Continuing the discussion from yesterday, an email:

โ€œ1. Why did Jefferson replace โ€˜propertyโ€™ with โ€˜pursuit of happinessโ€™? Historians usually attribute the alteration to a widespread awareness that โ€˜propertyโ€™ was a colonial euphemism for โ€™slavery.โ€™ Had the Continental Congress proclaimed the purpose of government the preservation of life, liberty, and slavery, the document would have lost something of its rhetorical force, no?

โ€œ2. More seriously, I think [Andrew] Sullivan is widely off the mark in suggesting that the Founders were indifferent to the governmentโ€™s role in cultivating virtue. To a one, they subscribed to the logic of classic republicanism, which held that liberty could only be maintained by a virtuous people. (It held as a corollary that the only reliable means of safeguarding virtue was the cultivation of religious piety, but thatโ€™s another matter for another time.) They believed that local governments were best positioned to cultivate the moral sentiments necessary for republican governance, but they werenโ€™t averse to seeing the national legislature take on the task within its proper domain โ€” specifically, in the federal territories. Recall, for example, Article 3 of the Northwest Ordinance of 1787, which stipulated that โ€˜Religion, morality, and knowledge, being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education shall forever be encouraged.โ€™

โ€œThereโ€™s a lot more to say about this; I could go on for pages and pages. Suffice it to say, I think that Sullivanโ€™s interpretation canโ€™t bear the weight of overwhelming historical evidence to the contrary.โ€

RP: This is all very interesting, as was the discussion yesterday, and I thank the correspondent. I think that the bit there about religion and morality โ€œbeing necessary. . . to the happiness of mankindโ€ gets you part of the way (but only part of the way) to an answer to my original questionsโ€“which were, again, whether we can identify a particular view of โ€œhappinessโ€ among the Founders and whether that view included a moral component (whether, that is, they regarded happiness not just as satisfaction but as something closer to justified satisfaction).