To: Bubba Ho-Tep
The Lost Causers are always so quick to seize upon the 3/5 compromise as some sort of mystic indicator of disingenuousness on the part of northerners, but it really exposes their own hypocrisy. You'll find the more dim-witted uttering inanities such as:
"you'll have to ask your yankee forefathers why a antebellum black man was only worth 3/5's of a free white man. (FWIW, your yankee forefathers didn't want blacks to count at all." The issue came about as the government attempted to apportion tax liabilities, which was accomplished through the census. The south balked at counting slaves since they had no vote and no rights. They didn't want the slaves counted at all. The north said to count everyone. However, when the question of representation in congress reared its head the south wished that every slave counted in full. The north only said that since they weren't allowed the vote and thus no representation, they should not be counted. The south really wanted their cake and to eat it too!
The 3/5 compromise came about as a settlement between the two competing interests with the slaves (again) losing in the bargain and the south getting more than it deserved.
376 posted on
04/26/2011 5:43:08 AM PDT by
rockrr
(Everything is different now...)
To: rockrr
The issue came about as the government attempted to apportion tax liabilities, which was accomplished through the census. The south balked at counting slaves since they had no vote and no rights. They didn't want the slaves counted at all. The north said to count everyone. However, when the question of representation in congress reared its head the south wished that every slave counted in full. The north only said that since they weren't allowed the vote and thus no representation, they should not be counted. The south really wanted their cake and to eat it too!I think you're mixing up issues from the Confederation and the Constitution.
States were asked, not really required, to provide contributions to the common fund under the Confederation by proportion to population. Each state was represented equally. Southern states didn't want slaves counted so it lowered their taxes.
States weren't taxed under the Constitution in proportion to population, unless I'm confused, but suddenly their representation in one House and the Electoral College was based on population.
Now southerners wanted slaves counted so as to increase their representation. Such an abrupt reversal in course wasn't seen again till Hitler invaded USSR.
To: rockrr; Bubba Ho-Tep
The south balked at counting slaves since they had no vote and no rights. They didn't want the slaves counted at all.
Wow, I think even Bubba may call out your ignorance on that one. Taxation went hand-in-hand with representation. As Hamilton said [R]epresentation and taxation go together. ...Would it be just to impose a singular burden, without conferring some adequate advantage?
The South wanted to count slaves to build up their representation in the House. Northerners wanted none counted to maximize their representation in the House. (Some even scoffed during the debates with an alternative that if they "did" get counted, since Southerners considered slaves their "property", that Northerners could then count their cattle and chairs.) Round and round they went, and the only way the North could get the Southern states to join was to concede 60% of the slave population for representation.
To: rockrr
The issue came about as the government attempted to apportion tax liabilities, which was accomplished through the census. The south balked at counting slaves since they had no vote and no rights. They didn't want the slaves counted at all. The north said to count everyone. However, when the question of representation in congress reared its head the south wished that every slave counted in full. The north only said that since they weren't allowed the vote and thus no representation, they should not be counted. The south really wanted their cake and to eat it too! The 3/5 compromise came about as a settlement between the two competing interests with the slaves (again) losing in the bargain and the south getting more than it deserved. More yankee mythology.....
735 posted on
04/28/2011 6:58:07 PM PDT by
cowboyway
(Molon labe : Deo Vindice : "Rebellion is always an option!!"--Jim Robinson)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson