when so acquired, would be a violation of that equality which is guaranteed to all, inasmuch as it would deprive them of the equal fruits of their own equal rights. When a person is lawfully appointed to any office of honor or profit, he is entitled to all the emoluments of his office; and as these emoluments are not common to all the people, he possesses certain rights, by virtue of his office, which are not common to all. But this causes no violation of the principle of equality. The equality in this instance, consists in the right of all to qualify themselves for the enjoyment of these offices and emoluments; and in the actual enjoyment of them, when conferred according to law and the constitution. Every citizen of the United States may claim a right, on the principle of natural equality, to hold and exercise the office of President of the United States without possessing the necessary qualifications, on precisely the same ground that he can claim a right to vote in elections without possessing the suitable qualifications. In either case, the wisdom of the people, acting in their sovereign capacity, must decide what qualifications shall be required.

It is apparent, from the foregoing remarks, that the asserted principle of equality by no means warrants the inference that all persons have a right to vote in public affairs and elections without any restriction as to qualifications. On the contrary it will appear upon farther examination, that such a general application of the principle would produce an unjust inequality among the various members of society; and would be injurious, perhaps fatal, to the public interests.

Men possess very various talents and acquirements; and if they are equally protected in the exercise of them, and in the enjoyment of the fruits of them, this equal protection will produce an inequality in their condition and the welfare of society requires that it should be so. If it were not so, the stimulus to enterprise and exertion, which has done, and is still doing, so much to beautify, enrich, and strengthen our country, would be paralyzed; and instead of the rapid progress which we are now making to greatness and power, we should witness decay and ruin. But the laws and institutions of society ought to be such that all persons may avail themselves of their fair equal rights and advantages; and of their talents, acquirements and personal merits; and such as shall prevent monopolies and entailments of property or privileges in the hands of individuals, or associations of men, or families. The general good of society; a due regard to the democratic principles of our government, and of the equal rights of its members, require this.

But in the division of power between the general government, and the State governments, the regulation of these things was left, principally, within the jurisdiction of the latter. And they have generally, or at least in some important respects, carried these principles into effect, by causing an equal division of intestate estates among the heirs, and by preventing entailments of property. Whether they have adopted the true principle as to monopolies of privileges in the hands of individuals and associations of men, presents a subject of interesting enquiry, the examination of which does not fall within the scope of this treatise.

CHAPTER VI.

A Historical Review of the Right of Suffrage, according to the Constitutions of the United States and of the several States.

The constitution of the United States does not prescribe the qualification of electors, in any case. It provides that the electors of members of the house of representatives in Congress "in each State shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislature."* These qaulifications are left to be prescribed and regulated wholly by the constitutions and laws of the several States. There is no other officer or member of the general government of the United States, who is elected directly by the votes of the people, but representatives to Congress. It would have been well, on many accounts, if the qualifications of the electors of all the elective officers and of the members of conventions for forming and amending the constitutions, both of the general and State governments, had been prescribed and established by the constitution of the United States. This would have made the qualifications for the right of suffrage uniform throughout the country; and would have made the elective franchise a right to be appreciated and sought for, as a valuable American privilege, by all classes of people. And it would have become an estimable and known standard of citizenship;

* Art. 1, sec. 2.

or, as the right has been considered and treated in some of the States, it would have given to its possessors the honorable appellation of freemen of the United States.

We recur to the principles of our glorious revolution as the correct and standard principles of our government; and very justly so: for the history of the world does not present an example of more pure, enlightened and disinterested patriotism than was exhibited by the great men of the revolution of 1776. The actors, in that revolution, were the men who formed the constitutions of the thirteen old original States which achieved the revolution. It may be interesting, therefore, to review the provisions made by the conventions of the people in those States, on the subject of the right of suffrage, at and near the period of the revolution; and to compare them with the later provisions on that subject, in the same States and in the new States.

New Hampshire. A convention assembled in 1775, agreed that "each elector should possess a real estate of twenty pounds value."*

By the constitution of October 1783, every male inhabitant of twenty-one years of age, paying for himself a poll tax, had a right to vote in the town or parish where he dwelt, for senators and representatives.

By the constitution of 1792, part 2, every male inhabitant of twenty-one years of age, excepting paupers and persons excused from paying taxes at

* 2 Belknap's Hist. New Hampshire, 398.

their own request, are admitted to vote in the town or parish where they dwell, for senators and representatives.

Massachusetts. By the constitution of 1780, ch. 1, sec. 2, art. 2, every male inhabitant of twenty-one years of age, having a freehold estate within the State of the annual income of three pounds, or any estate of sixty pounds, had a right to give his vote for the senators for the district of which he was an inhabitant. And by ch. 1, sec. 2, art. 4, every male person of twenty-one years of age, being a resident of any town in the State one year next preceding the election, and having the like qualifications as to property, had a right to vote for a representative or representatives in the same town.

66

By an alteration of the constitution made in 1820, (Amendments, art. 3) " every male citizen of twenty one years of age and upwards, (excepting paupers and persons under guardianship) who shall have resided within the commonwealth one year, and within the town or district in which he may claim a right to vote, six callendar months, next preceding any election of governor, lieutenant governor, senators, or representatives, and who shall have paid, by himself or his parent, master or guardian, any State or county tax which shall, within two years next preceding such election, have been assessed upon him, in any town or district of this commonwealth; and also every citizen who shall be by law exempted from taxation, and who shall be, in all other respects qualified as above mentioned, shall have a right to vote in such