[Jim Noble]

Yes, and the reason slaves were counted as 3/5 was to REDUCE the representation from slave states in the House, which, if slaves had been counted as 1.0 instead of 0.6 would have been that much greater.

In 1790, the slave states had 30/69 seats in the House. Had their slaves been counted as 1.0, even though they could not vote and were not citizens, they could well have commanded a majority.

The 3/5 clause was an anti-slavery measure.

[jurroppi1]

THIS^

[Svartalfiar]

The 3/5 clause was an anti-slavery measure.

Kind of. If the northern states had their way, slaves would have been counted a 0/5 of a person. The 3/5 number was a compromise between not counting and fully counting. My point, however, was not the 3/5 number, it was the implied term 'slave'. Not 'Negro', 'black', or any such term, it was all-encompassing. It included white slaves, yellow slaves, indentured servants, etc. Yes, the majority of slaves were black, but the Constitution did not specify them at all.