samuel adams

samuel adams

samuel adams
samuel adams


Samuel Adams (27. syyskuuta 1722 (J: 16. syyskuuta) Boston, Massachusetts Bayn provinssi – 2. lokakuuta 1803 Boston, Massachusetts)[1] oli Amerikan vallankumoukseen johtaneen isänmaallisen liikkeen keskeisimpiä johtajia ja yksi Yhdysvaltain perustajaisistä. Hän oli mukana järjestämässä brittihallinnon vastaisia protesteja, kuten Bostonin teekutsuja. Samuel Adams oli erityisen vaikutusvaltainen kirjailijana ja ajattelijana, joka puki sanoiksi tasavaltalaiset periaatteet, joilla Yhdysvaltain poliittista kulttuuria muokattiin.

Adamsin suku oli alkujaan Englannin Devonshiresta ja siirtyi vuonna 1636 Massachusettsiin.[2] Samuel Adams oli presidentiksi kohonneen John Adamsin pikkuserkku. Hän valmistui Harvard Collegesta vuonna 1740 ja opiskeli muutaman vuoden lakitiedettä. Sen jälkeen hän oli mukana useissa kannattamattomissa liiketoimissa ja toimi myöhemmin veronkantajana Bostonissa, mutta joutui oikeuteen jätettyään veroja keräämättä ja hoidettuaan tilinpidon leväperäisestiselvennä. Adams aktivoitui poliittisesti 1760-luvulla, jolloin Britannia ryhtyi säätämään Pohjois-Amerikan siirtokuntia koskeneita epäsuosittuja verolakeja. Hänestä tuli keskeinen hahmo vuoden 1764 sokerilakia vastustaneiden piirissä, ja hän lietsoi Bostonissa mellakoita vuoden 1765 leimaverolakia vastaan. Adams ryhtyi ensimmäisten joukossa arvostelemaan periaatteellisista syistä verotusta ilman edustusoikeutta, ja hänestä tuli pian arvovaltaisin siirtokuntalaisten oikeuksien puolestapuhuja James Otisin jälkeen.[1]

Adams oli vuosina 1765–1774 Massachusettsin lainsäädäntöelimen (General Court) alemman kamarin jäsenenä.[1][2] Vuodesta 1769 hän oli brittien toimia vastustaneiden niin sanottujen Massachusettsin radikaalien johtaja. On epäselvää, missä vaiheessa hän ryhtyi kannattamaan ja tavoittelemaan siirtokunnille täyttä itsenäisyyttä, mutta hän lienee ollut joka tapauksessa ensimmäisiä itsenäisyyden kannattajia. Adams oli taitava propagandisti, joka mustamaalasi brittiläisiä viranomaisia lukemattomissa salanimillä julkaistuissa kirjoituksissa, ja hyvin lahjakas poliittinen organisaattori. Hän ei alkuun onnistunut lietsomaan massachusettsilaisia vastustamaan äärikeinoin vuonna 1767 säädettyjä Townshendin lakeina tunnettuja tullimaksuja. Brittijoukkojen miehitettyä 1768 Bostonin Adams sai niistä oivallisen maalitaulun lehdistöpropagandalleen. Hän johti myös bostonilaisten kunnankokousta, joka vaati brittijoukkojen poistamista kaupungista Bostonin verilöylyn jälkeen.[1]

Kun Britannian parlamentti vuonna 1770 kumosi Townshendin lait teeveroa lukuun ottamatta, Adamsin kannatus näytti vähenevän. Hän onnistui kuitenkin seuraavienkin kolmen hiljaisen vuoden aikana kehittämään radikaalien toimintaa. Vuonna 1772 hän perusti Bostonin kirjeenvaihtokomitean ja vaikutti vastaavien komiteoiden verkoston rakentamiseen halki siirtokuntien. Niistä tuli myöhemmin keskeinen osa vastarintaorganisaatiota. Parlamentin vuonna 1773 säätämä teelaki tarjosi Adamsille uuden tilaisuuden suoran toiminnan lietsomiseen. Hän oli yksi niin sanottujen Bostonin teekutsujen suunnittelijoista, vaikka ei itse osallistunutkaan kyseenalaiseen tempaukseen. Tämän jälkeen Adams johti massachusettsilaisten protesteja parlamentin rangaistuksena säätämiä niin sanottuja sietämättömiä lakeja vastaan. Ensimmäisessä mannermaakongresissa hän vaati siirtokuntien edustajilta tiukkaa vastarintaa Britannian toimia vastaan.[1]
samuel adams

Massachusettsin siirtokunnan kongressissa vuosina 1774–1775 Adams osallistui sotilaallisen vastarinnan valmisteluun. Kun brittijoukot Lexingtonin ja Concordin taisteluihin johtaneiden tapahtumien yhteydessä marssivat Bostonista Concordiin, Adams ja John Hancock olivat lähettyvillä. Marssin todellisena syynä on väitetty olleen näiden kahden kapinajohtajan vangitseminen. Ensisijaisesti britit menivät kuitenkin tuhoamaan siirtokuntalaisten asevarastoa Concordissa, eivätkä he yrittäneet vangita Adamsia tai Hancockia.[1]

Adams osallistui yhdessä pikkuserkkunsa John Adamsin kanssa myös toisen mannermaakongressin työskentelyyn, ja he olivat molemmat siellä vaikutusvaltaisia jäseniä. He olivat ensimmäisten joukossa vaatimassa täydellistä irtautumista emämaasta. Kumpikin allekirjoitti myös itsenäisyysjulistuksen. Myöhemmin Samuel Adams oli edustajana konventissa, joka valmisteli vuonna 1780 Massachusettsille uuden perustuslain, samoin kuin vuonna 1787 Massachusettsin perustuslakikonventissa, joka päätti Yhdysvaltain perustuslain ratifioinnista osavaltiossa. Aluksi hän kuului perustuslakiesitystä vastustaneisiin antifederalisteihin, jotka pelkäsivät liittovaltion keskittävän liikaa valtaa keskushallitukselle. Hän kuitenkin muutti kantansa, kun perustuslakia luvattiin täydentää merkittävillä lisäyksillä, kuten Bill of Rights -kansalaisoikeusluettelolla.[1]

Adams pyrki liittovaltion kongressiin sen ensimmäisissä vaaleissa, mutta ei tullut valituksi. Sen sijaan hän toimi Massachusettsin varakuvernöörinä 1789–1793 ja kuvernöörinä 1794–1797. Yhdysvaltain ensimmäisen puoluejaon hahmottuessa Adams liittyi demokraatti-republikaaneihin ja oli vuoden 1796 presidentinvaaleissa Thomas Jeffersonin valitsijamiehenä. Sen jälkeen hän vetäytyi politiikasta.[1]

Samuel Adamsin nimeä on myöhemmin käytetty monissa kaupallisissa ja ei-kaupallisissa yhteyksissä. Boston Beer Company lanseerasi myöhemmin olutalan palkintoja voittaneen Samuel Adams Boston Lagerin vuonna 1985. Samuel Adams oli myös oluenpanija, joka peri taidon isältään.[3]. Adamsin nimeä kantavia hyväntekeväisyysjärjestöjä ovat Sam Adams Alliance ja Sam Adams Foundation.


