Premium Essay

What Were The 3/5th's Three Compromises

Submitted By
Words 1228
Pages 5
When America broke away from Britain in the late 1700’s, the country had another issue waiting on the home front, slavery. The institution of slavery ran incredibly deep in early America and into its economy. Although only a small portion of people actually owned slaves, almost everyone in the country gained from the economic advantage that came with the evil institution. Some even believe that our constitution allowed slavery to go on due to these advantages. To combat this, the federal government enacted 3 compromises in order to slow the growth of slavery in America. These compromises were the 3/5th’s compromise, the foreign slave trade, and the ability to re-capture slaves who have crossed state borders (Fugitive Slave Clause). These compromises were the first steps to getting slaves rights; although it may seem that these compromises didn’t help slaves, it was the first time they were given rights across the country. The first compromise was the 3/5th’s compromise and was put into effect in 1787. Southerners looked for House of Representatives …show more content…
As stated in Article 4 section 2, runaway slaves must be given back to their owners when found. This power was quickly taken advantage of by southerners. Many slaves would be kidnapped in the north and brought into the deep south to be put on a plantation. This happened to a lot of innocent people including Solomon Northrup, a free man taken from his land. His book and movie “12 Years a Slave” tell his story and how he freed himself. Slave owners often found as many ways as possible to take advantage of the compromises. This compromise hurt slave in a lot of ways and when it later became law as the fugitive Slave Act of 1793, it would be taken advantage of even more. Not only could free men just be randomly snatched up, it made it very difficult for escaped slaves to stay free. This compromise didn’t do much to help slaves, it in fact did quite the

Similar Documents

Premium Essay

Business Law Notes

...Statutory Interpretation (not examinable) • Literal Rule There are three (3) principles of law that can be applied to interpret the law, where the Literal rule can be applied and if absurdity exist either the Golden or the Mischief rule can be used. The Literal rule considers the law as what it says where the natural meaning of the words are used for interpretation; this can be depicted in the case Regina v Barrymore where the defendant was charged with the offence of wounding with the intent to murder, however the learned magistrate of St John’s Magistrate’s court committed the defendant to stand trial on a charge of wounding with intent to do grievous bodily harm. The court however had no power to commit the defendant for any offence other than the offence with which he had been charged. • Golden Rule The Golden rule is an extension of the literal rule, giving either narrow or wide meaning to the law; the Narrow meaning can be exemplified in the case of Marilyn Spenser v the Attorney General (AG), where the appellants, members of the Executive of the Committee of the Hallelujah Square Tabernacle church submitted to the Attorney General (AG) articles of incorporation of the church as a religious non- profit organization. However, the AG rejected the request stating that a nonprofit company must be a commercial enterprise which is to be carried out without financial gain to its members. Wide Meaning on the other hand is used to give law a wider meaning...

Words: 21185 - Pages: 85