The economic crisis spawned debates throughout the country about the political system and its responsiveness to all classes of American citizens. The New York constitutional convention of 1821 included a committee that reviewed the state’s voting laws and considered implementing “universal suffrage,” that is, granting voting rights to all white men regardless of wealth or property. The committee heard testimony from supporters and opponents of property qualifications for voting. Chief Justice and Chancellor James Kent of New York argued in favor of property qualifications.

I have reflected upon the report of the select committee with attention and with anxiety. We appear to be disregarding the principles of the constitution, under which we have so long and so happily lived, and to be changing some of its essential institutions. . . .

The tendency of universal suffrage is to jeopardize the rights of property and the principles of liberty. . . .

The notion that every man that works a day on the road, or serves an idle hour in the militia, is entitled as of right to an equal participation in the whole power of the government is most unreasonable and has no foundation in justice. We had better at once discard from the report such a nominal test of merit. If such persons have an equal share in one branch of the legislature, it is surely as much as they can in justice or policy demand. Society is an association for the protection of property as well as of life, and the individual who contributes only one cent to the common stock ought not to have the same power and influence in directing the property concerns of the partnership as he who contributes his thousands. He will not have the same inducements to care, and diligence, and fidelity. His inducements and his temptation would be to divide the whole capital upon the principles of agrarian law [to ensure a more equal distribution of land to all classes].

Liberty, rightly understood, is an inestimable blessing, but liberty without wisdom, and without justice, is no better than wild and savage licentiousness. The danger which we have hereafter to apprehend, is not the want, but the abuse, of liberty. We have to apprehend the oppression of minorities, and a disposition to encroach on private right—to disturb chartered privileges—and to weaken, degrade, and overawe the administration of justice; we have to apprehend the establishment of unequal, and consequently, unjust systems of taxation, and all the mischiefs of a crude and mutable legislation. A stable senate, exempted from the influence of universal suffrage, will powerfully check these dangerous propensities.

Source: Report of the Proceedings and Debates of the Convention of 1821 (Albany, 1821), 219, 221–22.