The US Constitution, 3/5, and the Slave Trade Clause: Crash Course Black American History #9

Summary

This script from Crash Course Black American History explores the paradox of America's founding ideals versus its practice, highlighting the US Constitution's role in perpetuating slavery. It discusses the Three-Fifths Compromise and the Slave Trade Clause, which economically benefited all states while dehumanizing enslaved people. The video challenges the romanticized view of the Founding Fathers, emphasizing the complex truths of American history where freedom and opportunity came at the expense of many.

Takeaways

• 🏆 The US Constitution, despite its aspirations, did not initially apply to millions of people, especially enslaved individuals, and reinforced racial caste systems.
• 🎭 Clint Smith uses the analogy of a child wanting to be a pro wrestler to illustrate the gap between aspiration and reality, similar to America's identity and its historical actions.
• 📜 The Constitution's founding document did not abolish slavery but rather recommitted to it, which was seen as a moral indictment by many, including abolitionist William Lloyd Garrison.
• 🤝 The Founders had the opportunity to start fresh and end slavery but chose not to, reflecting their values and the social hierarchy they envisioned.
• 👥 The word 'slave' was deliberately omitted from the Constitution to avoid historical judgment, yet the institution was deeply embedded in the document's provisions.
• 💼 Slavery was economically lucrative, and many Founders were slave owners, which influenced the Constitution's clauses regarding representation and trade.
• 🔢 The Three-Fifths Compromise was a legislative compromise that counted enslaved individuals as 3/5 of a person for the purpose of political representation and taxation.
• 🌐 The Slave Trade Clause allowed the importation of enslaved people until 1808 without federal regulation, reflecting a compromise between Northern and Southern economic interests.
• 🗳️ The compromises in the Constitution had profound implications for the balance of power in the House of Representatives and the Electoral College.
• 💔 The Constitution's legacy is one of both creating opportunity and perpetuating injustice, reflecting the complex and often contradictory nature of American history.
• 🤔 The script challenges the traditional narrative of the Founding Fathers, urging a more nuanced understanding of their roles and the document they created.

Q & A

What is the main theme of the Crash Course Black American History episode presented by Clint Smith?

The main theme is the disconnect between the ideals expressed in the U.S. Constitution and the reality of racial inequality and slavery that persisted in America.

How does Clint Smith illustrate the concept of aspiration versus reality in the context of the U.S. Constitution?

Smith uses the analogy of his childhood desire to be a pro wrestler to explain how America's aspirations as a nation were not reflected in the lived experiences of millions of people, particularly regarding the institution of slavery.

Why is it ironic that the place where the U.S. Constitution was drafted is called Independence Hall?

It is ironic because while the United States was born there, millions of people living in the U.S. became even less free following the Constitution's ratification, as it did not abolish slavery.

What was the moral indictment of the United States by abolitionist William Lloyd Garrison in 1854?

Garrison burned a copy of the Constitution, calling it 'a covenant with death and an agreement with Hell,' to protest the fact that the Constitution did not abolish slavery.

Why did the Founding Fathers avoid using the word 'slave' in the Constitution?

The Founding Fathers knew that slavery was morally wrong and something they should be ashamed of, so they avoided using the term to prevent it from being directly associated with the document.

What was the Three-Fifths Compromise and why was it significant?

The Three-Fifths Compromise was a clause in the Constitution that counted enslaved individuals as 3/5 of a person for the purpose of determining a state's population and political representation. It was significant because it dehumanized enslaved people and influenced the balance of political power.

How did the Three-Fifths Compromise affect the political dynamics of the House of Representatives and the Electoral College?

The compromise gave Southern states more political power by partially counting enslaved people in their populations, which in turn affected the number of representatives they could send to the House and the electoral votes they could cast.

What is the Slave Trade Clause and what does it imply about the economic interests of the Founding Fathers?

The Slave Trade Clause allowed states to continue the importation of enslaved people until 1808 without federal regulation. It implies that many of the Founding Fathers recognized the economic benefits of slavery and were willing to compromise on moral principles for economic gain.

