Answer: the representation of states in Congress.
<em>The Great Compromise and the Three-Fifths Compromise both focused on </em><em>the representation of states in Congress.</em>
Both of these compromises were devised during the United States Constitutional Convention in 1787. The Great Compromise resolved a dispute between small population states and large population states. The large population states wanted representation in Congress to be based on a state's population size. The smaller states feared this would lead to unchecked dominance by the big states; they wanted all states to receive the same amount of representation. The Great Compromise created a bicameral (two-chamber) legislature. Representation in the House of Representatives would be based on population. In the Senate, all states would have the same amount of representation, by two Senators.
The Three-Fifths Compromise was a way of accounting (somewhat) for the population of slaves in states that permitted slavery. For taxation and representation purposes, the question was whether slaves should count in the population figures. (They were not considered voting citizens at that time.) The Three-Fifths Compromise said that three out of every five slaves could be counted when determining a state's population size for determining how many seats that state would receive in the House of Representatives.
One similarity between the US Constitution and the States' Constitutions is that all of the states have a supreme court, congress, and executive office.
Being the oldest and most effective original telegram, beacon towers are
the most important component of the defensive project on the Great
Wall. They are built continually to pass military messages. In ancient
times, if intruders approached, soldiers on the wall would create smoke
in the daytime and light a fire at night to warn their troops.
Answer:
Sectionalism is the belief that a person's region was superior to other sections of the country. The most sectional tension was between the North and South, but the West was also developing an identity of its own and was willing to side with either of the other sections if it would help them grow.