Samuel Adams (27. syyskuuta 1722 (J: 16. syyskuuta) Boston, Massachusetts Bayn provinssi – 2. lokakuuta 1803 Boston, Massachusetts)[1] oli Amerikan vallankumoukseen johtaneen isänmaallisen liikkeen keskeisimpiä johtajia ja yksi Yhdysvaltain perustajaisistä. Hän oli mukana järjestämässä brittihallinnon vastaisia protesteja, kuten Bostonin teekutsuja. Samuel Adams oli erityisen vaikutusvaltainen kirjailijana ja ajattelijana, joka puki sanoiksi tasavaltalaiset periaatteet, joilla Yhdysvaltain poliittista kulttuuria muokattiin.

Adamsin suku oli alkujaan Englannin Devonshiresta ja siirtyi vuonna 1636 Massachusettsiin.[2] Samuel Adams oli presidentiksi kohonneen John Adamsin pikkuserkku. Hän valmistui Harvard Collegesta vuonna 1740 ja opiskeli muutaman vuoden lakitiedettä. Sen jälkeen hän oli mukana useissa kannattamattomissa liiketoimissa ja toimi myöhemmin veronkantajana Bostonissa, mutta joutui oikeuteen jätettyään veroja keräämättä ja hoidettuaan tilinpidon leväperäisestiselvennä. Adams aktivoitui poliittisesti 1760-luvulla, jolloin Britannia ryhtyi säätämään Pohjois-Amerikan siirtokuntia koskeneita epäsuosittuja verolakeja. Hänestä tuli keskeinen hahmo vuoden 1764 sokerilakia vastustaneiden piirissä, ja hän lietsoi Bostonissa mellakoita vuoden 1765 leimaverolakia vastaan. Adams ryhtyi ensimmäisten joukossa arvostelemaan periaatteellisista syistä verotusta ilman edustusoikeutta, ja hänestä tuli pian arvovaltaisin siirtokuntalaisten oikeuksien puolestapuhuja James Otisin jälkeen.[1]

Adams oli vuosina 1765–1774 Massachusettsin lainsäädäntöelimen (General Court) alemman kamarin jäsenenä.[1][2] Vuodesta 1769 hän oli brittien toimia vastustaneiden niin sanottujen Massachusettsin radikaalien johtaja. On epäselvää, missä vaiheessa hän ryhtyi kannattamaan ja tavoittelemaan siirtokunnille täyttä itsenäisyyttä, mutta hän lienee ollut joka tapauksessa ensimmäisiä itsenäisyyden kannattajia. Adams oli taitava propagandisti, joka mustamaalasi brittiläisiä viranomaisia lukemattomissa salanimillä julkaistuissa kirjoituksissa, ja hyvin lahjakas poliittinen organisaattori. Hän ei alkuun onnistunut lietsomaan massachusettsilaisia vastustamaan äärikeinoin vuonna 1767 säädettyjä Townshendin lakeina tunnettuja tullimaksuja. Brittijoukkojen miehitettyä 1768 Bostonin Adams sai niistä oivallisen maalitaulun lehdistöpropagandalleen. Hän johti myös bostonilaisten kunnankokousta, joka vaati brittijoukkojen poistamista kaupungista Bostonin verilöylyn jälkeen.[1]

Kun Britannian parlamentti vuonna 1770 kumosi Townshendin lait teeveroa lukuun ottamatta, Adamsin kannatus näytti vähenevän. Hän onnistui kuitenkin seuraavienkin kolmen hiljaisen vuoden aikana kehittämään radikaalien toimintaa. Vuonna 1772 hän perusti Bostonin kirjeenvaihtokomitean ja vaikutti vastaavien komiteoiden verkoston rakentamiseen halki siirtokuntien. Niistä tuli myöhemmin keskeinen osa vastarintaorganisaatiota. Parlamentin vuonna 1773 säätämä teelaki tarjosi Adamsille uuden tilaisuuden suoran toiminnan lietsomiseen. Hän oli yksi niin sanottujen Bostonin teekutsujen suunnittelijoista, vaikka ei itse osallistunutkaan kyseenalaiseen tempaukseen. Tämän jälkeen Adams johti massachusettsilaisten protesteja parlamentin rangaistuksena säätämiä niin sanottuja sietämättömiä lakeja vastaan. Ensimmäisessä mannermaakongresissa hän vaati siirtokuntien edustajilta tiukkaa vastarintaa Britannian toimia vastaan.[1]
samuel adams

Massachusettsin siirtokunnan kongressissa vuosina 1774–1775 Adams osallistui sotilaallisen vastarinnan valmisteluun. Kun brittijoukot Lexingtonin ja Concordin taisteluihin johtaneiden tapahtumien yhteydessä marssivat Bostonista Concordiin, Adams ja John Hancock olivat lähettyvillä. Marssin todellisena syynä on väitetty olleen näiden kahden kapinajohtajan vangitseminen. Ensisijaisesti britit menivät kuitenkin tuhoamaan siirtokuntalaisten asevarastoa Concordissa, eivätkä he yrittäneet vangita Adamsia tai Hancockia.[1]

Adams osallistui yhdessä pikkuserkkunsa John Adamsin kanssa myös toisen mannermaakongressin työskentelyyn, ja he olivat molemmat siellä vaikutusvaltaisia jäseniä. He olivat ensimmäisten joukossa vaatimassa täydellistä irtautumista emämaasta. Kumpikin allekirjoitti myös itsenäisyysjulistuksen. Myöhemmin Samuel Adams oli edustajana konventissa, joka valmisteli vuonna 1780 Massachusettsille uuden perustuslain, samoin kuin vuonna 1787 Massachusettsin perustuslakikonventissa, joka päätti Yhdysvaltain perustuslain ratifioinnista osavaltiossa. Aluksi hän kuului perustuslakiesitystä vastustaneisiin antifederalisteihin, jotka pelkäsivät liittovaltion keskittävän liikaa valtaa keskushallitukselle. Hän kuitenkin muutti kantansa, kun perustuslakia luvattiin täydentää merkittävillä lisäyksillä, kuten Bill of Rights -kansalaisoikeusluettelolla.[1]

