-
(单词翻译:双击或拖选)
THE MAKING OF A NATION - American History Series: Debating Slaves' Part in Representation1 of States
The constitutional convention2 agreed that states with bigger populations would have more members of Congress. But would slaves be counted in that population? Transcript3 of radio broadcast:
05 March 2008
ANNOUNCER:
Welcome to THE MAKING OF A NATION -- American history in VOA Special English.
In May of seventeen eighty-seven, a group of the nation's early leaders opened a convention in Philadelphia. They planned to change the Articles of Confederation, which created a weak union of the thirteen states. Instead, they wrote a new document.
This week in our series, we continue the story of the United States Constitution. Here are Frank Oliver and Tony Riggs.
(MUSIC)
VOICE TWO:
Last week, we told how the convention finally agreed on how states would be represented in the national government.
There would be two houses in the national legislature. In one house -- the House of Representatives -- the number of representatives from each state would depend on the state's population. In the other house -- the Senate -- all states would have an equal number of representatives.
The agreement on representation was known as the "Great Compromise." Not all the delegates4 in Philadelphia were pleased with it. But it saved the convention from failure.
VOICE ONE:
The debate on representation in the House raised an important issue. No one wanted to talk about it. But all the delegates knew they must discuss it. The issue was slavery. If representation was based on population, who would you count? Would you count just free people? Or would you count Negro slaves, too?
There were thousands of slaves in the United States in seventeen eighty-seven. Most lived in southern states. But many could be found in the north, too. And northern ship owners made a lot of money by importing slaves from Africa.
VOICE TWO:
The Articles of Confederation said nothing about slavery. Each state could decide to permit it or not. Massachusetts, for example, had made slavery illegal. Nine other states had stopped importing new slaves. Only three states -- Georgia, North Carolina, and South Carolina -- continued to import slaves.
The issue was never easy to discuss. Some of the most important men in America owned slaves. They included George Washington and James Madison.
No one wanted to insult these men. Yet the convention had to make some decisions about slavery. Slavery affected5 laws on trade and taxes, as well as the question of representation in Congress.
(MUSIC)
VOICE ONE:
During the debate, some delegates argued that slaves were property. They could not be counted for purposes of representation. Others argued that slaves were people and should be counted with everyone else.
Gouverneur Morris of Pennsylvania made an angry speech. "Slavery," he declared, "is an evil institution. It has caused great sadness and poverty in all the states where it is permitted."
Charles Pinckney of South Carolina defended the existence of slavery in the United States. "In all ages," he said, "one half of mankind have been slaves."
George Mason of Virginia, a slave owner, wanted to free all slaves. He said Virginia attempted to do this when it was a British colony. But he said the British government blocked Virginia's attempts. Mason blamed the problem on British businessmen who made money from slavery.
VOICE TWO:
Other delegates rose to denounce6 or defend slavery. But the convention had no power to rule on whether slavery was right or wrong.
Everyone knew the convention would fail if it tried to write a Constitution that banned slavery. The southern states would never accept such a document. They would refuse to join the United States.
Rufus King of Massachusetts said the convention should consider slavery only as a political matter. And that is what happened. The convention accepted several political compromises on the issue.
(MUSIC)
VOICE ONE:
James Wilson of Pennsylvania, for example, proposed a method of counting each state's population for purposes of representation. All white persons and other free citizens would be counted as one each. Every five slaves would be counted only as three persons. This was called the 'three-fifths' rule. The delegates accepted it.
The word 'slave' was never used in the Constitution. It simply used the words 'all other persons.' The 'three-fifths rule' remained law until the Fourteenth Amendment7 to the Constitution was passed in eighteen sixty-eight.
Alexander Hamilton said the three-fifths compromise was necessary. "Without it," he said, "no union could possibly have been formed."
VOICE TWO:
Slavery also became an issue when the convention began discussing the powers of the national legislature. Once again, the question was asked: Are slaves people? Or are they property? The answer would affect import taxes and the growth of new states.
The convention accepted several compromises on these questions, too. It agreed that the national treasury8 could collect a tax of ten dollars for every imported slave. It also agreed that slaves could be imported until the year eighteen-oh-eight. Then no new slaves could be brought into the country.
Until then, each state had the power to make its own decisions about slavery. After eighteen-oh-eight, the national government would make all decisions.
(MUSIC)
VOICE ONE:
As debate on a new Constitution continued through the summer of seventeen eighty-seven, several delegates asked an important question. Who would approve, or ratify9, it?
The state legislatures? The people? Or, as Gouverneur Morris proposed, one big national convention? As always, Elbridge Gerry opposed giving this power to the people. "The people," he said, "have the wildest ideas of government in the world."
VOICE TWO:
James Madison disagreed. He believed the people must ratify their new plan of government. Madison said, "I consider the difference between a system founded on the legislatures only, and one founded on the people, to be the true difference between a treaty and a constitution."
