Virginians Voting in the Colonial Period; Wm. and Mary Qrtly., Vol. 6, No. 1, 1897 Transcribed by Kathy Merrill for the USGenWeb Archives Special Collections Project ************************************************************************ USGENWEB ARCHIVES NOTICE: These electronic pages may NOT be reproduced in any format for profit or presentation by any other organization or persons. Persons or organizations desiring to use this material, must obtain the written consent of the contributor, or the legal representative of the submitter, and contact the listed USGenWeb archivist with proof of this consent. The submitter has given permission to the USGenWeb Archives to store the file permanently for free access. http://www.usgwarchives.net *********************************************************************** Virginians Voting in the Colonial Period Lyon G. Tyler William and Mary College Quarterly Historical Magazine, Vol. 6, No. 1, (Jul., 1897), pp. 7-13. VIRGINIANS VOTING IN THE COLONIAL PERIOD(1). BY THE EDITOR In the issue of the New York Nation for April 27, 1893, occurs an interesting communication from Dr. J. F. Jameson, of Brown University, bearing the above title. The writer attempts to answer the question, "To what extent had Virginia politics already become democratic in the period just preceding the outbreak of the Revolution?" The mode adopted by him is practical, and leads him to the deduction that "either the ballot was wider in Virginia than elsewhere, or there was a fuller participation in its exercise." He rightly discredits the assumption of many New England writers that "the Virginia democracy was the product of the Revolutionary movement, or the invention of Thomas Jefferson". In reaching this conclusion, Dr. Jameson acknowledges the difficulty felt by him, in common with other writers of the North, in under- standing "the existence, side by side, of aristocratic social institutions and democratic political theories." I may observe that perhaps "the puzzle" to which Dr. Jameson thus refers is due to a mis- apprehension of hte conditions of southern life. The existence of aristocratic institutions accords no real difficulty, if we keep in mind that they were, essentially, mere forms, which did not vitally interfere with the "political theories". The democratic spirit in the life of Virgnia was progressive, and long antecedent to the American Revolution. If we begin with the charter of 1606, which lodged all power in the hands of the king, we observe the creative power of democracy speedily producing the charters of 1609 and 1612, which made the body of the stockholders participants in the authority, and seven years later, in 1619, the whole body of the colonists. The General Assembly in 1619 was dominated by a spirit as free as that of an English Parliament, and in 1624 it made haste to claim the exclusive power of laying teaxes. From this time on, no matter what the institutions, the spirit of the democracy continued in the same lines of political equality. There were two circumstances which emphasized this character in the colony. The first was the isolated lives led by the colonists, and the second was the growth of slavery of the negro race. Isolation promoted self-confidence and self-reliance, and negro slavery __________________________________________ (1) Read before the Virginia Historical Society Dec. 18, 1894. Page 8. made race, and not class, the distinction in social life. The Vriginian was a democrat because he was servant or slave to no man. I speak now more particularly of the eighteenth century, when the white servants had ceased to be imported in any great numbers. It must not be for- gotten that if, as alleged, slavery tended to produce a disparity between the estates of the inhabitants, it also confirmed the independence of all white people; for if the rich relied entirely upon the negro as laborer, the poor man was necessarily compelled to be independent of both. In the South to-day, every white man, no matter what his occupation, has to be ad- dresed as "Mister", which is not the case in the North, where the menial duties are performed by white servants. Viewed in this light, the puzzle ceases to be a difficult one. There was, it is true, a governor appointed by the crown, a council of wealthy planters who enjoyed the chief offices, fair ladies who wore costly silks, and gay cavaliers who carried silver-headed canes and wore imposing wigs; but they were as a drop in the bucket by the side of that mighty power of the democracy which swayed the Assembly, and which at times swept governor, council, and burgesses from their places. All the early travellers who published books upon Virginia - Rev. Hugh Jones (1724), Rev. Andrew Burnaby (1759), J. F. D. Smyth (1773), and John Davis(1) (1798) - are unanimous in speaking of the "haughtiness" and "independence" of the white inhabitants. The real poor class, according to Smythe, was "less in number than anywhere in the world", a sentiment which had been previously affirmed by Beverley(2) (1705); but even of these it might be said that, being entirely independent, having nothing to gain and nothing to lose from their richer neighbors, they were absolutely free from servility. This spirit of independence made the southern troops in the late war the admiration of hte world; but it had its drawbacks in begetting a loose system of discipline. Political freedom was carried into the army, and could only be satisfied by permitting the soldiers to elect their own officers. ____________________________________________________ (1) "The higher Virginians seem to venerate themselves as men, and I am persuaded there was not one in the company who would have felt embarrassed at being admitted to the presence and conversation of the greatest monarch on earth". = Davis' Travels. (2) "I remember the time when L5 were left by a charitable testator to the poor of the parish he lived in, and it lay nine years before the executors could find one poor enough to accept of this legacy; but at last it was given to an old woman; so that this, in truth, may be termed the best poor man's country in the