Replication data for: Reconsidering the Great Compromise at the Federal Convention of 1787: Deliberation and Agenda Effects on the Senate and Slavery

Abstract

Conventional accounts of the Federal Convention of 1787 point to the many different compromises made at the convention, specifically the Great Compromise on representation and the Three-fifths Compromise on slavery. Often these compromises are treated as separate events, the result of deliberation leading to moderation of delegate positions (presumably among the key states of Massachusetts and North Carolina). However, by applying the techniques of roll call analysis we find this traditional account is at best incomplete and probably misleading. While the Massachusetts delegation’s behavior seems consistent with a moderation hypothesis, we find evidence that the other crucial vote for the Great Compromise — from North Carolina—is inconsistent with moderation, but can be linked through the agenda to the Three-fifths Compromise over slavery, taxation and representation. We conclude by arguing that this reconsideration of some of the convention’s key votes should cause political scientists and historians to reevaluate how they see the compromises at the convention