Adams pyrki liittovaltion kongressiin sen ensimmäisissä vaaleissa, mutta ei tullut valituksi. Sen sijaan hän toimi Massachusettsin varakuvernöörinä 1789–1793 ja kuvernöörinä 1794–1797. Yhdysvaltain ensimmäisen puoluejaon hahmottuessa Adams liittyi demokraatti-republikaaneihin ja oli vuoden 1796 presidentinvaaleissa Thomas Jeffersonin valitsijamiehenä. Sen jälkeen hän vetäytyi politiikasta.[1]

Samuel Adamsin nimeä on myöhemmin käytetty monissa kaupallisissa ja ei-kaupallisissa yhteyksissä. Boston Beer Company lanseerasi myöhemmin olutalan palkintoja voittaneen Samuel Adams Boston Lagerin vuonna 1985. Samuel Adams oli myös oluenpanija, joka peri taidon isältään.[3]. Adamsin nimeä kantavia hyväntekeväisyysjärjestöjä ovat Sam Adams Alliance ja Sam Adams Foundation.


Samuel Adams (27. syyskuuta 1722 (J: 16. syyskuuta) Boston, Massachusetts Bayn provinssi – 2. lokakuuta 1803 Boston, Massachusetts)[1] oli Amerikan vallankumoukseen johtaneen isänmaallisen liikkeen keskeisimpiä johtajia ja yksi Yhdysvaltain perustajaisistä. Hän oli mukana järjestämässä brittihallinnon vastaisia protesteja, kuten Bostonin teekutsuja. Samuel Adams oli erityisen vaikutusvaltainen kirjailijana ja ajattelijana, joka puki sanoiksi tasavaltalaiset periaatteet, joilla Yhdysvaltain poliittista kulttuuria muokattiin.

Adamsin suku oli alkujaan Englannin Devonshiresta ja siirtyi vuonna 1636 Massachusettsiin.[2] Samuel Adams oli presidentiksi kohonneen John Adamsin pikkuserkku. Hän valmistui Harvard Collegesta vuonna 1740 ja opiskeli muutaman vuoden lakitiedettä. Sen jälkeen hän oli mukana useissa kannattamattomissa liiketoimissa ja toimi myöhemmin veronkantajana Bostonissa, mutta joutui oikeuteen jätettyään veroja keräämättä ja hoidettuaan tilinpidon leväperäisestiselvennä. Adams aktivoitui poliittisesti 1760-luvulla, jolloin Britannia ryhtyi säätämään Pohjois-Amerikan siirtokuntia koskeneita epäsuosittuja verolakeja. Hänestä tuli keskeinen hahmo vuoden 1764 sokerilakia vastustaneiden piirissä, ja hän lietsoi Bostonissa mellakoita vuoden 1765 leimaverolakia vastaan. Adams ryhtyi ensimmäisten joukossa arvostelemaan periaatteellisista syistä verotusta ilman edustusoikeutta, ja hänestä tuli pian arvovaltaisin siirtokuntalaisten oikeuksien puolestapuhuja James Otisin jälkeen.[1]

Adams oli vuosina 1765–1774 Massachusettsin lainsäädäntöelimen (General Court) alemman kamarin jäsenenä.[1][2] Vuodesta 1769 hän oli brittien toimia vastustaneiden niin sanottujen Massachusettsin radikaalien johtaja. On epäselvää, missä vaiheessa hän ryhtyi kannattamaan ja tavoittelemaan siirtokunnille täyttä itsenäisyyttä, mutta hän lienee ollut joka tapauksessa ensimmäisiä itsenäisyyden kannattajia. Adams oli taitava propagandisti, joka mustamaalasi brittiläisiä viranomaisia lukemattomissa salanimillä julkaistuissa kirjoituksissa, ja hyvin lahjakas poliittinen organisaattori. Hän ei alkuun onnistunut lietsomaan massachusettsilaisia vastustamaan äärikeinoin vuonna 1767 säädettyjä Townshendin lakeina tunnettuja tullimaksuja. Brittijoukkojen miehitettyä 1768 Bostonin Adams sai niistä oivallisen maalitaulun lehdistöpropagandalleen. Hän johti myös bostonilaisten kunnankokousta, joka vaati brittijoukkojen poistamista kaupungista Bostonin verilöylyn jälkeen.[1]

Kun Britannian parlamentti vuonna 1770 kumosi Townshendin lait teeveroa lukuun ottamatta, Adamsin kannatus näytti vähenevän. Hän onnistui kuitenkin seuraavienkin kolmen hiljaisen vuoden aikana kehittämään radikaalien toimintaa. Vuonna 1772 hän perusti Bostonin kirjeenvaihtokomitean ja vaikutti vastaavien komiteoiden verkoston rakentamiseen halki siirtokuntien. Niistä tuli myöhemmin keskeinen osa vastarintaorganisaatiota. Parlamentin vuonna 1773 säätämä teelaki tarjosi Adamsille uuden tilaisuuden suoran toiminnan lietsomiseen. Hän oli yksi niin sanottujen Bostonin teekutsujen suunnittelijoista, vaikka ei itse osallistunutkaan kyseenalaiseen tempaukseen. Tämän jälkeen Adams johti massachusettsilaisten protesteja parlamentin rangaistuksena säätämiä niin sanottuja sietämättömiä lakeja vastaan. Ensimmäisessä mannermaakongresissa hän vaati siirtokuntien edustajilta tiukkaa vastarintaa Britannian toimia vastaan.[1]
samuel adams

Massachusettsin siirtokunnan kongressissa vuosina 1774–1775 Adams osallistui sotilaallisen vastarinnan valmisteluun. Kun brittijoukot Lexingtonin ja Concordin taisteluihin johtaneiden tapahtumien yhteydessä marssivat Bostonista Concordiin, Adams ja John Hancock olivat lähettyvillä. Marssin todellisena syynä on väitetty olleen näiden kahden kapinajohtajan vangitseminen. Ensisijaisesti britit menivät kuitenkin tuhoamaan siirtokuntalaisten asevarastoa Concordissa, eivätkä he yrittäneet vangita Adamsia tai Hancockia.[1]

