Three-fifths compromise | Definition, Purpose, & History (2024)

United States history

verifiedCite

While every effort has been made to follow citation style rules, there may be some discrepancies.Please refer to the appropriate style manual or other sources if you have any questions.

Select Citation Style

Print

verifiedCite

While every effort has been made to follow citation style rules, there may be some discrepancies.Please refer to the appropriate style manual or other sources if you have any questions.

Select Citation Style

Feedback

Thank you for your feedback

Our editors will review what you’ve submitted and determine whether to revise the article.

Written and fact-checked by

The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica Encyclopaedia Britannica's editors oversee subject areas in which they have extensive knowledge, whether from years of experience gained by working on that content or via study for an advanced degree. They write new content and verify and edit content received from contributors.

The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica

Article History

Allyn Cox:

The Constitutional Convention

See all media

Related Topics:
Constitution of the United States of America

See all related content →

Three-fifths compromise, compromise agreement between delegates from the Northern and the Southern states at the United States Constitutional Convention (1787) that three-fifths of the enslaved population would be counted for determining direct taxation and representation in the House of Representatives.

Many of the Founding Fathers acknowledged that slavery violated the ideal of liberty that was so central to the American Revolution, but, because they were committed to the sanctity of private property rights, the principles of limited government, and the pursuit of intersectional harmony, they were unable to take bold action against slavery. Moreover, the Southern Founders’ thoroughgoing embrace of slave-based agriculture and their deeply ingrained racial prejudice solidified the barriers against emancipation. That the Continental Congress removed Thomas Jefferson’s statement regarding the injustice of the slave trade (and, by implication, slavery) from the final version of the Declaration of Independence is emblematic of the Founders’ resolve to subordinate the controversial issue of slavery to the larger goal of securing the unity and independence of the United States.

Notwithstanding the initial disagreements over slavery at the Constitutional Convention in 1787, the framers of the Constitution continued to privilege the maintenance of unity of the new United States over the eradication of slavery by resolving to again defuse sectional tensions over the matter. As they went about creating a new scheme of government, the delegates from the small and large states were divided on the issue of the apportionment of legislative representation. The Virginia, or large state, plan provided for a bicameral legislature with representation of each state based on its population or wealth; the New Jersey, or small state, plan proposed equal representation for each state in Congress. Neither the large nor the small states would yield, but the deadlock was resolved by the Connecticut, or Great, Compromise, which resulted in the establishment of a bicameral legislature with proportional representation in the lower house and equal representation of the states in the upper house.

The matter of how to determine population was anything but trivial. Having failed to secure the abolishment of slavery, some delegates from the Northern states sought to make representation dependent on the size of a state’s free population. Southern delegates, on the other hand, threatened to abandon the convention if enslaved individuals were not counted. Eventually, the framers agreed on a compromise that called for representation in the House of Representatives to be apportioned on the basis of a state’s free population plus three-fifths of its enslaved population. This agreement came to be known as the three-fifths compromise:

Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a term of years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three-fifths of all other Persons

It should be noted that neither the word slave nor the word slavery appears in this clause or anywhere in the unamended Constitution.

Are you a student? Get a special academic rate on Britannica Premium.

Learn More

Granting slaveholding states the right to count three-fifths of their population of enslaved individuals when it came to apportioning representatives to Congress meant that those states would thus be perpetually overrepresented in national politics. However, this same ratio was to be used to determine the federal tax contribution required of each state, thus increasing the direct federal tax burden of slaveholding states. Provision was also added to the Constitution for a law permitting the recapture of fugitive slaves, along with a moratorium until 1808 on any congressional ban against the importation of slaves, though in the meantime individual states remained free to prohibit slave imports if they so wished.

The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica This article was most recently revised and updated by Mindy Johnston.

Three-fifths compromise | Definition, Purpose, & History (2024)

FAQs

Three-fifths compromise | Definition, Purpose, & History? ›

The Three-Fifths Compromise was reached among state delegates during the 1787 Constitutional Convention. It determined that three out of every five slaves were counted when determining a state's total population for legislative representation and taxation.

What is the Three-Fifths Compromise and what was its purpose? ›

Three-fifths compromise, compromise agreement between delegates from the Northern and the Southern states at the United States Constitutional Convention (1787) that three-fifths of the enslaved population would be counted for determining direct taxation and representation in the House of Representatives.

What was the purpose of the 3 5 compromise quizlet? ›

What did the 3/5's compromise determine? The 3/5's compromise declared that three fifths of the slave population would be counted to determine representation and direct taxation.

