Calculating 3/5 of each state's slaves into the count for the number of representatives allotted created an increase in the southern states representation in the House of representatives, which only strengthened southern incentives to own slaves. Although the constitution never used the term “slave,” slavery was addressed in the constitution when endorsing slave ownership. The government showed itself as the “greatest of all reflections on human nature” when they did not take an active role in disbanding slavery. Allowing slavery to continue, and become ingrained in the United States, the Constitution reflected the delegates view at the time that slavery was a part of American society. Some delegates did not agree with slavery, but decided in favor of benefiting the southern slave states, rather than offending them by trying to end slavery. With slavery deeply ingrained in society, the constitution had no choice but to either expand or tear down the institution of slavery in the United States. Allowing slavery to continue through representation in government, however, was not the only place in the constitution where issues of slavery were …show more content…
The clause supported slaveholder’s rights to have slaves returned to them no matter where they escaped to. Through obligating free and slave states to return slaves, the constitution leaned towards benefiting the slave holders, rather than giving states freedom to treat slaves according to their beliefs. Most people viewed slaves as “inferior to the whites in the endowments both of body and mind” and as lost property returned. Even Thomas Jefferson, who did not believe in slavery, owned slaves and placed a notice in the paper for a runaway slave. He admitted the slaves endured injuries and provocations from white men, but did not see that as a reason to end slavery. The constitution did not allow states the choice to choose how they addressed runaway slaves, but instead benefited the