1 minute read

Luther v. Borden

Political Vs. Natural Rights



The circuit court jury found in Borden's favor, and the case went on to the Supreme Court. For various reasons, however, the case was not argued for several more years.

Meanwhile, in 1843, the state of Rhode Island adopted a new constitution, and the government that operated under it was widely recognized as the state's legitimate government. Martin Luther was fined $500 and had to serve six months in jail for having helped the Dorr government. Justice Story died and was succeeded by Justice Woodbury, who had not taken part in the earlier court battles. By 1849, when the Supreme Court handed down its decision in Luther v. Borden, the whole question of which Rhode Island government was legitimate seemed rather like ancient history.



Nevertheless, the lawyers for each side argued over the political principles involved. Luther's lawyers contended that the people of Rhode Island, faced with an exclusionary, minority government, had had the right to adopt their own constitution and establish their own government.

Borden's lawyers countered that the right to vote was not a "natural right," but rather a political one; that is, that men were not born with the right to vote, but rather were granted that right on the basis of the rules their government made. (Life, liberty, property, and the pursuit of happiness, by contrast, were all considered natural rights with which no government could legitimately interfere.) After all, said Borden's lawyers, even the Dorr government had refused the right to vote to men under the age of 21 and to men who had not lived in Rhode Island for more than a year. The question remained as to why then limiting suffrage to property holders made the charter government illegitimate.

Additional topics

Law Library - American Law and Legal InformationNotable Trials and Court Cases - 1833 to 1882Luther v. Borden - Significance, Insurrection In Providence, Which Was The Rightful Government?, Political Vs. Natural Rights