WHAT THE FRAMERS OF THE FEDERAL CONSt.i.tUTION THOUGHT OF THE NEGRO
The first important discussion in the Convention of 1787 to reflect the att.i.tude of the framers of the Federal Const.i.tution toward the Negro, was whether or not slaves should be considered a part of the population in apportioning representation in Congress on that basis. A precedent had been set in the Articles of Confederation in the provision for counting five slaves as three whites to determine the rate of taxation on the population basis. The free States contended that only the free inhabitants should be counted, but the slave States urged the recognition of slaves as a part of the population to secure to the South the power which it wielded until the Civil War.[530]
Taking up this important question soon after the convention a.s.sembled,
The following resolution was then moved by Mr. Randolph, Resolved that the rights of suffrage in the national legislature ought to be proportioned to the quotas of contribution, or to the number of free inhabitants, as the one or the other rule may seem best in different cases.
It was moved by Mr. Hamilton seconded by Mr. Spaight that the resolution be altered so as to read
Resolved that the rights of suffrage in the national legislature ought to be proportioned to the number of free inhabitants
It was moved and seconded that the resolution be postponed--and on the question to postpone it pa.s.sed in the affirmative
The following resolution was moved by Mr. Randolph seconded by Mr Madison Resolved that the rights of suffrage in the national legislature ought to be proportioned--it was moved and seconded to add the words "and not according to the present system"--On the question to agree to the amendment it pa.s.sed in the affirmative. (Ayes--7 noes--0.)[531]
It was then moved and seconded so to alter the resolution that it should read
Resolved that the rights of suffrage in the national legislature ought not to be according
It was then moved and seconded to postpone the consideration of the last resolution--And, on the question to postpone, it pa.s.sed in the affirmative The following resolution was then moved by Mr Madison seconded by Mr. G Morris.
Resolved that the equality of suffrage established by the articles of confederation ought not to prevail in the national legislature and that an equitable ratio of representation ought to be subst.i.tuted.
It was moved and seconded to postpone the consideration of the last resolution.
(The following Resolution being the 2d. of those proposed by Mr.
Randolph was taken up. viz--"that the rights of suffrage in the National Legislature ought to be proportioned to the quotas of contribution, or to the number of free inhabitants, as the one or the other rule may seem best in different cases.")
Mr. M(adison) observing that the words ("_or to the number of_) _free inhabitants_." might occasion debates which would divert the Committee from the general question whether the principle of representation should be changed, moved that they might be struck out.
Mr King observed that the quotas of contribution which would alone remain as the measure of representation, would not answer; because waving every other view of the matter, the revenue might hereafter be so collected by the general Govt. that the sums respectively drawn from the States would (not) appear; and would besides be continually varying.
Mr. Madison admitted the propriety of the observation, and that some better rule ought to be found.
Col. Hamilton moved to alter the resolution so as to read "that the rights of suffrage in the national Legislature ought to be proportioned to the number of free inhabitants. Mr. Spaight 2ded. the motion.
It was then moved that the Resolution be postponed, which was agreed to.
Mr. Randolph and Mr. Madison then moved the following resolution--"that the rights of suffrage in the national Legislature ought to be proportioned."
It was moved and 2ded to amend it by adding "and not according to the present system"--which was agreed to.
It was then moved and 2ded. to alter the resolution so as to read "that the rights of suffrage in the national Legislature ought not to be according to the present system."
It was then moved & 2ded. to postpone the Resolution moved by Mr.
Randolph & Mr. Madison, which being agreed to;
Mr. Madison, moved, in order to get over the difficulties, the following resolution--"that the equality of suffrage established by the articles of Confederation ought not to prevail in the national Legislature, and that an equitable ratio of representation ought to be submitted" This was 2ded. by Mr. Govr.
Morris, (and being generally relished, would have been agreed to when,)
Mr. Reed moved that the whole clause relating to the point of Representation be postponed; reminding the Come. that the deputies from Delaware were restrained by their commission from a.s.senting to any change of the rule of suffrage, and in case a change should be fixed on, it might become their duty to retire from the Convention.
Mr. Govr. Morris observed that the valuable a.s.sistance of those members could not be lost without real concern, and that so early a proof of discord in the convention as a secession of a State, would add much to the regret; that the change proposed was however so fundamental an article in a national Govt. that it could not be dispensed with.
Mr. M(adison) observed that whatever reason might have existed for the equality of suffrage when the Union was a federal one among sovereign States, it must cease when a national Governt.
should be put into the place. In the former case, the acts of Congs. depended so much for their efficacy on the cooperation of the States, that these had a weight both within & without Congress, nearly in proportion to their extent and importance. In the latter case, as the acts of the Genl. Govt. would take effect without the intervention of the State legislatures, a vote from a small State wd. have the same efficacy & importance as (a vote) from a large one, and there was the same reason for (different numbers) of representatives from different States, as from Counties of different extents within particular States. He suggested as an expedient for at once taking the sense of the members on this point and saving the Delaware deputies from embarra.s.sment, that the question should be taken in Committee, and the clause on report to the House (be postponed without a question there). This however did not appear to satisfy Mr. Read.
By several it was observed that no just construction of the Act of Delaware, could require or justify a secession of her deputies, even if the resolution were to be carried thro" the House as well as the Committee. It was finally agreed however that the clause should be postponed: it being understood that in the event the proposed change of representation would certainly be agreed to, no objection or difficulty being started from any other quarter (than from Delaware).
The motion of Mr. Read to postpone being agreed to
The Committee then rose. The chairman reported progress, and the House having resolved to resume the subject in Committee tomorrow,[532]
(Adjourned to 10 OClock)
The next question was on the following resolve:
In substance that the mode of the present representation was unjust--the suffrage ought to be in proportion to number or property.
To this Delaware objected, in consequence of the restrictions in their credentials, and moved to have the consideration thereof postponed, to which the house agreed.[533]
McHenry records for the thirtieth of May that the Committee then proceeded to consider the second resolution in Mr. Randolph"s paper.
That the rights of suffrage in the national legislature ought to be proportioned to the quotas of contribution or to the number of free inhabitants as the one or the other rule may seem best in different cases.
As this gave the large States the most absolute controul over the lesser ones it met with opposition which produced an adjournment without any determination.[534]
After frequent discussion and the failure to reach an agreement to safeguard the interests of the small States while giving due weight to the population of the large the effort to apportion representation in the national legislature a.s.sumed this form in the Committee of the Whole:
It was moved by Mr. King, seconded by Mr Rutledge to agree to the following resolution, namely:
Resolved that the right of suffrage in the first branch of the national Legislature ought not to be according to the rule established in the articles of confederation; but according to some equitable ratio of representation
And on the question to agree to the same
it pa.s.sed in the affirmative (Ayes--7; noes--3; divided--1.)
It was then moved by Mr. Rutledge seconded by Mr Butler to add the following words to the last resolution
"namely, according to the quotas of contribution"
It was moved by Mr Wilson seconded by Mr C. Pinckney to postpone the consideration of the last motion in order to introduce the following words, after the words "equitable ratio of representation" namely.
"in proportion to the whole number of white and other "free Citizens" and inhabitants of every age, s.e.x and condition, "including those bound to servitude for a term of years", and three fifths of all other persons not comprehended in the foregoing description, except Indians, not paying taxes "in each State.""
On the question to postpone