Final answer:
Southerners argued that the Constitution supported slavery based on provisions like the Three-Fifths Compromise, which counted a portion of the enslaved population for representation and taxation, and clauses that prevented Congressional interference with the slave trade and required the drafting of fugitive slave laws.
Step-by-step explanation:
Southerners during the period of the Missouri Debate argued that the framers of the Constitution supported slavery, pointing to provisions within the text which bolstered their position. Notably, the Three-Fifths Compromise found in Article 1, Section 2 of the Constitution, allowed for a fraction of the enslaved population to be counted for legislative representation and direct taxation purposes.
This effectively gave southern white men overrepresentation in Congress. The compromise stated that 'Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several states ... according to their respective Number, which shall be determined by adding to the whole number of free Persons...and three fifths of all other persons.' This provision led to additional political power for slave states without recognizing the full humanity of the enslaved.
The Constitution also included other clauses that gave legal protection to slavery. It prohibited Congress from interfering with the trans-Atlantic slave trade before 1808 and enabled the creation of fugitive slave laws, which required the return of escaped slaves to their owners, further entrenching the institution of slavery.
The debates and eventual compromises within the Constitution, including the Three-Fifths Compromise, reflect the conflicting views and political power struggles of the time. The Constitutional framers managed to create a document that supported slavery, while many had personal reservations about the institution, as evidenced by their conscious choice to avoid the term 'slave' in the text of the Constitution.