paid 1,120,794 dollars; and Virginia, 1,307,594. The white population of the former was about 340,000, and of the latter about 220,000. The greater value of the lands of Virginia, gave to that state the larger proportion. Threefifths of the slaves, at that time, amounted to 130,000; making the total population in Virginia, upon the threefifths basis, about 350,000. The taxable ratio would have been nearly the same in the two states; yet Virginia had to pay 186,800 dollars more than Pennsylvania's assessment. Experience soon proved that it was difficult to carry out the rule to tax the lands by congressional assessment upon the states; and in 1783, Congress recommended, in conformity with the powers it possessed under the articles of confederation, that the quota should be according to the number of free people, including three-fifths of those bound to servitude-excluding Indians not taxed. This, however, was not carried into effect, though eleven of the thirteen states adopted it. The proportion, as a representative basis, was subsequently adopted by the constitutional convention.

In 1787, when the convention was framing the constitution of the United States, the interest of the eastern and southern states occupied reversed positions. The convention determined to adopt a representation, in the lower house of Congress, according to population, without regard to land taxation. With this rule, the power of the south would have been increased by counting the slave as the equal of the white.

As the constitution was being framed, the south expressed a readiness to have representation and taxation

regulated by the same rule, and to count the slaves as taxable at the same rate as the whites; but, in that event, representation must be upon the same basis as the taxation. The northern states, on the other hand, resisted the direct introduction of the slaves into the apportionment as persons. Here was an issue between the north and the south that seemed to be beyond reconciliation. The south insisted upon recognising the slaves as persons; and the north opposed it, and refused to consider them except as property. A solution of these complications, however, was attained by compromise; and as Mr. Curtis interprets the proceedings of that memorable assembly, it was founded on mutual conciliation, and a desire to be just. The two objects to be accomplished were, to avoid the offence that might be given to the northern states, by making the slaves, in direct terms, an ingredient in the rule of representation; and, on the other hand, to concede to the southern states the right to have their representation enhanced by the same enumeration of their slaves that might be adopted for the purpose of apportioning direct taxation. These objects were effected by an arrangement proposed by a delegate from Pennsylvania. It consisted, first, in affirming the maxim, that representation ought to be in proportion to direct taxation; and then by directing a periodical census of the free inhabitants, and three-fifths of all other persons (slaves), to be taken by authority of the United States; and that the direct taxation should be apportioned among the states according to this census of persons. Thus the rule was proposed, by the delegate from Pennsylvania, that the slaves should only be counted

as three-fifths. The vote on this was as follows:-Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, and Georgia-ayes, 6: New Jersey, Delaware-noes, 2. Massachusetts and South Carolina were divided. In these early discussions, the eight states north of Mason and Dixon's line were considered as non-slaveholding; those south of it were called slaveholding states; and legislation, at that early day, had thus assumed a sectional bearing. The eight northern states had an estimated population of 1,495,000; and the southern states had 766,000 whites and free negroes, and 520,000 slavesthree-fifths of which would be 312,000; making a representative basis of 1,078,000, and a total population of 1,286,000.

TABLE A.-Representation in the House of Representatives, according to the Constitution of 1789, and of the Census of 1790.

Total representatives in 1789, 65; total according to census of 1790, excluding fractionals and the population of the districts of Maine, Vermont, Kentucky, and Tennessee, 97.

TABLE B.-Decennial Congressional Apportionments and Representative Population (including the Inhabitants of Maine, Vermont, Kentucky, and Tennessee, for 1790) for the Lower House of Congress, from 1790 to 1860, inclusive.

TABLE C.-Apportionment and Census of the Non-Slaveholding

TABLE D.-Apportionment and Census of the Slaveholding States,

for 1860.

Federal Number

STATES.

Free Po- Slave Po- Total Po- Representa- of Repre- Fraction pulation. pulation. pulation. tive Popula

over.

senta

tion.

tives.

The estimate for the northern states, in Table A, include the slaves, numbering about 50,000, because their emancipation was considered as certain within a few years thereafter. The ratio of representative population was ultimately fixed at 33,000; and, until a census could be taken, each of the states was allotted a given number of delegates. Table B exhibits the decennial apportionments and representation for the lower house of Congress. Table C shows the representative population of the northern or non-slaveholding states. The total population of the United States, according to the census of 1860, was 31,429,891. Deducting from this number the population of the "Territories," of the district of Columbia, and two-fifths of the slaves, then we have what is called the representative population, amounting, in the northern states, to 18,852,155; and, in the southern states, 10,635,023: total, 29,487,178. In order to ascertain the number of representatives each state is entitled