The position I find presented in Madison’s notes, maintained by northern states, is that if you want slaves counted for the House of Representatives then they are fully human and should be free, but if you want to contend they are property they should be counted for taxation and not for representation.
Exactly, that’s what I wanted to say but could not find the words.
You’re much more eloquent than I.
nicely put... thanks for the information.
t
Yes. Madison knew fully “representing” the slaves would mean slavery would never go away.
You may also note that Madison opposed Washington’s proposed carriage tax because it should be apportioned. Had there been an attempt to levy a tax on slaves it would have probably gone off the rails on that basis, people being able to oppose it saying “well, Madison said thus” even if they intensely disliked Madison ... after all, at least with horse drawn carriages there were no carriage-free States so some apportionment scheme might manage to work.
Edit: oh for the days when any limitation on congressional power ought not to be interpreted in a way that destroyed the limitation! There could be no federal progressivism if the 10th Amendment alone were honored!