(单词翻译:单击)
听力文本
Last week, we told how the convention finally agreed on how states would be represented in the national government. There would be two houses in the national legislature. In one house -- the House of Representatives -- the number of representatives from each state would depend on the state's population. In the other house -- the Senate -- all states would have an equal number of representatives. The agreement on representation was known as the "Great Compromise." Not all the delegates in Philadelphia were pleased with it. But it saved the convention from failure. The debate on representation in the House raised an important issue. No one wanted to talk about it. But all the delegates knew they must discuss it. The issue was slavery. If representation was based on population, who would you count? Would you count just free people? Or would you count Negro slaves, too? There were thousands of slaves in the United States in seventeen eighty-seven. Most lived in southern states.
But many could be found in the north, too. And northern ship owners made a lot of money by importing slaves from Africa. The Articles of Confederation said nothing about slavery. Each state could decide to permit it or not. Massachusetts, for example, had made slavery illegal. Nine other states had stopped importing new slaves. Only three states -- Georgia, North Carolina, and South Carolina -- continued to import slaves. The issue was never easy to discuss. Some of the most important men in America owned slaves. They included George Washington and James Madison. No one wanted to insult these men. Yet the convention had to make some decisions about slavery. Slavery affected laws on trade and taxes, as well as the question of representation in Congress. During the debate, some delegates argued that slaves were property. They could not be counted for purposes of representation. Others argued that slaves were people and should be counted with everyone else. Gouverneur Morris of Pennsylvania made an angry speech. "Slavery," he declared, "is an evil institution.
It has caused great sadness and poverty in all the states where it is permitted." Charles Pinckney of South Carolina defended the existence of slavery in the United States. "In all ages," he said, "one half of mankind have been slaves." George Mason of Virginia, a slave owner, wanted to free all slaves. He said Virginia attempted to do this when it was a British colony. But he said the British government blocked Virginia's attempts. Mason blamed the problem on British businessmen who made money from slavery. Other delegates rose to denounce or defend slavery. But the convention had no power to rule on whether slavery was right or wrong. Everyone knew the convention would fail if it tried to write a Constitution that banned slavery. The southern states would never accept such a document. They would refuse to join the United States. Rufus King of Massachusetts said the convention should consider slavery only as a political matter. And that is what happened. The convention accepted several political compromises on the issue. James Wilson of Pennsylvania, for example, proposed a method of counting each state's population for purposes of representation. All white persons and other free citizens would be counted as one each. Every five slaves would be counted only as three persons. This was called the 'three-fifths' rule. The delegates accepted it.
The word 'slave' was never used in the Constitution. It simply used the words 'all other persons.' The 'three-fifths rule' remained law until the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution was passed in eighteen sixty-eight. Alexander Hamilton said the three-fifths compromise was necessary. "Without it," he said, "no union could possibly have been formed." Slavery also became an issue when the convention began discussing the powers of the national legislature. Once again, the question was asked: Are slaves people? Or are they property? The answer would affect import taxes and the growth of new states. The convention accepted several compromises on these questions, too. It agreed that the national treasury could collect a tax of ten dollars for every imported slave. It also agreed that slaves could be imported until the year eighteen-oh-eight. Then no new slaves could be brought into the country. Until then, each state had the power to make its own decisions about slavery. After eighteen-oh-eight, the national government would make all decisions. As debate on a new Constitution continued through the summer of seventeen eighty-seven, several delegates asked an important question. Who would approve, or ratify, it? The state legislatures? The people?
Or, as Gouverneur Morris proposed, one big national convention? As always, Elbridge Gerry opposed giving this power to the people. "The people," he said, "have the wildest ideas of government in the world." James Madison disagreed. He believed the people must ratify their new plan of government. Madison said, "I consider the difference between a system founded on the legislatures only, and one founded on the people, to be the true difference between a treaty and a constitution." Edmund Randolph of Virginia proposed that state conventions should consider the document prepared by the Philadelphia convention. They could offer amendments, he said. And then another general convention would decide on a final document. Gouverneur Morris agreed, but for another reason. He said, "I have long wished for another convention that would have the firmness to provide a strong central government...which we are afraid to do." James Madison hated the idea. Calling another general convention would mean the Philadelphia convention had failed.