How did the Slave Trade Clause create a compromise between the Northern and Southern colonies regarding slavery?

The clause allowed Southern colonies to continue benefiting from the slave trade, which was essential to their economy, while also allowing Northern colonies, where slavery had been abolished, to avoid direct involvement in the trade.

What was the long-term impact of the Three-Fifths Compromise and the Slave Trade Clause on the United States?

The Three-Fifths Compromise and the Slave Trade Clause institutionalized slavery in the United States, leading to a prolonged period of racial inequality and human rights abuses that took a Civil War and the loss of hundreds of thousands of lives to begin to rectify.

How does Clint Smith suggest we should view the Founding Fathers and the Constitutional Convention in the context of American history?

Smith suggests that we should hold multiple truths about the Founding Fathers and the Constitutional Convention: acknowledging their role in creating a nation of opportunity while also recognizing the human cost and racial injustice that were integral to its founding.

Outlines

00:00

📜 The Disconnect Between Aspiration and Reality in America's Founding

This paragraph discusses the concept of aspiration versus reality, using the analogy of the speaker's childhood dream of being a pro wrestler to illustrate the point. It then transitions to the founding of the United States and the drafting of the Constitution, highlighting the irony that while the U.S. was born from the document, it also entrenched a racial caste system that made millions less free. The Constitution is described as the central legal document of the U.S., yet it failed to abolish slavery, instead recommitting to it, which many saw as a moral indictment of the country. The speaker mentions the symbolic act of William Lloyd Garrison burning the Constitution in 1854, calling it 'a covenant with death and an agreement with Hell.' The paragraph emphasizes the economic benefits of slavery and the personal involvement of many of the Constitution's framers in the practice, leading to the avoidance of the word 'slave' in the document itself.

05:03

🔢 The Three-Fifths Compromise and Slave Trade Clause: Economic and Political Implications

The second paragraph delves into the specifics of the Three-Fifths Compromise and the Slave Trade Clause within the U.S. Constitution. The Three-Fifths Compromise is explained as a constitutional clause that counted enslaved individuals as 3/5 of a person for the purpose of representation and taxation, which had profound implications for the balance of political power and the perception of Black people's humanity. The Slave Trade Clause is detailed as a provision that allowed the importation of enslaved people until 1808 without federal regulation, highlighting the compromise between Northern and Southern colonies and the economic benefits that slavery brought to all colonies, not just the South. The paragraph underscores the importance of these clauses in perpetuating slavery and the economic motivations behind their inclusion in the Constitution.

10:05

🤝 The Complex Legacy of America's Founding Fathers

The final paragraph reflects on the legacy of the Founding Fathers and the Constitutional Convention, acknowledging the complexity of their vision for the new nation. It points out that nearly half of the delegates owned enslaved people, and thus the Constitution's promise of democracy was built at the expense of millions. The speaker calls for a nuanced understanding of American history, recognizing both the opportunities created by the founding of the United States and the injustices it perpetuated. The paragraph concludes with a reminder of the dual nature of America's history, encapsulating the paradox of a nation built on both freedom and oppression.

Keywords

💡Constitution

The Constitution refers to the U.S. Constitution, which is the supreme law of the United States and the framework for the federal government. It is central to the video's theme as it discusses how the Constitution, despite its aspirations for freedom and equality, paradoxically reinforced the racial caste system and slavery. The script mentions that the Constitution was silent on the word 'slave' but implicitly supported the institution through clauses like the Three-Fifths Compromise and the Slave Trade Clause.

💡Three-Fifths Compromise

The Three-Fifths Compromise was a provision in the U.S. Constitution that counted enslaved individuals as three-fifths of a person for the purposes of taxation and representation. This concept is pivotal to the video's narrative as it illustrates the dehumanizing and discriminatory treatment of Black people within the founding legal document, serving as a metaphor for their status as less than full human beings in the eyes of the law.