Adams osallistui yhdessä pikkuserkkunsa John Adamsin kanssa myös toisen mannermaakongressin työskentelyyn, ja he olivat molemmat siellä vaikutusvaltaisia jäseniä. He olivat ensimmäisten joukossa vaatimassa täydellistä irtautumista emämaasta. Kumpikin allekirjoitti myös itsenäisyysjulistuksen. Myöhemmin Samuel Adams oli edustajana konventissa, joka valmisteli vuonna 1780 Massachusettsille uuden perustuslain, samoin kuin vuonna 1787 Massachusettsin perustuslakikonventissa, joka päätti Yhdysvaltain perustuslain ratifioinnista osavaltiossa. Aluksi hän kuului perustuslakiesitystä vastustaneisiin antifederalisteihin, jotka pelkäsivät liittovaltion keskittävän liikaa valtaa keskushallitukselle. Hän kuitenkin muutti kantansa, kun perustuslakia luvattiin täydentää merkittävillä lisäyksillä, kuten Bill of Rights -kansalaisoikeusluettelolla.[1]

Adams pyrki liittovaltion kongressiin sen ensimmäisissä vaaleissa, mutta ei tullut valituksi. Sen sijaan hän toimi Massachusettsin varakuvernöörinä 1789–1793 ja kuvernöörinä 1794–1797. Yhdysvaltain ensimmäisen puoluejaon hahmottuessa Adams liittyi demokraatti-republikaaneihin ja oli vuoden 1796 presidentinvaaleissa Thomas Jeffersonin valitsijamiehenä. Sen jälkeen hän vetäytyi politiikasta.[1]

Samuel Adamsin nimeä on myöhemmin käytetty monissa kaupallisissa ja ei-kaupallisissa yhteyksissä. Boston Beer Company lanseerasi myöhemmin olutalan palkintoja voittaneen Samuel Adams Boston Lagerin vuonna 1985. Samuel Adams oli myös oluenpanija, joka peri taidon isältään.[3]. Adamsin nimeä kantavia hyväntekeväisyysjärjestöjä ovat Sam Adams Alliance ja Sam Adams Foundation.



Samuel Adams (September 27 [O.S. September 16] 1722 – October 2, 1803) was an American statesman, political philosopher, and one of the Founding Fathers of the United States. He was a politician in colonial Massachusetts, a leader of the movement that became the American Revolution, and one of the architects of the principles of American republicanism that shaped the political culture of the United States. He was a second cousin to his fellow Founding Father, President John Adams.

Adams was born in Boston, brought up in a religious and politically active family. A graduate of Harvard College, he was an unsuccessful businessman and tax collector before concentrating on politics. He was an influential official of the Massachusetts House of Representatives and the Boston Town Meeting in the 1760s, and he became a part of a movement opposed to the British Parliament’s efforts to tax the British American colonies without their consent. His 1768 Massachusetts Circular Letter calling for colonial non-cooperation prompted the occupation of Boston by British soldiers, eventually resulting in the Boston Massacre of 1770. Adams and his colleagues devised a committee of correspondence system in 1772 to help coordinate resistance to what he saw as the British government’s attempts to violate the British Constitution at the expense of the colonies, which linked like-minded Patriots throughout the Thirteen Colonies. Continued resistance to British policy resulted in the 1773 Boston Tea Party and the coming of the American Revolution.

Parliament passed the Coercive Acts in 1774, at which time Adams attended the Continental Congress in Philadelphia which was convened to coordinate a colonial response. He helped guide Congress towards issuing the Continental Association in 1774 and the Declaration of Independence in 1776, and he helped draft the Articles of Confederation and the Massachusetts Constitution. Adams returned to Massachusetts after the American Revolution, where he served in the state senate and was eventually elected governor.
samuel adams

Samuel Adams later became a controversial figure in American history. Accounts written in the 19th century praised him as someone who had been steering his fellow colonists towards independence long before the outbreak of the Revolutionary War. This view gave way to negative assessments of Adams in the first half of the 20th century, in which he was portrayed as a master of propaganda who provoked mob violence to achieve his goals. Both of these interpretations have been challenged by some modern scholars, who argue that these traditional depictions of Adams are myths contradicted by the historical record.

Samuel Adams was born in Boston in the British colony of Massachusetts on September 16, 1722, an Old Style date that is sometimes converted to the New Style date of September 27.[5] Adams was one of twelve children born to Samuel Adams, Sr., and Mary (Fifield) Adams in an age of high infant mortality; only three of these children lived past their third birthday.[6][7][8] Adams’s parents were devout Puritans and members of the Old South Congregational Church. The family lived on Purchase Street in Boston.[6][9] Adams was proud of his Puritan heritage, and emphasized Puritan values in his political career, especially virtue.[3][4]

Samuel Adams, Sr. (1689–1748) was a prosperous merchant and church deacon.[10][11][6] Deacon Adams became a leading figure in Boston politics through an organization that became known as the Boston Caucus, which promoted candidates who supported popular causes.[12][13] The Boston Caucus helped shape the agenda of the Boston Town Meeting. A New England town meeting is a form of local government with elected officials, and not just a gathering of citizens; according to historian William Fowler, it was “the most democratic institution in the British empire”.[14][12] Deacon Adams rose through the political ranks, becoming a justice of the peace, a selectman, and a member of the Massachusetts House of Representatives.[15][16][17][18] He worked closely with Elisha Cooke, Jr. (1678–1737), the leader of the “popular party”, a faction that resisted any encroachment by royal officials on the colonial rights embodied in the Massachusetts Charter of 1691.[19][18][20][17] In the coming years, members of the “popular party” became known as Whigs or Patriots.[21][22]

The younger Samuel Adams attended Boston Latin School and then entered Harvard College in 1736. His parents hoped that his schooling would prepare him for the ministry, but Adams gradually shifted his interest to politics.[6][24] After graduating in 1740, Adams continued his studies, earning a master’s degree in 1743. In his thesis, he argued that it was “lawful to resist the Supreme Magistrate, if the Commonwealth cannot otherwise be preserved”, which indicated that his political views, like his father’s, were oriented towards colonial rights.[25][26][27][28]

Adams’s life was greatly affected by his father’s involvement in a banking controversy. In 1739, Massachusetts was facing a serious currency shortage, and Deacon Adams and the Boston Caucus created a “land bank” which issued paper money to borrowers who mortgaged their land as security.[29][30][31] The land bank was generally supported by the citizenry and the popular party, which dominated the House of Representatives, the lower branch of the General Court. Opposition to the land bank came from the more aristocratic “court party”, who were supporters of the royal governor and controlled the Governor’s Council, the upper chamber of the General Court.[30] The court party used its influence to have the British Parliament dissolve the land bank in 1741.[32][33] Directors of the land bank, including Deacon Adams, became personally liable for the currency still in circulation, payable in silver and gold. Lawsuits over the bank persisted for years, even after Deacon Adams’s death, and the younger Samuel Adams often had to defend the family estate from seizure by the government.[27][32][34][35][36][37][38] For Adams, these lawsuits “served as a constant personal reminder that Britain’s power over the colonies could be exercised in arbitrary and destructive ways”.[38]

