Mr. Gorham.  This ratio was fixed by Congress as a rule of taxation.  Then, it was urged, by the delegates representing the States having slaves, that the blacks were still more inferior to freemen.  At present, when the ratio of representation is to be established, we are assured that they are equal to freemen.  The arguments on the former occasion had convinced them that three fifths was pretty near the just proportion, he should vote according to the same opinion now.

Mr. Butler insisted that the labor of a slave in South Carolina was as productive and valuable as that of a freeman in Massachusetts; that as wealth was the greatest means of defence and utility to the nation, they were equally valuable to it with freemen; and that consequently an equal representation ought to be allowed for them in a government which was instituted principally, for the protection of property, and was itself to be supported by property.

Mr. Mason could not agree to the motion, notwithstanding it was favorable to Virginia, because he thought it unjust.  It was certain that the slaves were valuable, as they raised the value of land, increased the exports and imports, and of course the revenue, would supply the means of feeding and supporting an army, and might in cases of emergency become themselves soldiers.  As in these important respects they were useful to the community at large, they ought not to be excluded from the estimate of representation.  He could not, however, regard them as equal to freemen, and could not vote for them as such.  He added, as worthy of remark, that the Southern States have this peculiar species of property, over and above the other species of property common to all the States.

Mr. Williamson reminded Mr. Gorham, that if the Southern States contended for the inferiority of blacks to whites, when taxation was in view, the Eastern States, on the same occasion, contended for their equality.  He did not, however, either then or now, concur in either extreme, but approved of the ratio of three-fifths.

On Mr. Butler’s motion, for considering blacks as equal to whites in the apportionment of representation,—­Delaware, South Carolina, Georgia, aye—­3; Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, no—­7.  New York not on the floor.

Mr. Gouverneur Morris said he had several objections to the proposition of Mr. Williamson.  In the first place it fettered the Legislature too much.  In the second place, it would exclude some States altogether who would not have a sufficient number to entitle them to a single representation.  In the third place, it will not consist with the resolution passed on Saturday last, authorizing the Legislature to adjust the representation, from time to time on the principles of population and wealth; nor with the principles of equity.  If slaves were to be considered as inhabitants, not as wealth, then the said resolution would not be pursued; if as wealth, then why is no other wealth but slaves included?  These objections may perhaps be removed by amendments....  Another objection with him, against admitting the blacks into the census, was, that the people of Pennsylvania would revolt at the idea of being put on a footing with slaves.  They would reject any plan that was to have such an effect. pp. 1067-8-9 & 1072.