💡Slave Trade Clause

The Slave Trade Clause is a part of the U.S. Constitution that prohibited Congress from banning the international slave trade for 20 years after the Constitution's adoption. This term is significant in the video as it highlights a deliberate decision by the Founders to allow the continuation of the slave trade, thus embedding economic interests in human bondage into the fabric of the new nation.

💡Abolitionist

An abolitionist is someone who advocates for the abolition of slavery. The term is relevant in the video through the mention of William Lloyd Garrison, a famous abolitionist who burned a copy of the Constitution, denouncing it as morally corrupt for its entanglement with slavery.

💡Caste System

A caste system is a social stratification system in which people are born into social classes with predefined roles and limited social mobility. The video uses the term to describe the racial hierarchy in the U.S., where the Constitution, instead of dismantling such a system, further entrenched it through its provisions on slavery.

💡Representation

Representation in the context of the video refers to the political power and influence granted to states based on their population, as determined by the number of representatives in the House of Representatives. The script discusses how the Three-Fifths Compromise affected representation by including enslaved people as a fraction of the population.

💡Economic Interests

Economic interests are the financial stakes or benefits that motivate certain actions or policies. The video explains how the economic interests of the Founders, many of whom owned enslaved people or benefited from the slave trade, influenced the Constitution's provisions on slavery.

💡Racial Hierarchy

Racial hierarchy refers to a social structure where different racial groups are ranked according to perceived superiority or inferiority. The video discusses how the Constitution and its compromises, such as the Three-Fifths Compromise, reinforced a racial hierarchy that considered Black people as less than fully human.

💡Independence Hall

Independence Hall is the location where the U.S. Constitution was drafted. The video uses this term to underscore the irony that while the United States was born there with aspirations of freedom, many people, particularly enslaved individuals, became less free after the Constitution's ratification.

💡Moral Indictment

A moral indictment is a strong criticism or condemnation based on moral grounds. In the video, the term is used to describe the criticism of the Constitution by abolitionists and others who saw its entanglement with slavery as a profound moral failing.

💡Beneficiaries

Beneficiaries are those who receive benefits from a particular action or policy. The video discusses how the Constitution's provisions on slavery created a group of beneficiaries—those who profited from the institution, including both Southern slave owners and Northern businesses that indirectly benefited from the slave economy.

Highlights

The disconnect between who America says it is and who it actually is, especially in regards to the aspirations of the Constitution not applying to millions of people.

The irony of the U.S. Constitution being drafted in what later became known as Independence Hall, as millions became less free after its ratification.

The Constitution's failure to abolish slavery and its re-commitment to it, seen as a moral indictment of the country.

Abolitionist William Lloyd Garrison's dramatic burning of the Constitution in 1854, calling it 'a covenant with death and an agreement with Hell'.

The Founders' awareness of the moral wrongs of slavery, yet their decision to avoid using the word 'slave' in the Constitution.

The economic lucrativeness of slavery and how many Founders personally benefited from it, with about half of the Constitutional Convention delegates owning enslaved people.

The Three-Fifths Compromise that defined enslaved individuals as 3/5 of a human for representation and taxation purposes.

The absurdity and profound implications of the Three-Fifths Compromise, changing the dynamics of political representation and the Electoral College.

The Slave Trade Clause allowing the importation of enslaved people until 1808, reflecting a compromise between Northern and Southern colonies.

The economic benefits of slavery to both Northern and Southern states, and how this widespread financial gain allowed slavery to persist.

The unique reliance of certain Southern states like Georgia and South Carolina on the transatlantic slave trade due to higher enslaved worker mortality rates.

The fear that states like Georgia and South Carolina might not join the Union if there were Constitutional limits on the slave trade.

The long-lasting impact of the Three-Fifths Compromise and the Civil War's role in shifting the United States' stance on slavery.

The complex truths of the Founding Fathers creating a nation of opportunity and upward mobility at the expense of millions of enslaved people.