After leaving Harvard in 1743, Adams was unsure about his future. He considered becoming a lawyer but instead decided to go into business. He worked at Thomas Cushing’s counting house, but the job only lasted a few months because Cushing felt that Adams was too preoccupied with politics to become a good merchant.[39][40] Adams’s father then lent him £1,000 to go into business for himself, a substantial amount for that time.[40][29] Adams’s lack of business instincts were confirmed; he lent half of this money to a friend who never repaid, and frittered away the other half. Adams always remained, in the words of historian Pauline Maier, “a man utterly uninterested in either making or possessing money”.[41]

  • 26 degrees celsius to fahrenheit
  • After Adams had lost his money, his father made him a partner in the family’s malthouse, which was next to the family home on Purchase Street. Several generations of Adamses were maltsters, who produced the malt necessary for brewing beer.[43] Years later, a poet poked fun at Adams by calling him “Sam the maltster”.[27][44] Adams has often been described as a brewer, but the extant evidence suggests that he worked as a maltster and not a brewer.[43][45][46]

    In January 1748, Adams and some friends were inflamed by British impressment and launched The Independent Advertiser, a weekly newspaper that printed many political essays written by Adams.[27][39][47] His essays drew heavily upon English political theorist John Locke’s Second Treatise of Government, and they emphasized many of the themes that characterized his subsequent career.[48][34] He argued that the people must resist any encroachment on their constitutional rights.[34] He cited the decline of the Roman Empire as an example of what could happen to New England if it were to abandon its Puritan values.[49]

    When Deacon Adams died in 1748, Adams was given the responsibility of managing the family’s affairs.[50][51] In October 1749, he married Elizabeth Checkley, his pastor’s daughter.[35][52] Elizabeth gave birth to six children over the next seven years, but only two lived to adulthood: Samuel (born 1751) and Hannah (born 1756).[35] In July 1757, Elizabeth died soon after giving birth to a stillborn son.[35][51][53] Adams remarried in 1764 to Elizabeth Wells,[54] but had no other children.[41]

    Like his father, Adams embarked on a political career with the support of the Boston Caucus. He was elected to his first political office in 1747, serving as one of the clerks of the Boston market. In 1756, the Boston Town Meeting elected him to the post of tax collector, which provided a small income.[27][34][35][55] He often failed to collect taxes from his fellow citizens, which increased his popularity among those who did not pay, but left him liable for the shortage.[56][13] By 1765, his account was more than £8,000 in arrears. The town meeting was on the verge of bankruptcy, and Adams was compelled to file suit against delinquent taxpayers, but many taxes went uncollected.[57] In 1768, his political opponents used the situation to their advantage, obtaining a court judgment of £1,463 against him. Adams’s friends paid off some of the deficit, and the town meeting wrote off the remainder. By then, he had emerged as a leader of the popular party, and the embarrassing situation did not lessen his influence.[58][59]

    Samuel Adams emerged as an important public figure in Boston soon after the British Empire’s victory in the French and Indian War (1754–1763). The British Parliament found itself deep in debt and looking for new sources of revenue, and they sought to directly tax the colonies of British America for the first time.[60][61] This tax dispute was part of a larger divergence between British and American interpretations of the British Constitution and the extent of Parliament’s authority in the colonies.[62]

    The first step in the new program was the Sugar Act of 1764, which Adams saw as an infringement of longstanding colonial rights. Colonists were not represented in Parliament, he argued, and therefore they could not be taxed by that body; the colonists were represented by the colonial assemblies, and only they could levy taxes upon them.[63] Adams expressed these views in May 1764, when the Boston Town Meeting elected its representatives to the Massachusetts House. As was customary, the town meeting provided the representatives with a set of written instructions, which Adams was selected to write. Adams highlighted what he perceived to be the dangers of taxation without representation:

    For if our Trade may be taxed, why not our Lands? Why not the Produce of our Lands & everything we possess or make use of? This we apprehend annihilates our Charter Right to govern & tax ourselves. It strikes at our British privileges, which as we have never forfeited them, we hold in common with our Fellow Subjects who are Natives of Britain. If Taxes are laid upon us in any shape without our having a legal Representation where they are laid, are we not reduced from the Character of free Subjects to the miserable State of tributary Slaves?[63][64][65]

    “When the Boston Town Meeting approved the Adams instructions on May 24, 1764,” writes historian John K. Alexander, “it became the first political body in America to go on record stating Parliament could not constitutionally tax the colonists. The directives also contained the first official recommendation that the colonies present a unified defense of their rights.”[66] Adams’s instructions were published in newspapers and pamphlets, and he soon became closely associated with James Otis, Jr., a member of the Massachusetts House famous for his defense of colonial rights.[66] Otis boldly challenged the constitutionality of certain acts of Parliament, but he would not go as far as Adams, who was moving towards the conclusion that Parliament did not have sovereignty over the colonies.[67][21][64][68]

    In 1765, Parliament passed the Stamp Act which required colonists to pay a new tax on most printed materials.[61][69] News of the passage of the Stamp Act produced an uproar in the colonies.[70][71] The colonial response echoed Adams’s 1764 instructions. In June 1765, Otis called for a Stamp Act Congress to coordinate colonial resistance.[72][73] The Virginia House of Burgesses passed a widely reprinted set of resolves against the Stamp Act that resembled Adams’s arguments against the Sugar Act.[73] Adams argued that the Stamp Act was unconstitutional; he also believed that it would hurt the economy of the British Empire. He supported calls for a boycott of British goods to put pressure on Parliament to repeal the tax.[73][74]

    In Boston, a group called the Loyal Nine, a precursor to the Sons of Liberty, organized protests of the Stamp Act. Adams was friendly with the Loyal Nine but was not a member.[74][75] On August 14, stamp distributor Andrew Oliver was hanged in effigy from Boston’s Liberty Tree; that night, his home was ransacked and his office demolished. On August 26, lieutenant governor Thomas Hutchinson’s home was destroyed by an angry crowd.