It would mean the end of all his hard work and hopes. When the debate was over, the delegates agreed that the people should ratify the new Constitution through conventions held in each state. Finally, the delegates had to decide how many 'yes' votes by states would be needed to ratify the Constitution. Any changes to the Articles of Confederation needed ratification by all thirteen states. The Philadelphia convention was called only to change those Articles. So all thirteen would have to approve. This, as several delegates noted, would be impossible. After all, Rhode Island never sent a representative to Philadelphia. It was sure to reject the Constitution. Also, as everyone knew, the Philadelphia convention went far past the point of changing the Articles of Confederation. The delegates wrote a completely new plan of government. They could agree to accept ratification by fewer than thirteen states. Delegates who supported a strong central government acted quickly. They raised the question of numbers. How many states were needed to ratify? By the end of the day, the convention had not decided. But many of the delegates must have met that night. Early the next day, the convention voted. And the number it agreed on was nine. The great convention in Philadelphia was nearing the end of its work. It needed only to write out its agreements in final form and sign the document. That will be our story next week.
重点解析
1.agreed on 约定的，公认的
Either his boss or his colleagues agreed on this.
不论是他的老板还是他的同事都同意这点。
2.By the end of 到……结束时
However, by the end of the semester, I noticed the more principles I applied to my work, the better the animation.
然而，到学期结束的时候，我注意到如果在我的作品中应用的这些原则越多，动画就越好。
3.national convention 全国代表大会
Next week, it will be the Republicans turn to go after Democrats at their National Convention in Minnesota.
下个星期该轮到共和党在明尼苏达举行全国代表大会上攻击民主党了。
4.for purposes of 为了
For purposes of scalability, the server side does not store the state information of the client.
为了增强可伸缩性，服务器端不存储客户机的状态信息。
5.as well as 也；和…一样；不但…而且
