=Attacks on the Restricted Suffrage.=—­The changing circumstances of American life, however, soon challenged the rule of those with property.  Prominent among the new forces were the rising mercantile and business interests.  Where the freehold qualification was applied, business men who did not own land were deprived of the vote and excluded from office.  In New York, for example, the most illiterate farmer who had one hundred pounds’ worth of land could vote for state senator and governor, while the landless banker or merchant could not.  It is not surprising, therefore, to find business men taking the lead in breaking down freehold limitations on the suffrage.  The professional classes also were interested in removing the barriers which excluded many of them from public affairs.  It was a schoolmaster, Thomas Dorr, who led the popular uprising in Rhode Island which brought the exclusive rule by freeholders to an end.

In addition to the business and professional classes, the mechanics of the towns showed a growing hostility to a system of government that generally barred them from voting or holding office.  Though not numerous, they had early begun to exercise an influence on the course of public affairs.  They had led the riots against the Stamp Act, overturned King George’s statue, and “crammed stamps down the throats of collectors.”  When the state constitutions were framed they took a lively interest, particularly in New York City and Philadelphia.  In June, 1776, the “mechanicks in union” in New York protested against putting the new state constitution into effect without their approval, declaring that the right to vote on the acceptance or rejection of a fundamental law “is the birthright of every man to whatever state he may belong.”  Though their petition was rejected, their spirit remained.  When, a few years later, the federal Constitution was being framed, the mechanics watched the process with deep concern; they knew that one of its main objects was to promote trade and commerce, affecting directly their daily bread.  During the struggle over ratification, they passed resolutions approving its provisions and they often joined in parades organized to stir up sentiment for the Constitution, even though they could not vote for members of the state conventions and so express their will directly.  After the organization of trade unions they collided with the courts of law and thus became interested in the election of judges and lawmakers.

Those who attacked the old system of class rule found a strong moral support in the Declaration of Independence.  Was it not said that all men are created equal?  Whoever runs may read.  Was it not declared that governments derive their just power from the consent of the governed?  That doctrine was applied with effect to George III and seemed appropriate for use against the privileged classes of Massachusetts or Virginia.  “How do the principles thus proclaimed,” asked the non-freeholders of Richmond, in petitioning for the ballot, “accord with the existing regulation of the suffrage?  A regulation which, instead of the equality nature ordains, creates an odious distinction between members of the same community ... and vests in a favored class, not in consideration of their public services but of their private possessions, the highest of all privileges.”