending Territorial Title of Nobility Treaty Trial by Jury Vesting Vicinage War Powers List of clauses Interpretation Concurrent powers Constitutional law Criminal procedure Criminal sentencing Dormant Commerce Clause Enumerated powers Equal footing Executive privilege Incorporation of the Bill of Rights Judicial review Nondelegation doctrine Preemption Saxbe fix Separation of church and state Separation of powers Taxation power Unitary executive theory Display and legacy National Archives Charters of Freedom Rotunda Independence Mall Constitution Day Constitution Gardens National Constitution Center Scene at the Signing of the Constitution ( painting ) A More Perfect Union ( film ) Worldwide influence US Government Portal Law Portal Wikipedia book Retrieved from `` https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Three-Fifths_Compromise&oldid=835856485 '' Categories : Drafting of the United States Constitution Slavery in the United States History of African - American civil rights History of the United States ( 1776 -- 89 ) 1787 in the United States 1787 in American politics Hidden categories : Subscription required using via Pages containing links to subscription - only content Use mdy dates from May 2016 All articles with unsourced statements Articles with unsourced statements from March 2009 All articles with failed verification Articles with failed verification from September 2014 Talk Contents About Wikipedia Català Dansk Deutsch Español Français 한국어 Português 中文 Edit links This page was last edited on 11 April 2018, at 05 : 35. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution - ShareAlike License ; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia ® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization. About Wikipedia

Question: where was the 3/5 compromise originally stated in the constitution
Answer: Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3; Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3; Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3; Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3; Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3