Essay On The Philadelphia Convention Of 1787

768 Words4 Pages

INTRODUCTION Throughout the Philadelphia Convention of 1787 there were different disputes, mainly centered on the issues of slavery and tariffs. These disputes finally lead to a compromise reached by the delegates present. The northern economy was primarily centered around industrialization. In contrast, the southern economy was mostly agricultural, and widely relied on slaves, as they were the cheapest form of labor accessible. Southern economies relied on slaves and wanted to count them as at least a part of a person, all while not taxing them. The north believed the opposite, and tensions started growing. Disputes lasted for the bulk of the Convention. Although a compromise was finally reached,i It is still debated whether or not this was …show more content…

They didn’t, however, want their taxes to increase because of their slaves. These two desires were controversial because, as the Northern states believed, slaves should only be given full representation if they are also taxed fully. It is our understanding that some, such as James Wilson, proposed that blacks should be equal with whites however others, like Governor Morris of Pennsylvania, along with others, believed this would give encouragement to the slave trade, and did not want give the south representation for their slaves. James Wilson eventually proposed a compromise to count three-fifths of the slave population in a state and add it to the total number of free white people, which was approved in 1787. The ⅗ compromise wasn’t a good decision, but neither was it a bad decision. Without the three-fifths compromise, the Southern States would have cededed succeeded. However, the Southern States such as Virginia had more population when the ⅗ compromise was put into play. Therefore, they had more representation. Four of the five first presidents of the US were from Virginia because of this compromise. Therefore, the compromise was a good compromise if viewed from the South, but a bad compromise if viewed from the North. Although, it also imposes the question; should slaves have been allowed in the …show more content…

They mainly grew cotton, tobacco, and indigo. The North on the other hand, was industrialized, making shirts, thread and other goods, within the walls of the factories. Because of their different economic statuses, the South felt the threat of tariffs, the taxing of imports and exports. They were afraid that the North, being highly industrialized, would tax the foreign goods coming through the ports in order to make their goods the better deal. The South did not support the tariffs, and were strongly opposed to them in meetings and debates. The South grew indigo, tobacco, and cotton, whereas the North did not grow much cash crops due to the irrelevant climate. Tariffs were a major concern of the South, one of which they dubbed the “Tariff of Abominations.” (Created in 1828 to protect the North’s industry power over the nation) In the North, where they didn’t have to ship their goods as far, American products were

Open Document