Did the constitution include a section about slavery?

Answer 1

Slavery is not mentioned specifically in the Constitution but is implied in Section 3, Clause 1 where it defines how representation is to be determined (by population.) People fell into four catagories: free persons, free persons of indentured servitude for a period of years, Indians not taxed, and three-fifths of all other persons. "The three-fifths of a person" was how the slavery issue was dealt with, because slaves were people *and* property and could not be totally counted as "persons". However, to count them as persons could affect a state's representation in the House, so, to protect the property aspects of slavery for the South, whose support was absolutely essential for ratification, the "three-fifths compromise" was promulgated and accepted.

Answer 2

Not even one time even though the Constitution allowed slavery to continue. It allowed the slave trade, euphemistically reffered to as the migration importation of such persons (meaning slaves) to continue for 20 years by stating in Article 1, Section 9 that Congress could not pass a law infringing on that right. Further, Article 5 protected this situation also for 20 years by stating that no amendment may be made concerning the subject until 1808.

Answer 3

There is, but the wording of it was not quite clear, and that was why the Supreme Court in the Dred Scott case was free to interpret the clause as it thought fit, and it ruled that slavery was protected by the Constitution.

Answer 4

To be frank, slavery is a great embarrassment to the US Constitution and an unpleasant topic to teach or even to talk about, as I had to do for more than three decades as a teacher. But to answer the question fully, the framers of the Constitution knew that the slave-holding states would not ratify the document unless slavery was protected. Many of the framers, most notably Dr. Benjamin Franklin of Pennsylvania, opposed slavery openly, but wanted to keep the US alive as a single nation and leave the abolition of slavery for another time (which proved to be 1865, with the 13th Amendment).

Gouveneur (that was his first name!) Morris, also of Pennsylvania, who wrote most of the text, did a good job of hiding its pro-slavery features, never once using the words "slave," "slaves" or "slavery." In Article 1, Section 2, Paragraph 3, the Constitution prescribes the way in which the population of each state is to be counted. It includes "… the whole number of free persons…" including indentured (temporary) servants and excluding non-taxed Native Americans. Then came the trick: the population count included " … three-fifths of all other persons." Having eliminated everybody BUT slaves in the first part of the prescription, the "3/5 clause" had to apply to slaves themselves. The 3/5 Compromise is the name given to this concession to the slaveholders. Today that part of the Constitution is among those that are italicized, blue-lined, or otherwise identified as no longer operative.

If we can call such sneakiness "clever," such cleverness appears in two other parts of the Constitution. In Article 1, Section 9, Paragraph 1, it was decided (no doubt after some fierce arguments behind closed doors) that the slave trade, the selling of human beings as if they were cattle, had to be stopped, but as another concession to slaveholders, it would be allowed for the next 20 years. The framers designated 1788 as the date of the Constitution's formal presentation to the states and the people, and so 1,9,1 begins: "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 …" This description not only included but in practical terms meant ONLY slaves.

The Framers of the Constitution also had to address the issue of escaping slaves who would find their way to freedom through the non-slavery or "free" states. Article 4, Section 2, Paragraph 3, officially forbids free states' citizens from helping slave escape bondage: "No person held to service or labor in one state, under the laws thereof, escaping to another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due." In other words, being in a free state did not make a slave free, and any free state in which a slave took refuge was required to return the escapee to his/her owner(s).

Without any direct reference to slave(s) or slavery, the US Constitution was written in such a way that the slave-holding states would ratify it. As a matter of fact, the one and only time that "slavery" appears in the Constitution is in the 13th Amendment, Article 1, Section 1, Paragraph 1: "Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction." The Constitution would necessary refer to slavery as it sought to promote and even enforce human rights, but from now own the key phrase would be " … PREVIOUS condition of servitude."

Answer 5

no it did not because the founders feared that the Const. would not be ratified through the issue's sensitivity in that time period.

Answer 6

yes, but the 13th amendment abolishes it.