    Officials such as Governor Francis Bernard believed that common people acted only under the direction of agitators and blamed the violence on Adams.[78] This interpretation was revived by scholars in the early 20th century, who viewed Adams as a master of propaganda who manipulated mobs into doing his bidding.[79][80][57] For example, historian John C. Miller wrote in 1936 in what became the standard biography of Adams[80] that Adams “controlled” Boston with his “trained mob”.[75] Some modern scholars have argued that this interpretation is a myth, and that there is no evidence that Adams had anything to do with the Stamp Act riots.[78][57][81][82][83] After the fact, Adams did approve of the August 14 action because he saw no other legal options to resist what he viewed as an unconstitutional act by Parliament, but he condemned attacks on officials’ homes as “mobbish”.[84][85][86] According to the modern scholarly interpretation of Adams, he supported legal methods of resisting parliamentary taxation, such as petitions, boycotts, and nonviolent demonstrations, but he opposed mob violence which he saw as illegal, dangerous, and counter-productive.[86][87][84][88]

    In September 1765, Adams was once again appointed by the Boston Town Meeting to write the instructions for Boston’s delegation to the Massachusetts House of Representatives. As it turned out, he wrote his own instructions; on September 27, the town meeting selected him to replace the recently deceased Oxenbridge Thacher as one of Boston’s four representatives in the assembly.[89] James Otis was attending the Stamp Act Congress in New York City, so Adams was the primary author of a series of House resolutions against the Stamp Act, which were more radical than those passed by the Stamp Act Congress.[90][91] Adams was one of the first colonial leaders to argue that mankind possessed certain natural rights that governments could not violate.[91]

    The Stamp Act was scheduled to go into effect on November 1, 1765, but it was not enforced because protestors throughout the colonies had compelled stamp distributors to resign.[91] Eventually, British merchants were able to convince Parliament to repeal the tax.[92][93] By May 16, 1766, news of the repeal had reached Boston. There was celebration throughout the city, and Adams made a public statement of thanks to British merchants for helping their cause.[94]

    The Massachusetts popular party gained ground in the May 1766 elections. Adams was re-elected to the House and selected as its clerk, in which position he was responsible for official House papers. In the coming years, Adams used his position as clerk to great effect in promoting his political message.[95][96][97][98] Joining Adams in the House was John Hancock, a new representative from Boston. Hancock was a wealthy merchant—perhaps the richest man in Massachusetts—but a relative newcomer to politics. He was initially a protégé of Adams, and he used his wealth to promote the Whig cause.[99][100][101]

    After the repeal of the Stamp Act, Parliament took a different approach to raising revenue, passing the Townshend Acts in 1767 which established new duties on various goods imported into the colonies. These duties were relatively low because the British ministry wanted to establish the precedent that Parliament had the right to impose tariffs on the colonies before raising them.[102] Revenues from these duties were to be used to pay for governors and judges who would be independent of colonial control. To enforce compliance with the new laws, the Townshend Acts created a customs agency known as the American Board of Custom Commissioners, which was headquartered in Boston.[103][102]

    Resistance to the Townshend Acts grew slowly. The General Court was not in session when news of the acts reached Boston in October 1767. Adams therefore used the Boston Town Meeting to organize an economic boycott, and called for other towns to do the same.[102] By February 1768, towns in Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Connecticut had joined the boycott.[102] Opposition to the Townshend Acts was also encouraged by Letters from a Farmer in Pennsylvania, a series of popular essays by John Dickinson which started appearing in December 1767. Dickinson’s argument that the new taxes were unconstitutional had been made before by Adams, but never to such a wide audience.[104]

    In January 1768, the Massachusetts House sent a petition to King George asking for his help.[104][105][106] Adams and Otis requested that the House send the petition to the other colonies, along with what became known as the Massachusetts Circular Letter, which became “a significant milestone on the road to revolution”.[104] The letter written by Adams called on the colonies to join with Massachusetts in resisting the Townshend Acts.[107][108] The House initially voted against sending the letter and petition to the other colonies but, after some politicking by Adams and Otis, it was approved on February 11.[107][108][109][110]

    British colonial secretary Lord Hillsborough, hoping to prevent a repeat of the Stamp Act Congress, instructed the colonial governors in America to dissolve the assemblies if they responded to the Massachusetts Circular Letter. He also directed Massachusetts Governor Francis Bernard to have the Massachusetts House rescind the letter.[59][111] On June 30, the House refused to rescind the letter by a vote of 92 to 17, with Adams citing their right to petition as justification.[112][111] Far from complying with the governor’s order, Adams instead presented a new petition to the king asking that Governor Bernard be removed from office. Bernard responded by dissolving the legislature.[112]

    The commissioners of the Customs Board found that they were unable to enforce trade regulations in Boston, so they requested military assistance.[113][111] Help came in the form of HMS Romney, a fifty-gun warship which arrived in Boston Harbor in May 1768.[113] Tensions escalated after the captain of Romney began to impress local sailors. The situation exploded on June 10, when customs officials seized Liberty, a sloop owned by John Hancock—a leading critic of the Customs Board—for alleged customs violations. Sailors and marines came ashore from Romney to tow away Liberty, and a riot broke out. Things calmed down in the following days, but fearful customs officials packed up their families and fled for protection to Romney and eventually to Castle William, an island fort in the harbor.[113][42][114][115][116]

    Governor Bernard wrote to London in response to the Liberty incident and the struggle over the Circular Letter, informing his superiors that troops were needed in Boston to restore order.[114][115] Lord Hillsborough ordered four regiments of the British Army to Boston.

    Learning that British troops were on the way, the Boston Town Meeting met on September 12, 1768, and requested that Governor Bernard convene the General Court.[117][118] Bernard refused, so the town meeting called on the other Massachusetts towns to send representatives to meet at Faneuil Hall beginning on September 22.[118][119] About 100 towns sent delegates to the convention, which was effectively an unofficial session of the Massachusetts House. The convention issued a letter which insisted that Boston was not a lawless town, using language more moderate than what Adams desired, and that the impending military occupation violated Bostonians’ natural, constitutional, and charter rights.[119][120] By the time that the convention adjourned, British troop transports had arrived in Boston Harbor.[120] Two regiments disembarked in October 1768, followed by two more in November.[121]

    According to some accounts, the occupation of Boston was a turning point for Adams, after which he gave up hope of reconciliation and secretly began to work towards American independence.[122][123][124][125][121] However, historian Carl Becker wrote in 1928 that “there is no clear evidence in his contemporary writings that such was the case.”[126] Nevertheless, the traditional, standard view of Adams is that he desired independence before most of his contemporaries and steadily worked towards this goal for years.[127][128] Historian Pauline Maier challenged that idea in 1980, arguing instead that Adams, like most of his peers, did not embrace independence until after the American Revolutionary War had begun in 1775.[129][130][131] According to Maier, Adams at this time was a reformer rather than a revolutionary; he sought to have the British ministry change its policies, and warned Britain that independence would be the inevitable result of a failure to do so.[132][133][134][135][129]

