States With Many Slaves example essay topic

Though the Americans had claimed victory over Britain in the American Revolution, the most difficult task was yet to come. Statesmen and delegates gathered to decide the future of the new nation. However, the delegates were torn over how this new nation should be organized. In 1777, all of the thirteen states ratified a new document called the Articles of Confederation, which, among other things, established thirteen sovereign states -- with their own governments and rights -- and one weak central government. By 1787, problems created by the Articles (such as an economic depression catalyzed by the inability of the national government to tax) could no longer be ignored. Thus the Constitutional Convention was called.

Federalists, supporters of a strong federal government, presented their views, while opposing Antifederalists, supporters of sovereign states, explained their position. Delegates were also divided by the states that they represented: those from states with small populations versus those from states with large populations; the delegates were further divided by states with many slaves and virtually slave-free states. With so many divisions, agreements did not come easily. Three major issues took an extra amount of effort to please everyone: representation in Congress, how slaves affected the population count, and how to deal with the idea of a centralized government official.

Had not the delegates accommodated each other's needs and compromised, the Constitution would not have been ratified at the time it was. Under the Articles of Confederation each state had one vote in the single-house (unicameral) legislature, and in order to pass any law all thirteen states had to agree. Since it is very rare for a large group to unanimously consent to something - especially with such heavy divisions between large and small, slave and non-slave states - the central government had almost no power. This political flaw doomed the economy because the national government could not tax nor regulate trade, causing the states to plunge into economic depression. At this point, delegates deemed it necessary to revise the Articles and settle the issue of representation, for that would cure the states' economic struggles.

James Madison put forth the Virginia Plan, which proposed that representation in Congress be based on population. Being from Virginia, by far the most populous state at that time, this would benefit him and inhabitants of the large states by allowing them to have more representatives and thus more influence. In opposition, William Paterson offered the New Jersey Plan, which proposed that every state have an equal number of representatives, benefiting those from small states whose vote would count for very little if the Virginia Plan were instated. Because the council were split, a new plan was devised, called the Connecticut Compromise. This compromise created a bicameral legislature, in which representatives in the House of Representatives were elected by the people, and the number was based on the state's population; members in the Senate were appointed by the representatives in the House, and the number of members representing each state was equal. This "Great Compromise" satisfied the needs of both large and small states, and thus was readily accepted by both.

The issue of slavery followed exactly behind the issue of representation. The economy of the larger, southern states relied on the large amount of slaves. The southern states felt that the population count should include their slaves; this would allow for more representation in the House of Representatives. The northern free states objected because the slave population would increase the southern states' representation.

However, population also affects taxation, and the slave states did not want to pay taxes on their slaves. This did not concern the northern states because there were very few slaves to worry about being taxed on. To please both sides, slaves were included in the population, but on a lesser scale than white citizens. Slaves were counted as three fifths of a person so that they did not greatly impact the amount of representation or taxation. This "Three Fifths Compromise" was another example of how the delegates worked together to appeal to the needs of both sides. Arguably the most challenging dispute to settle was that of presidency.

Federalists strongly supported the idea of a three-branch (executive, judicial, and legislative) government over the solely legislative government. They felt that the nation needed a mobile government, which in turn involves a head centralized leader of some sort, to pass or veto laws, act as a diplomat (in the process of agreeing on treaties), and act as the commanding chief of the national army. To prevent this figure from becoming a dictator or monarch, the other two branches would have equal power through a system of checks and balances. This system would allow the other branches to "check" the decisions made by the president before they become final.

This not only allowed the Federalists their president, but it relieved Antifederalists of their concerns of the stronger central government turning into a corrupt monarchy. Furthermore, the president would only serve four years before the next election. This allowed the public to either re-elect the president for another term or, if they did not like the president, elect a new candidate. This also lessened Antifederalist fears.

Once more, the delegates had decided upon a fair compromise in which both sides' needs were met. Because the delegates had an impeccable ability to compromise, many difficult issues were met in a way pleasing to both sides. These compromises were necessary because without them, the Constitution would not have been accepted by all the states. The divisions in delegates represented the divisions in states' needs. If the compromises had not been met to the delegates's atis faction, they would not have met the states' needs, and thus would not have been ratified. Because the compromises were fair to both sides, thoroughly covering all important issues, the states could accept the Constitution.