I am beginning to believe that much of this debate over allowing slaves in the territories was not about the freedom of the slaves as it was about limiting the spread of Slavery because of the 3/5 persons rule for determining repersentation.

Certainly the representatives that was afforded the southern states because of the 3/5's rule didn't repersent the slaves in any way, but repersented the interests of those State Governments. Because of the 3/5's rule the southern slave holding states had a greater per capita repersentation for the voter of those states than did the non slave states, except for teh state of New York because of immigrantion. As I said in the post on the subject below according to the Slave population of the 1860 census there would have been 33 repersentatives in the Slave states which were there solely because of that demograph.

Those 33 repersentatives would have nullified the entire electorial vote of the State of New York in the 1860 election of Lincoln. This situation would have been carried into the territories and expanded as long as the 3/5's rule was in effect. Thus the possibility that those states and territories as they became states would eventually out number the repersentatives of the non slave states.

This has always been a problem with our system of determining the repersentation in Congress by counting all persons no matter what their citizenship status and determining the repersentaion upon that figure alone rather than by determining repersentation for just the legal citizens. This was one of the things with New York as a port of entry for immigrantion. Its population figures would naturally be higher than a city, which was not a port of entry.

We are seeing the same results in the south and west in the 2010 census where an estimated 12, to 20,000,000 person of undocumented status have been supposedly counted and now representatives are going to be apportioned to those states where the highest consentrations are accordingly. Which will cause a loss of repersentation in the north and eastern states where fewer of these persons are located.

I believe, to the northern non slave states, the slaves repersented the same type of threat to those northern states, if the practice was allowed to expand or the 3/5's rule, or the practise of slavery itself, was not altoghether abolished. That as the slave population grew, as it naturally would, those states which did not allow slavery would naturally lose more and more repersentation in Congress if it was not stopped in some manner. That populatiion would not be free to move to other states and thereby distribute their influence.

This is another reason that the 14th Amendment had to be passed to make those freed slaves citizens. That group could not be allowed to sit out there and grow larger to be maniputated, because they would have no voice in their repersentation. They had to be given citizenship, to still be manipulated, but so they could become a voting block to elect the "right" repersentatives and return the balance of power to the "proper" level of northern control.

The Northern aim for their War effort was always about Power and Control.