She can play tennis as well as basketball.
她也会打篮球，也会打网球。
参考译文
上周，我们讲述了大会最终就国会代表权问题达成共识。国会将由两个议院组成。众议院——各州的众议员人数将取决于该州的人口。参议院——各州的参议院人数相等。关于国会代表权的协议被称为“大妥协”。该协议虽然不能令费城的所有代表感到满意，但却使大会免于失败。关于众议院代表权问题涉及另一重要问题。虽然没有人愿意提及这一问题。但是所有的代表都知道他们必须讨论这个问题，就是奴隶制。如果议员人数按人口的话，那怎么计算呢，只包括自由人士吗？或者黑奴也计算在内吗?1787年，美国有成千上万的黑奴。大多数人住在南部各州，但是在北方也能找到很多。北方的船主通过从非洲进口奴隶大发横财。《联邦条例》对奴隶制只字未提，各州自行决定是否允许奴隶制度的存在。例如，马萨诸塞州将奴隶制定为非法。其它九个州已经停止进口新奴隶。只有三个州——乔治亚州、北卡罗来纳州和南卡罗来纳州——继续进口奴隶。这个问题讨论起来非常棘手。美国一些重要人士，包括乔治·华盛顿和詹姆斯·麦迪逊都是奴隶主。没有人想冒犯这些人，然而，大会必须就奴隶制做出决定。奴隶制影响了有关贸易和税收的法律以及在国会的代表权问题。在辩论中，一些代表认为奴隶是个人财产，不能算在议员代表人数之内。
另一些人认为，奴隶也是人，应该和其他人一样计算在内。宾夕法尼亚州的古韦努尔·莫里斯发表了愤怒的讲话。他宣称：“奴隶制是一种邪恶的制度，它给所有允许奴隶制存在的州带来了巨大的悲伤和贫困。”南卡罗来纳州的查尔斯·平克尼为美国奴隶制的存在进行了辩护。他说：“古往今来，一半的人类都是奴隶。”弗吉尼亚州的奴隶主乔治·梅森想要解放所有的奴隶。他说在英国殖民时期，弗吉尼亚就试图这么做。但是却遭到了英国政府的阻止。梅森将其归咎于从奴隶制度中盈利的英国商人。其他代表则站起来谴责或捍卫奴隶制度。但是大会没有权力决定奴隶制是对是错。所有人都知道，如果试图将禁止奴隶制写进宪法，那么大会将以失败告终。南部各州决不会接受这样一份文件，他们将拒绝加入美国。马萨诸塞州的鲁弗斯·金表示，大会应该将奴隶制作为一个政治问题来考虑。大会在这一问题上接受了好几个政治妥协。例如，宾夕法尼亚州的詹姆斯·威尔逊就提出了一种计算各州人口的方法，以便代表各州。所有白人和其他自由公民按一个人来计算。每五个奴隶只能算作三个人。这就是所谓的“五分之三”规则。代表们予以接受。宪法中从未使用过“奴隶”一词，它只是简单地使用了“所有其他人”这个词。
“五分之三规则”直至1868年宪法第十四条修正案通过才失效。亚历山大·汉密尔顿表示，“五分之三”规则的妥协是必要的，他说，“没有它，美国就不可能组成联盟。”当大会开始讨论国会权力时，奴隶制也是一个问题。又有人问：奴隶是人吗?或者它们是财产?这一问题的答案将影响进口税和新州的发展。大会在这些问题上也接受了一些妥协。同意国库委员会可以对每一个进口奴隶征收10美元的税。还同意奴隶进口的期限为1808年。这样就不会有新的奴隶被带到这个国家。在此之前，各州都有权自行决定奴隶制。1808年后，联邦政府将拥有决定权。当关于新宪法的辩论持续到1787年夏天时，几位代表提出一重要问题。由谁来批准呢?州议会?或者像高维纽尔·莫里斯提议的那样，举行一次大型全国代表大会?埃尔布里奇·格里一如既往地反对把权力交给人民。他说：“人民对政府的想法是最荒诞不经的。”詹姆斯·麦迪逊不同意，他认为新的政府计划必须得到人们的批准。麦迪逊表示：“我认为，建立在国会基础上的制度与建立在人民基础上的制度之间的区别才是条约与宪法之间的区别。”弗吉尼亚州的埃德蒙·伦道夫提议，各州召开大会商定制宪大会的文件。他们可以提出修改意见，然后由全体大会定夺。
古韦努尔·莫里斯同意了，但出于其他原因。他表示：“我早就希望有一个大会能够决心成立一个强大的中央政府……这是我们害怕做的。”詹姆斯·麦迪逊讨厌这一主张，如果再召开一次大会，就意味着制宪大会失败。这将意味着他所有努力和希望都将落空。辩论结束后，代表们一致认为，应该在各州举行会议，由人民批准新宪法。最后，代表们必须决定各州需要多少张赞成票才能批准宪法。对《联邦条例》的任何修改都需得到13个州的批准。召开制宪大会只是为了修改这些条款，13个州都得同意。正如几位代表指出的那样，这是不可能的，毕竟，罗德岛州从来没有派代表去费城。它肯定会反对。而且，大家都知道，制宪大会绝非只是修改《联邦条例》。代表们起草了一份全新的政府计划，他们一致同意，可以不需要得到13个州的批准。支持强大中央政府的代表们迅速采取行动，他们提出了议员代表人数的问题。需要多少个州批准?到那天结束时，大会还没有作出决定。但许多代表那天晚上肯定见过面。第二天一早，大会进行了投票，最后决定只需得到九个州的批准。制宪大会即将结束。只需要落实成文字并签署文件。这将是我们下周的故事。
译文为可可英语翻译，未经授权请勿转载！
