Ch. 1.2. Primary Source: “There Will be No End of It,” John Adams, 1776
In this famous letter to James Sullivan, of May 26, 1776, John Adams defends the traditional limitations on voting rights. Adams was then a member of the Massachusetts delegation to the Continental Congress in Philadelphia. James Sullivan was a lawyer and judge who had just been appointed to Massachusetts’ highest court. Sullivan had suggested that the property qualifications for voting be reduced. Adams responded by expanding the discussion to include the possibility of extending suffrage also to women and other disenfranchised groups, but in all likelihood he did not take this possibility seriously.
Our worthy friend, Mr. Gerry has put into my hand, a letter from you, of the Sixth of May, in which you consider the principles of representation and legislation, and give us hints of some alterations, which you seem to think necessary, in the qualification of voters.
I wish, Sir, I could possibly find time, to accompany you, in your investigation of the principles upon which a representative assembly stands and ought to stand…
It is certain in theory, that the only moral foundation of government is the consent of the people. But to what an extent shall we carry this principle? Shall we say, that every individual of the community, old and young, male and female, as well as rich and poor, must consent, expressly to every act of legislation? No, you will say. This is impossible. How then does the right arise in the majority to govern the minority, against their will? Whence arises the right of the men to govern women, without their consent? Whence the right of the old to bind the young, without theirs?
But let us first suppose, that the whole community of every age, rank, sex, and condition, has a right to vote… But why exclude women? You will say, because their delicacy renders them unfit for practice and experience, in the great business of life, and the hardy enterprises of war, as well as the arduous cares of state. Besides, their attention is so much engaged with the necessary nurture of their children, that nature has made them fittest for domestic cares. And children have not judgment or will of their own. True. But will not these reasons apply to others?
Is it not equally true, that men in general in every society, who are wholly destitute of property, are also too little acquainted with public affairs to form a right judgment, and too dependent upon other men to have a will of their own? If this is a fact, if you give to every man, who has no property, a vote, will you not make a fine encouraging provision for corruption by your fundamental law? Such is the frailty of the human heart, that very few men, who have no property, have any judgment of their own. They talk and vote as they are directed by some man of property, who has attached their minds to his interest…
Harrington [James Harrington, the English author of The Commonwealth of Oceana, 1656] has shown that power always follows property. This I believe to be as infallible a maxim, in politics, as that action and reaction are equal is in mechanics… We may advance one step farther and affirm that the balance of power in a society accompanies the balance of property in land. The only possible way then of preserving the balance of power on the side of equal liberty and public virtue, is to make the acquisition of land easy to every member of society: to make a division of the land into small quantities, so that the multitude may be possessed of landed estates…I believe these principles have been felt, if not understood in the Massachusetts Bay, from the beginning…
I would not advise [our people of Massachusetts] to make any alteration in the laws, at present, respecting the qualifications of voters… The same reasoning, which will induce you to admit all men who have no property to vote…, will prove that you ought to admit women and children: for generally speaking, women and children have as good judgment and as independent minds as those men who are wholly destitute of property: these last being to all intents and purposes as much dependent upon others, who will please to feed, clothe, and employ them, as women are upon their husbands, or children on their parents…
Depend upon it, sir, it is dangerous to open so fruitful a source of controversy and altercation, as would be opened by attempting to alter the qualifications of voters. There will be no end of it. New claims will arise. Women will demand a vote. Lads from 12 to 21 will think their rights not enough attended to, and every man, who has not a farthing, will demand an equal voice with any other in all acts of state. It tends to confound and destroy all distinctions, and prostrate all ranks, to one common level.
Source: The Founders’ Constitution (The University of Chicago Press), Volume 1, Chapter 13, Document 10
http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/v1ch13s10.html