    Adams wrote numerous letters and essays in opposition to the occupation, which he considered a violation of the 1689 Bill of Rights.[136] The occupation was publicized throughout the colonies in the Journal of Occurrences, an unsigned series of newspaper articles that may have been written by Adams in collaboration with others.[137][138][139] The Journal presented what it claimed to be a factual daily account of events in Boston during the military occupation, an innovative approach in an era without professional newspaper reporters. It depicted a Boston besieged by unruly British soldiers who assaulted men and raped women with regularity and impunity, drawing upon the traditional Anglo-American distrust of standing armies garrisoned among civilians.[140][141] The Journal ceased publication on August 1, 1769, which was a day of celebration in Boston: Governor Bernard had left Massachusetts, never to return.[22]

    Adams continued to work on getting the troops withdrawn and keeping the boycott going until the Townshend duties were repealed. Two regiments were removed from Boston in 1769, but the other two remained.[22] Tensions between soldiers and civilians eventually resulted in the killing of five civilians in the Boston Massacre of March 1770. According to the “propagandist interpretation”[79][80][142][143][144][145] of Adams popularized by historian John Miller, Adams deliberately provoked the incident to promote his secret agenda of American independence.[146] According to Pauline Maier, however, “There is no evidence that he prompted the Boston Massacre riot”.[84]

    After the Boston Massacre, Adams and other town leaders met with Bernard’s successor Governor Thomas Hutchinson and with Colonel William Dalrymple, the army commander, to demand the withdrawal of the troops.[147][148] The situation remained explosive, and so Dalrymple agreed to remove both regiments to Castle William.[147][149][150] Adams wanted the soldiers to have a fair trial, because this would show that Boston was not controlled by a lawless mob, but was instead the victim of an unjust occupation.[151] He convinced his cousins John Adams and Josiah Quincy to defend the soldiers, knowing that those Whigs would not slander Boston to gain an acquittal.[150][152][153][154] However, Adams wrote essays condemning the outcome of the trials; he thought that the soldiers should have been convicted of murder.[155][156]

    After the Boston Massacre, politics in Massachusetts entered what is sometimes known as the “quiet period”.[157] In April 1770, Parliament repealed the Townshend duties, except for the tax on tea. Adams urged colonists to keep up the boycott of British goods, arguing that paying even one small tax allowed Parliament to establish the precedent of taxing the colonies, but the boycott faltered.[158][159] As economic conditions improved, support waned for Adams’s causes.[160] In 1770, New York City and Philadelphia abandoned the non-importation boycott of British goods and Boston merchants faced the risk of being economically ruined, so they also agreed to end the boycott, effectively defeating Adams’s cause in Massachusetts.[158] John Adams withdrew from politics, while John Hancock and James Otis appeared to become more moderate.[161][162][163] In 1771, Samuel Adams ran for the position of Register of Deeds, but he was beaten by Ezekiel Goldthwait by more than two to one.[164][165] He was re-elected to the Massachusetts House in April 1772, but he received far fewer votes than ever before.[166]

    A struggle over the power of the purse brought Adams back into the political limelight. Traditionally, the Massachusetts House of Representatives paid the salaries of the governor, lieutenant governor, and superior court judges. From the Whig perspective, this arrangement was an important check on executive power, keeping royally appointed officials accountable to democratically elected representatives.[133][168] In 1772, Massachusetts learned that those officials would henceforth be paid by the British government rather than by the province.[169] To protest this, Adams and his colleagues devised a system of committees of correspondence in November 1772; the towns of Massachusetts would consult with each other concerning political matters via messages sent through a network of committees that recorded British activities and protested imperial policies.[170] Committees of correspondence soon formed in other colonies, as well.

    Governor Hutchinson became concerned that the committees of correspondence were growing into an independence movement, so he convened the General Court in January 1773.[171][172] Addressing the legislature, Hutchinson argued that denying the supremacy of Parliament, as some committees had done, came dangerously close to rebellion. “I know of no line that can be drawn”, he said, “between the supreme authority of Parliament and the total independence of the colonies.”[173][172] Adams and the House responded that the Massachusetts Charter did not establish Parliament’s supremacy over the province, and so Parliament could not claim that authority now.[172][174] Hutchinson soon realized that he had made a major blunder by initiating a public debate about independence and the extent of Parliament’s authority in the colonies.[175] The Boston Committee of Correspondence published its statement of colonial rights, along with Hutchinson’s exchange with the Massachusetts House, in the widely distributed “Boston Pamphlet”.[173]

    The quiet period in Massachusetts was over. Adams was easily re-elected to the Massachusetts House in May 1773, and was also elected as moderator of the Boston Town Meeting.[176] In June 1773, he introduced a set of private letters to the Massachusetts House, written by Hutchinson several years earlier. In one letter, Hutchinson recommended to London that there should be “an abridgement of what are called English liberties” in Massachusetts. Hutchinson denied that this is what he meant, but his career was effectively over in Massachusetts, and the House sent a petition asking the king to recall him.[177][178][179][180]
    samuel adams

    Adams took a leading role in the events that led up to the famous Boston Tea Party of December 16, 1773, although the precise nature of his involvement has been disputed.

    In May 1773, the British Parliament passed the Tea Act, a tax law to help the struggling East India Company, one of Great Britain’s most important commercial institutions. Britons could buy smuggled Dutch tea more cheaply than the East India Company’s tea because of the heavy taxes imposed on tea imported into Great Britain, and so the company amassed a huge surplus of tea that it could not sell.[181][182] The British government’s solution to the problem was to sell the surplus in the colonies. The Tea Act permitted the East India Company to export tea directly to the colonies for the first time, bypassing most of the merchants who had previously acted as middlemen.[183][184] This measure was a threat to the American colonial economy because it granted the Tea Company a significant cost advantage over local tea merchants and even local tea smugglers, driving them out of business. The act also reduced the taxes on tea paid by the company in Britain, but kept the controversial Townshend duty on tea imported in the colonies. A few merchants in New York, Philadelphia, Boston, and Charlestown were selected to receive the company’s tea for resale.[185][186] In late 1773, seven ships were sent to the colonies carrying East India Company tea, including four bound for Boston.[187][188]

    News of the Tea Act set off a firestorm of protest in the colonies.[189][190] This was not a dispute about high taxes; the price of legally imported tea was actually reduced by the Tea Act. Protesters were instead concerned with a variety of other issues. The familiar “no taxation without representation” argument remained prominent, along with the question of the extent of Parliament’s authority in the colonies.[191] Some colonists worried that, by buying the cheaper tea, they would be conceding that Parliament had the right to tax them.[189] The “power of the purse” conflict was still at issue. The tea tax revenues were to be used to pay the salaries of certain royal officials, making them independent of the people.[187][192] Colonial smugglers played a significant role in the protests, since the Tea Act made legally imported tea cheaper, which threatened to put smugglers of Dutch tea out of business.[193][194] Legitimate tea importers who had not been named as consignees by the East India Company were also threatened with financial ruin by the Tea Act,[195] and other merchants worried about the precedent of a government-created monopoly.[189]

