2 Wisconsin Academy of Sciences , Arts and Letters. 
ing or not having slaves. It did not lay between the large and small states. 
It lay bet’ween north and south.” 
Having satisfied the smaller states with equality in the senate, the con¬ 
vention proceeded to its vital act of compromise, by establishing equilib¬ 
rium between the sections — equalizing their strength in congress and in 
the electoral college. 
No explanation has ever been offered as to how the particular fraction, 
was selected in determining what weight the number of slaves should 
have in the apportionment of representation. The motion came from a 
New England member. Many years afterward, the question was put to 
Madison in a Virginian assemblage, but he preserved silence. It remains 
among the curious mysteries of that historic convention which have never 
been cleared up. A plausible explanation is furnished in a pamphlet en¬ 
titled, “ The Lost Principle,” published at Richmond on the eve of the 
Civil war. 1 The anonymous writer argues that “f ” was chosen in order 
to preserve the equilibrium of the sections; that the South would never 
have consented to it on any other plea. If the negro at the south were 
counted as a whole man and not as three-fifths of a man, the slave-holding 
states would possess a clear majority in the first electoral college. 
The balance became apparent in the census of 1790. The population of 
the northern states was found to be 1,977,000; that of the southern states, 
1,952,000. The admission of Vermont, Kentucky and Tennessee established 
a perfect balance in the senate — eight slave-holding states and eight free 
states, making up the union at the beginning of the century. 
Federalism and Anti-Federalism proved a transitory issue — the great 
fact of sectionalism asserting itself with a dominant earnestness, after 
Hamilton had broken with Madison; and after the pregnant controversy 
of the Secretary of State with the Secretary of the Treasury, across the 
council boards of Washington’s first cabinet. It had cropped out even in 
the selection of that cabinet; it came forth aroused at Hamilton’s fiscal 
proposals; it manifested itself in southern objection to the admission of 
Vermont, and in northern objection to the admission of Kentucky. By 
the end of Washington’s term, the lines were fully and sharply drawn; 
much to the distaste and displeasure of the father of his country, too. In 
his farewell address, he expresses serious concern that “ground should 
have been furnished for characterizing parties by geographical discrimi¬ 
nations,” regarding it as a serious disturbance to the union. Such dis¬ 
criminations appeared in a marked degree when the task of choosing his 
successor was reached. New England gave her solid vote to John Adams. 
The South cast six sevenths of her vote for Thomas Jefferson. Down to 
1840, the same sectional proceeding was rehearsed in every presidential 
contest. 
1 The Lost Principle, by Barbarrossa. Richmond, 1860. The author is supposed to be 
JRobert Scott, of Virginia. 
