“But one more week of preparatory work and then comes election day. What an immense relief it will be to have this business settled for another four years!” – Cambridge Chronicle, Oct. 27, 1888
Although the peculiar mix of apprehension and excitement that has surrounded recent national elections (including Tuesday’s) may seem to be a recent phenomenon, Cantabrigians of previous centuries shared many of the same sentiments about elections that so many of us feel today. Issues such as voter registration, election integrity and the importance of suffrage as a mark of citizenship have long been part of the electoral process in Cambridge.
Cambridge voters have always had a strong sense of the importance of their participation in elections. An article in The Cambridge Chronicle on the eve of the 1848 presidential election urged:
Vote, citizens of Cambridge. Some of you may now have your last opportunity of casting a ballot for a President of the United States – do not lose it. Some of you are now to cast your first vote for that high officer – it is your greatest act as members of the body politic – go and vote, and feel that you are now men.
They were all men in 1848, of course. In 1780, Paul Cuffee and several other Black Massachusetts residents petitioned the state government, arguing that they needed to either give Black and Indigenous men the right to vote or stop taxing them (echoing the colonists’ recent cries of “No taxation without representation.”). These petitions were ultimately successful, and men of all races were given the right to vote under the Massachusetts Constitution of 1783. But although nonwhite men had the legal right to vote in theory, in practice systems of racial discrimination and gerrymandering severely limited their access to full participation in the electoral process.
Voter turnout was tracked carefully in the 19th century by the Cambridge newspapers, with each election cycle’s voter numbers reported dutifully after each contest. An 1848 notice in the Chronicle urged voters to check their vote registration and stated that, “above all, we wish, as a new proof of the good effect of our extensive means of education, to show that in Cambridge every man is capable of deciding for himself on the great questions of the day, and so well aware of his duty, as to exercise the power of acting upon them.” To this author, the city’s place as a hub of education – at the college level and through its public school system – placed a particular responsibility on its (male) citizens to cast their ballots thoughtfully.
Concerns about election integrity are also nothing new; in 1856, the Chronicle reported on a story out of New York in which men were voting illegally by means of impersonating others, including deceased residents. The Chronicle explained, however, that this could not happen here:
To those who do not understand the difference between New York voting and New England voting, the above statements will seem unaccountable. In Massachusetts it is simply impossible to commit such abuses. We use a check-list. When a man votes, his name is checked upon the list, – which insures the public both against his voting again, and against the fraud in any person having access to the ballot-box of depositing spurious votes.
Cambridge papers were also eager to report on the more celebratory side of elections, with many noting that restaurants, social clubs and community gathering places such as local churches and the YMCA would be posting updated returns on election night so Cantabrigians could combine their social activities with their desire for the latest election results. Papers also wrote about the many bets locals were making on the election, including this 1876 notice:
A well known resident of Cambridgeport wishes to make the following proposition, open to any respectable gentleman satisfactory to the first party. If Tilden is elected the first party will wheel the second party in a wheelbarrow from the Chronicle office to Harvard Square. If Hayes is elected the accepting party is to do the wheeling. Applications received at this office.
Whether anyone accepted this bet is not known, but of course Rutherford B. Hayes did win the election of 1876, so it may be that residents of Cambridge got to see this gentleman enjoy his wheelbarrow ride.
A fundamental shift occurred in Cambridge elections in 1920, when women were at last given the right to vote nationwide. Of course this right, which in theory applied to women of all races, was subject to the same compromising conditions of de facto racism and gerrymandering as the universal enfranchisement of Cambridge men, but the idea of women’s full participation in the electoral system held for many the promise of a new wave of voter engagement. Across the city and regardless of political party, women headed to the polls with excitement and determination. Groups from across the social and political spectrum held lectures and discussions for women about the issues they would address in the election, and special demonstrations were given beforehand so women could visit a polling place and familiarize themselves with the voting process. Local papers assured women that polling stations would have separate booths where women could vote in comfort and security, and reported that a record number of voters had registered in advance of the 1920 election and turned up at the polls.
There was a clear sense, too, that once U.S. women had a taste of voting, it would not be long before they wanted to be on the ballot. In an article on Election Day in 1920, the Cambridge Sentinel opined:
“A woman for President of the United States? It’s an interesting question, anyway, now that the federal suffrage amendment has been ratified, and women are voters … Buttonhole any intelligent man and ask him what he thinks and its likely he’ll talk about like this: I would not be surprised to see a woman candidate for the presidency before long … By the time the next presidential election gets around, the women will have found themselves as politicians and will be in shape to make their power felt.”
Just over a century later, we may be on the verge of that prediction coming to pass. But whatever the results of Tuesday’s election, Cambridge voters are part of a long legacy of engagement with – and strong opinions on – the electoral process.
About History Cambridge
History Cambridge started in 1905 as the Cambridge Historical Society. Today we have a new name and a new mission. We engage with our city to explore how the past influences the present to shape a better future. We recognize that every person in our city knows something about Cambridge’s history, and their knowledge matters. We listen to our community and we live by the ideal that history belongs to everyone. Throughout 2024, we are focusing on the history of North Cambridge. Make history with us at historycambridge.org.
History Cambridge is a nonprofit organization. Our activities rely on your financial support. If you value articles like this one, give today.
Beth Folsom is programs manager for History Cambridge.
A stronger
Please consider making a financial contribution to maintain, expand and improve Cambridge Day.
We are now a 501(c)(3) nonprofit and all donations are tax deductible.
Please consider a recurring contribution.