“Counting negro slaves as a whole person would have permitted the South to take both Houses and have made slavery in every state legal - it was about stopping the spread of slavery, not some racial discrimination/representation ploy.”
When the Constitution was being debated 13 of the 13 states were slave states.
Or did you not know that?
When the Constitution was being debated 13 of the 13 states were slave states.
Or did you not know that?
—
Geewilikers Mr Wizard, how amazing you are to imagine that the founders could not envision the country growing beyond the original 13. You should have been there to tell them it was pointless compromise!
It might be pretty to think that fully counting slaves in apportioning House seats among the states was a step towards the recognition of human equality, but few people would have thought that way at the time, and that wasn't why slaveowners liked the idea.
It would certainly be clever to think that Northerners who opposed fully counting slaves were actually enemies of the way to equality, but they had legitimate fears that apportioning seats that way would encourage Southern states to remain slave states -- and support pro-slavery moves in Congress.
New York state did not abolish slavery until 1827
https://history.nycourts.gov/when-did-slavery-end-in-new-york/
New Jersey had slaves until 1865
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_slavery_in_New_Jersey