I think it was the 3/5th compromise
3/5 compromise
No. Slavery is no longer legal in America, therefore dismissing the compromise which stated that slaves were counted as 3/5th of a person regarding representation and taxation for states.
The three-fifths compromise was necessary in order to gain the support of both the Northern and Southern states for how slaves would be counted for the purpose of apportioning representation in the U.S. House of Representatives. Taxation was also affected by this apportionment but the main issue was representation. If slaves were counted as a whole person, the South would have a larger representation; if slaves didn't count at all, the North would have a larger representation. So to satisfy each side, the Constitution stated that slaves would be counted as 3/5ths of a person; a compromise between the two extremes.
The three-fifths compromise was necessary in order to gain the support of both the Northern and Southern states for how slaves would be counted for the purpose of apportioning representation in the U.S. House of Representatives. Taxation was also affected by this apportionment but the main issue was representation. If slaves were counted as a whole person, the South would have a larger representation; if slaves didn't count at all, the North would have a larger representation. So to satisfy each side, the Constitution stated that slaves would be counted as 3/5ths of a person; a compromise between the two extremes.
The Three Fifths Compromise stated that slaves counted as 3/5 of a person for counts for deciding taxation and representation. Whether it was a good thing is a personal opinion.
The three-fifth compromise was the compromise between delegates from the South and delegates in the North when deciding whether or not slaves would count as a part of the population when determining the amount of representation a state received in the House. The South wanted them counted fully, as it would give them more power in Congress, and the North did not as they had less slaves, and since slaves did not count as citizens they did not believe they should be counted when determining representation. So the three-fifths compromise was agreed upon which stated that the population of citizens and "three-fifths of all other persons" would be counted in determining representation in Congress. This was later overturned in the 14th Amendment and 15th Amendments.
The Fugitive Slave Law.
Oddly, the northerners regarded slaves as property who should receive no representation. Southerners demanded that Blacks be counted with whites.The compromise called the “Three-fifths Compromise” allowed a state to count three fifths of each Black person in determining political representation in the House.
The Three-Fifths Compromise determined how population would be counted for....? Representation in Congress and also direct taxes on the population of the states.
There was only one compromise regarding slavery and it was the three-fifths compromise which stated that slaves would be counted as three-fifths of a person for purposes of assigning House of Representative seats. Another compromise during the Constitutional convention was the Great compromise which created a bicameral legislature and the creation of the electoral college for Presidential elections.
Chief Justice, Roger Taney, in the Dred Scott trial, when it reached the Supreme Court in 1857.
The Great Compromise stated that representation in the House of Representatives should be determined through population. While the Senate would have an equal number of representatives from each state, the House of Representatives would include one representative for each 30,000 individuals in a state.
it solved the issue of how people were going to be represented in government. the three fifths compromise stated that three out of five southern blacks would count as people, and the great compromise set up the bicameral houses of legislation. the house representation based on population, and the senate giving each state two representatives.