Question

Which of these statements is an argument against property qualification?

A) Landowners would not be swayed in their opinions.
B) Property owners had an interest in the country's success.
C) All men are created equal, so everyone should be able to vote.
D) Landowners were felt to be intelligent.

Answer 1

The statement against property qualifications for voting that fits the era's move towards equality is that all men are created equal and should have the right to vote (Option C).

Step-by-step explanation:

The argument against property qualification for voting that aligns with the spirit of universal equality is C) All men are created equal, so everyone should be able to vote. This statement reflects the idea that the right to vote should not be dependent on land ownership or any other form of property qualification.

During the early 19th century, property qualifications for voting were increasingly challenged. Universal manhood suffrage was advocated, promoting voting rights for all White male adults regardless of property ownership. This movement was a response to the elitist notion that only the propertied class had a vested interest in the country's success or the intelligence deemed necessary to vote responsibly.

Over time, significantly by the 1820s and 1830s, states began abolishing property qualifications for voting, moving towards a more egalitarian society that acknowledged the capacity and rights of the common man to participate in governance. Jefferson, for instance, championed the cause of the yeoman farmer as the backbone of the republic.