Nonsense. The Free States still have roughly twice the number of Representatives as the Slave States (including those that didn't secede). Your claim is abjectly ridiculous. The South didn't fear being overwhelmed in the House, where they already were greatly outnumbered. They feared that the Senate would eventually go against them, since by 1860 (and for a great while before that) the numbers were more evenly divided. They believed (rightly or wrongly) that Northern preponderance in both Houses, in additional to the obvious electoral advantage in Presidential elections, would eventually be used against them to meddle in their internal affairs (extending beyond slavery) and to enforced economically disadvantageous trade policies upon them.
So? The Constitution does award representation based on population, and even with the 3/5ths rule the free states still had more people. The South can hardly complain about that.
Your claim is abjectly ridiculous.
No it is not. The South had over 3 million slaves. Because of the 3/5th rule, the Southern population was 1.8 million higher for purposes of determining representation that without it. And in the South, the slaves had no need for congressional representation because in the eyes of the Southerners they were property and not people. It'd be like the North pressing for each horse or dog be counted as 3/5th of a person for Congressional representation.
They feared that the Senate would eventually go against them, since by 1860 (and for a great while before that) the numbers were more evenly divided. They believed (rightly or wrongly) that Northern preponderance in both Houses, in additional to the obvious electoral advantage in Presidential elections, would eventually be used against them to meddle in their internal affairs (extending beyond slavery) and to enforced economically disadvantageous trade policies upon them.
Really? And what affairs, other than slavery, did they think the North would meddle in?