I accept your additions and corrections, just trying to keep my telling as short, simple and accurate as possible.
But I had never before considered that 3/5 representation was intended as an incentive to free more slaves.
Interesting. And note how little it seemed to work.
Obviously economic calculations outweighed political advantages back in those days.
One of the founding father’s (I can’t remember who, I’ll look it up later) had a journal of the events and outlined a proposal that was given to the slave states that would give them full representation if they freed their slaves. The slave states refused so the 3/5ths clause was put in place limiting representation and Article 1, Section 9 clause regarding banning of the importation of slaves after 1807 was a work in to start the process of ending slavery. They then started the process of ending almost immediately with the Slave Trade act of 1794 and the Importation Act of 1807. There was fast and early movement to stop Slavery, something the Slave states greatly opposed and all referenced either as the primary or secondary reason for secession in their various articles.