The 3/5ths clause? The two-senators-each rule to assure that the slaveholding states would have disproportionate power, and the subsequent battles to prevent new slave-prohibitionist states upsetting the balance? Article 1, section 9 (The migration or importation of such persons as any of the states now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a tax or duty may be imposed on such importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each person)? The necessity of the 13th Amendment? Sanford vs Scott (4. A free negro of the African race, whose ancestors were brought to this country and sold as slaves, is not a "citizen" within the meaning of the Constitution of the United States.
5. When the Constitution was adopted, they were not regarded in any of the States as members of the community which constituted the State, and were not numbered among its "people or citizens." Consequently, the special rights and immunities guarantied to citizens do not apply to them. And not being "citizens" within the meaning of the Constitution, they are not entitled to sue in that character in a court of the United States, and the Circuit Court has not jurisdiction in such a suit.
6. The only two clauses in the Constitution which point to this race treat them as persons whom it was morally lawfully to deal in as articles of property and to hold as slaves.) ?
How does any of this suggest that the purpose of limited government was to protect slaveholders? No one is going to say that allowances weren't made to protect them but the 3/5ths clause has nothing to do with the enumeration of powers or the scope of government. Limited government and slaverights are orthogonal issues and should be treated as such.