Edmund Randolph of Virginia proposed that state conventions10 should consider the document prepared by the Philadelphia convention. They could offer amendments11, he said. And then another general convention would decide on a final document.
VOICE ONE:
Gouverneur Morris agreed, but for another reason. He said, "I have long wished for another convention that would have the firmness to provide a strong central government…which we are afraid to do."
James Madison hated the idea. Calling another general convention would mean the Philadelphia convention had failed. It would mean the end of all his hard work and hopes. When the debate was over, the delegates agreed that the people should ratify the new Constitution through conventions held in each state.
(MUSIC)
VOICE TWO:
Finally, the delegates had to decide how many 'yes' votes by states would be needed to ratify the Constitution.
Any changes to the Articles of Confederation needed ratification12 by all thirteen states. The Philadelphia convention was called only to change those Articles. So all thirteen would have to approve. This, as several delegates noted13, would be impossible. After all, Rhode Island never sent a representative to Philadelphia. It was sure to reject the Constitution.
Also, as everyone knew, the Philadelphia convention went far past the point of changing the Articles of Confederation. The delegates wrote a completely new plan of government. They could agree to accept ratification by fewer than thirteen states.
VOICE ONE:
Delegates who supported a strong central government acted quickly. They raised the question of numbers. How many states were needed to ratify? By the end of the day, the convention had not decided14. But many of the delegates must have met that night. Early the next day, the convention voted. And the number it agreed on was nine.
The great convention in Philadelphia was nearing the end of its work. It needed only to write out its agreements in final form and sign the document. That will be our story next week.
(MUSIC)
ANNOUNCER:
Our program was written by Christine Johnson and narrated15 by Frank Oliver and Tony Riggs. Join us next week for THE MAKING OF A NATION as we finish the story of the United States Constitution. Transcripts16, MP3s and podcasts of our series are at voaspecialenglish.com.
__
This is program #23 of THE MAKING OF A NATION
The constitutional convention2 agreed that states with bigger populations would have more members of Congress. But would slaves be counted in that population? Transcript3 of radio broadcast:
05 March 2008
ANNOUNCER:
Welcome to THE MAKING OF A NATION -- American history in VOA Special English.
In May of seventeen eighty-seven, a group of the nation's early leaders opened a convention in Philadelphia. They planned to change the Articles of Confederation, which created a weak union of the thirteen states. Instead, they wrote a new document.
This week in our series, we continue the story of the United States Constitution. Here are Frank Oliver and Tony Riggs.
(MUSIC)
VOICE TWO:
Last week, we told how the convention finally agreed on how states would be represented in the national government.
There would be two houses in the national legislature. In one house -- the House of Representatives -- the number of representatives from each state would depend on the state's population. In the other house -- the Senate -- all states would have an equal number of representatives.
The agreement on representation was known as the "Great Compromise." Not all the delegates4 in Philadelphia were pleased with it. But it saved the convention from failure.
VOICE ONE:
The debate on representation in the House raised an important issue. No one wanted to talk about it. But all the delegates knew they must discuss it. The issue was slavery. If representation was based on population, who would you count? Would you count just free people? Or would you count Negro slaves, too?
There were thousands of slaves in the United States in seventeen eighty-seven. Most lived in southern states. But many could be found in the north, too. And northern ship owners made a lot of money by importing slaves from Africa.
VOICE TWO:
The Articles of Confederation said nothing about slavery. Each state could decide to permit it or not. Massachusetts, for example, had made slavery illegal. Nine other states had stopped importing new slaves. Only three states -- Georgia, North Carolina, and South Carolina -- continued to import slaves.
The issue was never easy to discuss. Some of the most important men in America owned slaves. They included George Washington and James Madison.
No one wanted to insult these men. Yet the convention had to make some decisions about slavery. Slavery affected5 laws on trade and taxes, as well as the question of representation in Congress.
(MUSIC)
VOICE ONE:
During the debate, some delegates argued that slaves were property. They could not be counted for purposes of representation. Others argued that slaves were people and should be counted with everyone else.
Gouverneur Morris of Pennsylvania made an angry speech. "Slavery," he declared, "is an evil institution. It has caused great sadness and poverty in all the states where it is permitted."
Charles Pinckney of South Carolina defended the existence of slavery in the United States. "In all ages," he said, "one half of mankind have been slaves."
George Mason of Virginia, a slave owner, wanted to free all slaves. He said Virginia attempted to do this when it was a British colony. But he said the British government blocked Virginia's attempts. Mason blamed the problem on British businessmen who made money from slavery.
VOICE TWO:
Other delegates rose to denounce6 or defend slavery. But the convention had no power to rule on whether slavery was right or wrong.
Everyone knew the convention would fail if it tried to write a Constitution that banned slavery. The southern states would never accept such a document. They would refuse to join the United States.
Rufus King of Massachusetts said the convention should consider slavery only as a political matter. And that is what happened. The convention accepted several political compromises on the issue.