The challenge of holding multiple truths about America's history, acknowledging both its achievements and its moral failings.

Crash Course's mission to provide free education for everyone, supported by patrons and the animation team at Thought Cafe.

Transcripts

Hi! My name is Clint Smith and this is Crash Course Black American History.

So sometimes in life, who we say we want to be is not necessarily who we are in that moment.

For example, when I was a little kid, I wanted to be a pro wrestler, and not like, grow up

and become one eventually, I wanted to be one right then, right there, in that moment.

Now, the thing is, even if I wrote down on a sheet of paper that I was a pro wrestler,

even if I got all of my friends to meet in a room and agree that I was a pro wrestler,

even if I got all of those friends to sign a long scroll of paper calling me a pro wrestler,

none of that, in fact, makes me a professional wrestler.

See, there’s a disconnect there, between who I say I want to be, and who I actually

am in that moment. This is basically the same thing that happened with the US constitution.

Stay with me. America said a lot of great things about who it was and what it represented,

even though, for millions of people, the aspirations espoused in that document, didn’t apply

to them. And not only did it not apply to them, but it further entrenched the racial

caste system that was already in place. You see, who America says it is, and who America

has been, have not always been neatly aligned, far from it.

It’s more than a little ironic that the place where the U.S. Constitution was drafted

was later called Independence Hall. Because while it’s true that the United States was

effectively born there, there were millions of people who called the United States home,

who, in many ways, became even less free following the ratification of the Constitution.

Now, this is not to imply that the colonial laws we’ve talked about in earlier episodes

weren’t restricting and inhumane in their own right – they were. But the constitution,

even in its earliest days when so many people around the world weren’t really sure what

a constitution even was, was intended as an effort to solidify the legal principles of

a nation. In the United States, the Constitution is

the central legal document of our land. It’s the thing everything else comes back to. And

in our foundational legal document, the one upon which the legal and political landscape

of this country would be built, the founders failed to do away with slavery. In fact, they

recommitted to it. And there were many people who felt strongly

that this was a moral indictment of the country. Almost 70 years later, in 1854, the famous

abolitionist William Lloyd Garrison would hold up a copy of the Constitution and burn

it, calling it “a covenant with death and an agreement with Hell.”

And it didn’t have to be this way. The Founders could have used this as an opportunity to

say, ‘hey, look let’s start this experiment fresh.’ They could have said, ‘you know

what team, we inherited slavery from the British, we just fought a war of independence, and

that means we should probably make everyone independent.’ But instead the majority of

them were like...“nahh.” And the thing is, so many of them knew slavery

was wrong, and so many of them knew it was something they should be ashamed of. And that’s

why the word "slave" didn’t actually appear anywhere in the Constitution. They didn’t

want it anywhere on the document, because they knew it would be something history would

judge them for. This matters because it demonstrates what

many of the Founders of our nation valued and where they thought Black people should

be on the social hierarchy. On an economic front, slavery was an incredibly

lucrative business, and the Founders knew that. Many of them personally. Of the 55 delegates

to the Constitutional Convention, about 25 owned enslaved people.

This conflict manifested itself in two ways – the Three-Fifths Compromise and the Slave

Trade Clause. Let’s start with the Three-Fifths Compromise.

Article one of the Constitution set up a government with two legislative chambers. In the Senate,

each state gets two senators. But in the House of Representatives, representation is determined

by the population of the state. And the newly minted states had very different

compositions. Northern states were more densely populated with White citizens, while Southern

states were heavily populated with enslaved Black people.

What this did was create a dilemma. The colonists were unsure if and how they should acknowledge

enslaved Black people as members of the population and to what extent they should be counted

as “citizens” in the context of allotting states political representation. Let’s go

to the Thought Bubble Northern delegates did not support including

enslaved Black people in the population of the Southern states, largely because it would

give the South more political power. But, the Southern Delegates knew that they wouldn’t

be able to compete in the House of Representatives if enslaved people weren’t counted.