Which statement best explains the Three-Fifths Compromise? ›

The Three-Fifths Compromise said that three out of every five slaves could be counted when determining a state's population size for determining how many seats that state would receive in the House of Representatives.

Which of the following was a direct effect of the Three-Fifths Compromise? ›

Final answer: The direct result of the Three-Fifths Compromise was a formula which allowed states to count slaves as three-fifths of a person for representation and taxation purposes. This was designed to settle political arguments between northern and southern states in the US.

Which group benefited most from the Three-Fifths Compromise? ›

Answer and Explanation: The Three-Fifths Compromise, reached during the Constitutional Convention in 1787, benefited slave states. During the convention, there was disagreement about whether slaves should count toward a state's population.

What was the main purpose of the Three-Fifths Compromise Brainly? ›

The "Three-fifths Compromise" permitted each Black person in a state to count for three fifths of that person's political membership in the House. It represents an early American attempt to avoid the convergence of wealth, nationality, class, and race in the pursuit of political power.

What was the main purpose of the compromise? ›

The Compromise was actually a series of bills passed mainly to address issues related to slavery.

Why were slaves counted as 3 fifths of a person when the Constitution was created? ›

Article one, section two of the Constitution of the United States declared that any person who was not free would be counted as three-fifths of a free individual for the purposes of determining congressional representation. The "Three-Fifths Clause" thus increased the political power of slaveholding states.

What did the Great Compromise purpose? ›

The compromise provided for a bicameral legislature, with representation in the House of Representatives according to population and in the Senate by equal numbers for each state.

What problem was the Three-Fifths Compromise designed to solve? ›

The Three-fifths Compromise was an agreement reached during the 1787 United States Constitutional Convention over the inclusion of slaves in a state's total population.

What disagreement led to the Three-Fifths Compromise? ›

Southern States wanted to count the total slave population while Northern States did not want to count any slaves in making the apportionment. Another compromise determined that three-fifths of the total slave population should be counted in apportioning both representatives and direct taxes.

Which two men favored the Constitution? ›

James Madison

After the Constitution had been written and signed, Madison then wrote the Federalist Papers with Alexander Hamilton and John Jay. These 85 essays explained the significance of the Constitution, in an effort to persuade states to ratify.

Why was the 3-5 compromise important? ›

The Three-Fifths Compromise gave the southern states where slavery was legal a non-proportional representation in the national government. In other words, the states where slavery was legal were given more political power to affect national government policies than their citizen populations allowed.

What are the pros and cons of the Three-Fifths Compromise? ›

The three-fifths compromise gave the slave states more representation, but not as much as counting a slave as one, and not less than not counting them. For both sides, this was better than the alternative. Looking at a person out of context, three-fifths of a person is demeaning.

Is the 3-5 clause still in the Constitution? ›

After all, it was the Southern slave owners who wanted slaves counted as full persons! Counting every slave as a full person would have given Southern states more Congressmen and more political power. The 3/5ths clause is no longer in force, though it is physically still in the US Constitution.

What was the lesson of the 3 5th compromise? ›

The Three-Fifths Compromise was a part of a series of compromises between Northern and Southern representatives enacted by the Constitutional Convention of 1787, which declared that three-fifths of the slave population in a state would be counted for purposes of determining representation in Congress and direct ...

What was the Great Compromise in simple terms? ›

The Great Compromise established the United States legislature as a bicameral, or two-house law-making body. In the Senate, each state would be allowed two representatives; in the House of Representatives, the number of representatives allowed for each state would be determined by its population.

Which three amendments ended the 3 5ths compromise? ›

After the Civil War, the formula was changed with the passage of the 13th Amendment, which abolished slavery, and Section 2 of the 14th Amendment, which specifically repealed the three-fifths rule.

What was the purpose of the New Jersey plan? ›

The New Jersey Plan was designed to protect the security and power of the small states by limiting each state to one vote in Congress, as under the Articles of Confederation.

Top Articles
Latest Posts
Recommended Articles
Article information

Author: Ouida Strosin DO

Last Updated:

Views: 5337

Rating: 4.6 / 5 (56 voted)

Reviews: 87% of readers found this page helpful

Author information

Name: Ouida Strosin DO

Birthday: 1995-04-27

Address: Suite 927 930 Kilback Radial, Candidaville, TN 87795

Phone: +8561498978366

Job: Legacy Manufacturing Specialist

Hobby: Singing, Mountain biking, Water sports, Water sports, Taxidermy, Polo, Pet

Introduction: My name is Ouida Strosin DO, I am a precious, combative, spotless, modern, spotless, beautiful, precious person who loves writing and wants to share my knowledge and understanding with you.