Question 38

The Three-Fifths Compromise addressed the question of how enslaved people would be counted for representation and taxation purposes.

The Three-Fifths Compromise established that for purposes of representation in Congress and taxation, enslaved individuals would be counted as three-fifths of a person.

A) The Great Compromise

The Great Compromise primarily dealt with the structure of Congress, creating a bicameral legislature with proportional representation in the House and equal representation in the Senate. It did not specifically address how enslaved people would be counted for representation or taxation.

B) The Missouri Compromise

The Missouri Compromise focused on the balance of power between slave and free states in the context of westward expansion. It did not involve the counting of enslaved individuals for representation or taxation, making it unrelated to the question at hand.

C) The Commerce Compromise

The Commerce Compromise resolved issues regarding the regulation of commerce and trade, particularly between northern and southern states. It did not address the counting of enslaved people, therefore it is not relevant to the topic of representation and taxation.

D) The Three-Fifths Compromise

The Three-Fifths Compromise specifically addressed how enslaved individuals would be counted, determining that they would count as three-fifths of a person. This compromise was crucial in balancing the interests of slaveholding and non-slaveholding states during the Constitutional Convention.

Conclusion

The Three-Fifths Compromise is the definitive answer as it directly relates to how enslaved individuals were to be counted for representation and taxation purposes. In contrast, the other options focus on different aspects of the Constitutional Convention and do not pertain to the specific issue of counting enslaved people, which makes them incorrect in this context.