world". - Beverley's History of Virginia. (1705). Page 9. The history of the ballot in Virginia begins with the General Assembly that met at Jamestown in 1691. From this period on to 1670 the right of suffrage was, with the exception of one election, exercised by the whole body of freemen, without distinction of religion, or, as far as we know, of race, color, or other condition. At first every plantation or settlement was entitled to the suffrage; and when counties were created, not only every county, but every parish of a county, was represented. Voting was looked upon not only as a right, but as a duty, and Virginia is the only one of the colonies that throughout its colonial life made voting compulsory. This was in marked contrast with Massachusetts and the New Haven colony, which made membership of the dominant church the qualification to vote. During this time, and for many years later, a religious aristocracy prevailed in New England. Writing in 1676, Edward Randolph said that "whosoever are of the magistracy in Massachusetts continue till death, by the aid of a law requiring the former magistrates to be first put to the vote." The first attempted restriction on the ballot in Virginia occurred in 1655, during the period of the Commonwealth. But, though it showed that Puritanism was far from meaning re- publicanism, it was repealed the next session. At length, in 1670, the burgesses, who had ceased to be representative by being continued by Berkeley ten years in office, made the permanent restriction of a freehold. But, as the law did not define the extent of the freehold, the restriction, for many years, was apparent rather than real. Governor Spotswood complained, in 1713, that "any one can vote, though just out of the condition of a servant, and that can but purchase half an acre of ground". Not till 1736 did the freehold qualification become de- fined. Then the qualification was made one hundred acres without a house, and twenty-five acres with a house, or the ownership of a house and lot in any town. This was, however, modified in 1769 by substituting fifty acres for one hundred acres in the case where there was no house. Compare the restrictions imposed by these laws with those in the New England colonies. In Massachusetts the property qualification after 1691, when the old charter was abrogated, was a freehold of forty shillings per annum, or other estate to the value of forty shillings(1). But the forms of election in these colonies, ____________________________________________________ (1) The one hundred acres prescribed by law of Virginia might be sandy beach or marsh land, utterly unremunerative. Forty shillings in 1691 were equal to L10 now. Page 10. which were very complicated, continued a greater hindrance to the free ballot than the nominal condition of voting. In Connecticut the custom of giving preference tot he magistrates in office continued down to 1818. And in Rhode Island it took a rebellion in 1842 to bring about any relaxation of the ancient charter, which was aristocratic in every feature(1). But what proportion of the white people in Virginia really voted? Dr. Jameson shows that in the elections on the State Constitution in 1778, 1779, and 1780 the total vote cast in Mas- sachusetts was about five per cent of the population, though it is probable that about sixteen per cent possessed the franchise; that in voting for governor in 1780 about three per cent of the population participated, in the next six years, about two per cent; that Shays' Rebellion and the discussion about the Federal elections brought the figure up to five per cent in the three elections, and that then it sank between three and four per cent and there remained till 1794, and the disputes engendered by the French Revolution. How does the vote in Virginia compare with this showing? Regretting the fact that he has been unable to find figures re- specting elections in Massachusetts in the strictly colonial period, but assuming that the freedom of election was quite as great in that period as in the period covered, Dr. Jameson proceeds to give some statistics regarding strictly colonial elections in Virginia, with the result mentioned in the beginning of this paper. Taking the calculation of Governor Dinwiddie that the white population was four times(2) the white tithables, which term includes all white males above sixteen, he applies this proportion to elections held in Spotsylvania in 1748; Westmoreland, 1748, 1752, 1754, and 1755; Frederick, 1757, 1758, and 1761; Surry in 1772; Fairfax, 1744, 1765, and 1768; and Fauquier, 1769 - thirteen cases in all. Summing up all the cases, he finds that if they are to be taken as a fair guide, about six per cent of the white inhabitants of colonial Virginia voted at the elections for the House of Burgesses in the last decades of the colonial period. This was a larger proportion than was usual in Massachusetts and other parts ___________________________________________________ (1) For the workings of the ballot in New England, see Bishop's Colonial Elections, Pro- fessor Baldwin's Early History of the Ballot in Connecticut. - American Historical Society Papers, Vol. IV., p. 81. (2) Under the census of 1790, which states the white males over sixteen years, this proportion is found to be remarkably correct. (See Higginbotham's America). Page 11. of America at a period a little later, with a sufficient margin to allow for the possibility that the populations assumed by Dr. Jameson are underestimates. Now my own examination of the records has possessed me with some figures which strengthen Dr. Jameson's conclusions. In Elizabeth City county, at a poll held July 11, 1758, Col. John Tabb received 76 votes; Capt. William Wager, 95 votes; Capt. Cary Selden 37 votes; Capt. Richard Sweeney, 13 votes; Robert Brough, 2 votes; George Wythe, 8 votes; and Mr. William Armistead, 11 votes; in al, 242. As each person voted for two delegates, the number exercising the suffrage in Elizabeth City in 1758 were half of 242, or 121. If we now compare with the number of white tithables given by Dinwiddie for the year 1757, which is 361, we find that thirty-three