And this is where we get something called, the three-fifths compromise. The Three-Fifths

Compromise was a clause in the Constitution that defined enslaved individuals as 3/5 of

a human. It was placed in Article 1, Section 2. and it stated that “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.”

Three-Fifths of a person. That doesn’t even make sense to say out loud. And it sounds

absurd, because it is absurd. Even though the South would have loved for

Black people to /fully count/ for political purposes, this legislative compromise, which

turned Black people into fractions, came to serve as a larger metaphor for the way that

Black people were seen by many as less than human. The implications of this decision were

profound. It changed the dynamics of the House of Representatives and the Electoral College.

Without the ⅗ compromise, some historians even argue that Thomas Jefferson wouldn’t

have won the election of 1800. Thanks, Thought Bubble.

The 3/5 compromise wasn’t the only negotiation about what slavery would look like in the

new United States. The Slave Trade Clause was outlined in Article

1, Section 9, Clause 1 of the Constitution. Though it doesn’t use the word “slave”

it was one of the original provisions of the Constitution that addressed slavery as a policy

issue. The text says, “The Migration or Importation

of such Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be

prohibited by the Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but

a Tax or duty may be imposed on such Importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each Person.”

This is basically a really fancy way of saying that the federal government cannot limit how

many individuals were imported to the United States. According to legal scholars Gordon

Lloyd and Jenny S. Martinez, when they said “any such Persons” they clearly meant

“enslaved people of African descent.” They also point out that this clause was created

to be another compromise between the Northern and Southern colonies. It allowed for slavery

to exist in the south, where it directly sustained the economy, and allowed for slavery to remain

illegal at the local level where it had already been abolished.

But it allowed for ALL of the colonies to indirectly, economically benefit from slavery,

and the fact that so many across the country, North and South, benefited financially from

slavery is part of what allowed it to sustain itself for so long.

Some states, like Georgia and South Carolina had a unique reliance on the transatlantic

slave trade because their enslaved workers died at higher rates relative to places like

Virgina or Maryland. They were particularly insistent on this point, so much that some

feared they wouldn’t join the Union if there were Constitutional limits placed on the slave

trade. So even though this document was written without

saying the word “slave”, what this clause essentially said was – “Until 1808, the

Migration or Importation of enslaved individuals of African descent cannot be regulated by

the federal government, but only by the states, to allow for each entity to make the best

economic decision for their White citizens.” At the end of the day, Southern states were

able to benefit by keeping their property and Northern states, we shouldn’t forget,

also got to benefit from the impact of slavery on the Northern economy.

The Slave Trade Clause prevented action on the translatanic slave trade for twenty years,

and the Three-Fifths Compromise lasted for a LOT longer than that. It took 75 years before

the United States eventually pivoted on slavery and it took a Civil War and cost hundreds

of thousands of lives, to get there. So, what can we say about the Constitutional

Convention? I mean what can we say about the Founding Fathers? So often we are taught about

how great they were, and how great this founding document they wrote is. But remember that

nearly half of the delegates at the Constitutional Convention owned enslaved people.

It’s important to understand who was, and who wasn’t included, in their vision of

this new nation. Who would be the beneficiaries of its promise of democracy, and whose bodies

would be used and cast aside in pursuit of it? Sometimes, American history demands that

we hold sets of complicated truths at the same time.

These delegates at the constitutional convention founded a country that would go on to create

unprecedented opportunity and upward mobility for millions of people across generations,

but it did so, at the direct expense of millions and millions of other people. Both are true.

And both are America. And holding multiple truths that seem at odds with one another,

well, that’s American history in a nutshell. I’ll see you next time.

Crash Course is made with the help of all these nice people and our animation team is

Thought Cafe. Crash Course is a Complexly production.

If you’d like to keep Crash Course free for everybody, forever, you can support the

series at Patreon; a crowdfunding platform that allows you to support the content you

love. Thank you to all of our patrons for making Crash Course possible with their continued

support.