(MUSIC)
VOICE ONE:
James Wilson of Pennsylvania, for example, proposed a method of counting each state's population for purposes of representation. All white persons and other free citizens would be counted as one each. Every five slaves would be counted only as three persons. This was called the 'three-fifths' rule. The delegates accepted it.
The word 'slave' was never used in the Constitution. It simply used the words 'all other persons.' The 'three-fifths rule' remained law until the Fourteenth Amendment7 to the Constitution was passed in eighteen sixty-eight.
Alexander Hamilton said the three-fifths compromise was necessary. "Without it," he said, "no union could possibly have been formed."
VOICE TWO:
Slavery also became an issue when the convention began discussing the powers of the national legislature. Once again, the question was asked: Are slaves people? Or are they property? The answer would affect import taxes and the growth of new states.
The convention accepted several compromises on these questions, too. It agreed that the national treasury8 could collect a tax of ten dollars for every imported slave. It also agreed that slaves could be imported until the year eighteen-oh-eight. Then no new slaves could be brought into the country.
Until then, each state had the power to make its own decisions about slavery. After eighteen-oh-eight, the national government would make all decisions.
(MUSIC)
VOICE ONE:
As debate on a new Constitution continued through the summer of seventeen eighty-seven, several delegates asked an important question. Who would approve, or ratify9, it?
The state legislatures? The people? Or, as Gouverneur Morris proposed, one big national convention? As always, Elbridge Gerry opposed giving this power to the people. "The people," he said, "have the wildest ideas of government in the world."
VOICE TWO:
James Madison disagreed. He believed the people must ratify their new plan of government. Madison said, "I consider the difference between a system founded on the legislatures only, and one founded on the people, to be the true difference between a treaty and a constitution."
Edmund Randolph of Virginia proposed that state conventions10 should consider the document prepared by the Philadelphia convention. They could offer amendments11, he said. And then another general convention would decide on a final document.
VOICE ONE:
Gouverneur Morris agreed, but for another reason. He said, "I have long wished for another convention that would have the firmness to provide a strong central government…which we are afraid to do."
James Madison hated the idea. Calling another general convention would mean the Philadelphia convention had failed. It would mean the end of all his hard work and hopes. When the debate was over, the delegates agreed that the people should ratify the new Constitution through conventions held in each state.
(MUSIC)
VOICE TWO:
Finally, the delegates had to decide how many 'yes' votes by states would be needed to ratify the Constitution.
Any changes to the Articles of Confederation needed ratification12 by all thirteen states. The Philadelphia convention was called only to change those Articles. So all thirteen would have to approve. This, as several delegates noted13, would be impossible. After all, Rhode Island never sent a representative to Philadelphia. It was sure to reject the Constitution.
Also, as everyone knew, the Philadelphia convention went far past the point of changing the Articles of Confederation. The delegates wrote a completely new plan of government. They could agree to accept ratification by fewer than thirteen states.
VOICE ONE:
Delegates who supported a strong central government acted quickly. They raised the question of numbers. How many states were needed to ratify? By the end of the day, the convention had not decided14. But many of the delegates must have met that night. Early the next day, the convention voted. And the number it agreed on was nine.
The great convention in Philadelphia was nearing the end of its work. It needed only to write out its agreements in final form and sign the document. That will be our story next week.
(MUSIC)
ANNOUNCER:
Our program was written by Christine Johnson and narrated15 by Frank Oliver and Tony Riggs. Join us next week for THE MAKING OF A NATION as we finish the story of the United States Constitution. Transcripts16, MP3s and podcasts of our series are at voaspecialenglish.com.
__
This is program #23 of THE MAKING OF A NATION
点击
收听单词发音
收听单词发音 |
1
representation
|
|
| n.表现某人（或某事物）的东西，图画，雕塑 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
2
convention
|
|
| n.惯例，习俗，常规，会议，大会 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
3
transcript
|
|
| n.抄本，誊本，副本，肄业证书 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
4
delegates
|
|
| 代表，代表团成员( delegate的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
5
affected
|
|
| adj.不自然的，假装的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
6
denounce
|
|
| vt.谴责，声讨，告发 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
7
amendment
|
|
| n.改正，修正，改善，修正案 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
8
treasury
|
|
| n.宝库；国库，金库；文库 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
9
ratify
|
|
| v.批准，认可，追认 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
10
conventions
|
|
| （某一职业、政党等的人士召开的）大会( convention的名词复数 )； 协议； 习俗； （美国）全国代表大会 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
11
amendments
|
|
| （法律、文件的）改动( amendment的名词复数 )； 修正案； 修改； （美国宪法的）修正案 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
12
ratification
|
|
| n.批准，认可 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
13
noted
|
|
| adj.著名的，知名的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
14
decided
|
|
| adj.决定了的，坚决的；明显的，明确的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
15
narrated
|
|
| v.故事( narrate的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
16
transcripts
|
|
| n.抄本（ transcript的名词复数 ）；转写本；文字本；副本 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
购买
在百度中搜索