per cent of the number of tithables voted, or dividing by four, about eight per cent of the whole white population. In King George county in 1758 the vote for Thomas Ludwell Lee, Esq., was 213; for William Fitzhugh, 153, and for Thompson Mason, 174. As each voter cast two votes, this poll repre- sented 270 electors, which number is thirteen and one half per cent of the white population in 1757. A poll in Lancaster, taken May 23, 1748, gave Joseph Chinn 115 votes; Major Peter Conway, 106; Mr. Thomas Pinkard, 73; Mr. Robert Mitchell, 70; and Capt. William Steptoe, 30, the aggregate of which represented 197 electors. I have no separate list of the tithables of whites and blacks for 1748, but as Lancaster in 1757 had very nearly the same aggregate of tithables, we may pretty accurately assume an equal number of white tithables in the different years. This gives about ten per cent. In Prince William county the poll in 1741 stood for William Fairfax, Esq., 249; Col. John Colvill, 175; Maj. Blackburn, 29; Valentine Peyton, 141, and Thomas Harrison, 234. This represents 414 electors, which is seven and one-half per cent of the white population in 1757. As the total tithables in this county in 1748 was very much below the number in 1757, this is, of course, too small a per cent. The Westmoreland county books afford a series of elections. In 1741 in an election to fill a vacancy, there were cast 322 votes, giving on the basis of the tithables of 1757, seven and one-half per cent(1). In 1748 at the regular election there were 363 voters, representing _____________________________________________ (1) See the tithables in Neill's Letters of the Fairfax Family. Page 12. about ten per cent. In 1752 there were 321 voters, representing eight and one-half per cent. In 1754 a vote was taken to fill a vacancy in the House, and there were 331 voters, which gives a little higher per cent. In 1755 there were 338 voters, and in 1761 there were 306 voters(1). In Essex county in 1761 and in 1765 the poll showed 368 votes, which, by the census of 1757, represented ten per cent of the white population. Taking figures more strictly appertaining to the period quoted by Dr. Jameson for Massa- chussetts, I find that in the election held April 12, 1787, at Kempsville in Princess Anne county for two delegates to represent the county in the legislature, the total number of ballots was 564, and by consequences the voters were 282, which represented 6 1/4 per cent of the white population of the county, estimating by the census of 1790. In 1788 in the election of delegates to the State convention, called to consider the constitution of the United States, 270 persons showed up as present and voting, and in 1789 on a poll for members of the legislature, 231; in the same year on a poll for congressman, 272; and these figures show a percentage of voters differing not much from the percentage stated in 1787 - 6 1/2 per cent. It is probable that these elections were not hotly contensted; for in the election for congress Hon. Isaac Avery received all but 76 notes. These statistics are interesting, but after all they are not surprising. Unless we suppose that the spirit of democracy was at all times very strong in Virginia, it is im- possible for us to understand the readiness of which Virginians accepted the doctrines of Jefferson. The people of Virginia and not the people of Massachusetts or New England are entitled to the credit of establishing true Republican methods of thought and manners in the United States; for Virginia, as is well known, was the headquarters of the great Republican party. But long before this time "the Republican ways of thinking" of the Virginia people had been apparent to the world. The governors - Spotswood and Dinwiddie - wrote bitterly of their intractable spirit. The former had to hum- ____________________________________________________________ (1) The candidates in 1741 wsere "Capt. Andrew Monroe", Capt. George Lee, Mr. John Bushrod; in 1748 "Mr. John Bushrod, Robert Vaulx, gent.", Col. Richard Lee, Robert Carter, Esq.; in 1752 "Mr. John Bushrod, Robert Vaulx, gent.", Col. Richard Lee, Robert Carter, Esq.; in 1754 "Col. Augustine Washington", Richard Lee, Esq., and Robert Carter; in 1755 "Col. Augustine Washington", Col. Philip Ludwell Lee, Richard Lee, Esq., and Mr. William Bernard; in 1761 "Richard Lee, Esq.", Richard Henry Lee, and Mr. William Bernard. In all the elections above, the names in italics [quotes] were elected. Page 13. bly beg the Burgesses' pardon for the assumption on one occasion displayed by members of the council in wearing their hats in presence of a committee of the House, and the latter could not repress his amazement when the mace bearer one day entered the supreme court over which he presided, and commanded the attendance of one of the judges upon the House, whose servant he was. Patrick Henry would never have written his resolutions on the stamp act, nor Mason his celebrated bill of rights, unless they had been bred among a people accustomed to liberty. So the tree of pedigree was neglected, till in our day it is beginning again to put forth some vigorous shoots. Severe in his republicanism, the Virginian of the Revolution had a scorn for "the aristocrat", and found his ideals in the Roman and Grecian Republics. Caesar, Brutus and Cicero were the names to conjure with. This faith in the ability of man for self-government was stamped upon every official document. While Massachussetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New Hampshire, along with New York, Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Maryland, and even the United States government, clung to the old ideas of English heraldry and fashioned their seals of state on the principle of a coat-of-arms, Virginia chose a purely classic design. She alone of the States has no shield on which to emblazon in dazzling colors and lustrous metal the memory of feudal services, of the rich man's power and the poor man's thraldom. But the genius of her seal is the Roman figure of Virtue, clad in the other the sword of authority, and sternly Republican in her motto of Sic Semper Tyrannis.