What did the Three-Fifths Compromise determine regarding the counting of slaves?

What did the Three-Fifths Compromise determine regarding the counting of slaves?

• A. Slaves counted fully for tax purposes
• B. Slaves were not counted for representation
• C. Slaves counted as three-fifths of a person for both taxes and representation
• D. Slaves counted only for representation and not for taxes

Answer: (C)

The Three-Fifths Compromise established that enslaved individuals would be counted as three-fifths of a person when apportioning representation in the House of Representatives and for tax purposes. This compromise emerged during the Constitutional Convention in 1787 as a solution to the contentious debate between Northern and Southern states about how to account for the slave population in terms of representation and taxation. By allowing slaves to count as three-fifths of a person, this compromise provided a method to allocate congressional representation in a way that favored states with larger slave populations while still recognizing that slaves were not fully considered equal to free individuals. This arrangement reflected the deeply entrenched social and political attitudes of the time regarding slavery and representation. It established a framework that continued to shape discussions around citizenship and representation long after its adoption, ultimately contributing to the systemic inequalities within the political system.

The Three-Fifths Compromise established that enslaved individuals would be counted as three-fifths of a person when apportioning representation in the House of Representatives and for tax purposes. This compromise emerged during the Constitutional Convention in 1787 as a solution to the contentious debate between Northern and Southern states about how to account for the slave population in terms of representation and taxation.

By allowing slaves to count as three-fifths of a person, this compromise provided a method to allocate congressional representation in a way that favored states with larger slave populations while still recognizing that slaves were not fully considered equal to free individuals. This arrangement reflected the deeply entrenched social and political attitudes of the time regarding slavery and representation. It established a framework that continued to shape discussions around citizenship and representation long after its adoption, ultimately contributing to the systemic inequalities within the political system.