    Adams and the correspondence committees promoted opposition to the Tea Act.[189][197][190] In every colony except Massachusetts, protesters were able to force the tea consignees to resign or to return the tea to England.[198][199][200][201][202] In Boston, however, Governor Hutchinson was determined to hold his ground. He convinced the tea consignees, two of whom were his sons, not to back down.[203][204] The Boston Caucus and then the Town Meeting attempted to compel the consignees to resign, but they refused.[197][205][206][207][208][209] With the tea ships about to arrive, Adams and the Boston Committee of Correspondence contacted nearby committees to rally support.[205][210]

    The tea ship Dartmouth arrived in the Boston Harbor in late November, and Adams wrote a circular letter calling for a mass meeting to be held at Faneuil Hall on November 29. Thousands of people arrived, so many that the meeting was moved to the larger Old South Meeting House.[211][210] British law required the Dartmouth to unload and pay the duties within twenty days or customs officials could confiscate the cargo.[212] The mass meeting passed a resolution introduced by Adams urging the captain of the Dartmouth to send the ship back without paying the import duty.[210][213] Meanwhile, the meeting assigned twenty-five men to watch the ship and prevent the tea from being unloaded.[210]

    Governor Hutchinson refused to grant permission for the Dartmouth to leave without paying the duty. Two more tea ships arrived in Boston Harbor, the Eleanor and the Beaver. The fourth ship, the William, was stranded near Cape Cod and never arrived to Boston. December 16 was the last day of the Dartmouth’s deadline, and about 7,000 people gathered around the Old South Meeting House.[214] Adams received a report that Governor Hutchinson had again refused to let the ships leave, and he announced, “This meeting can do nothing further to save the country.”[215][216][217] According to a popular story, Adams’s statement was a prearranged signal for the “tea party” to begin. However, this claim did not appear in print until nearly a century after the event, in a biography of Adams written by his great-grandson, who apparently misinterpreted the evidence.[218] According to eyewitness accounts, people did not leave the meeting until ten or fifteen minutes after Adams’s alleged “signal”, and Adams in fact tried to stop people from leaving because the meeting was not yet over.[84][88][219][220][221][222][218][223]

    While Adams tried to reassert control of the meeting, people poured out of the Old South Meeting House and headed to Boston Harbor. That evening, a group of 30 to 130 men boarded the three vessels, some of them thinly disguised as Mohawk Indians, and dumped all 342 chests of tea into the water over the course of three hours.[214][224][225][226][227][228] Adams never revealed whether he went to the wharf to witness the destruction of the tea.[229] Whether or not he helped plan the event is unknown, but Adams immediately worked to publicize and defend it.[224][229] He argued that the Tea Party was not the act of a lawless mob, but was instead a principled protest and the only remaining option that the people had to defend their constitutional rights.[230]

    Great Britain responded to the Boston Tea Party in 1774 with the Coercive Acts. The first of these acts was the Boston Port Act, which closed Boston’s commerce until the East India Company had been repaid for the destroyed tea. The Massachusetts Government Act rewrote the Massachusetts Charter, making many officials royally appointed rather than elected, and severely restricting the activities of town meetings. The Administration of Justice Act allowed colonists charged with crimes to be transported to another colony or to Great Britain for trial. A new royal governor was appointed to enforce the acts: General Thomas Gage, who was also commander of British military forces in North America.[231][232][233][234]

    Adams worked to coordinate resistance to the Coercive Acts. In May 1774, the Boston Town Meeting (with Adams serving as moderator) organized an economic boycott of British goods.[232][233] In June, Adams headed a committee in the Massachusetts House—with the doors locked to prevent Gage from dissolving the legislature—which proposed that an inter-colonial congress meet in Philadelphia in September. He was one of five delegates chosen to attend the First Continental Congress.[235][2][236] Adams was never fashionably dressed and had little money, so friends bought him new clothes and paid his expenses for the journey to Philadelphia, his first trip outside of Massachusetts.[237][238][239][236][240]

    In Philadelphia, Adams promoted colonial unity while using his political skills to lobby other delegates.[241] On September 16, messenger Paul Revere brought Congress the Suffolk Resolves, one of many resolutions passed in Massachusetts that promised strident resistance to the Coercive Acts.[241][242][236][240][243][244][245] Congress endorsed the Suffolk Resolves, issued a Declaration of Rights that denied Parliament’s right to legislate for the colonies, and organized a colonial boycott known as the Continental Association.[242]

    Adams returned to Massachusetts in November 1774, where he served in the Massachusetts Provincial Congress, an extralegal legislative body independent of British control. The Provincial Congress created the first minutemen companies, consisting of militiamen who were to be ready for action on a moment’s notice.[246][247] Adams also served as moderator of the Boston Town Meeting, which convened despite the Massachusetts Government Act, and was appointed to the Committee of Inspection to enforce the Continental Association.[246] He was also selected to attend the Second Continental Congress, scheduled to meet in Philadelphia in May 1775.

    John Hancock had been added to the delegation, and he and Adams attended the Provincial Congress in Concord, Massachusetts, before Adams’s journey to the second Congress. The two men decided that it was not safe to return to Boston before leaving for Philadelphia, so they stayed at Hancock’s childhood home in Lexington.[248] On April 14, 1775, General Gage received a letter from Lord Dartmouth advising him “to arrest the principal actors and abettors in the Provincial Congress whose proceedings appear in every light to be acts of treason and rebellion”.[249] On the night of April 18, Gage sent out a detachment of soldiers on the fateful mission that sparked the American Revolutionary War. The purpose of the British expedition was to seize and destroy military supplies that the colonists had stored in Concord. According to many historical accounts, Gage also instructed his men to arrest Hancock and Adams, but the written orders issued by Gage made no mention of arresting the Patriot leaders.[250][251]

    Gage had evidently decided against seizing Adams and Hancock, but Patriots initially believed otherwise, perhaps influenced by London newspapers that reached Boston with the news that the patriot leader would be hanged if he were caught.[252] From Boston, Joseph Warren dispatched Paul Revere to warn the two that British troops were on the move and might attempt to arrest them.[253] As Hancock and Adams made their escape, the first shots of the war began at Lexington and Concord. Soon after the battle, Gage issued a proclamation granting a general pardon to all who would “lay down their arms, and return to the duties of peaceable subjects”—with the exceptions of Hancock and Samuel Adams.[254] Singling out Hancock and Adams in this manner only added to their renown among Patriots and, according to Patriot historian Mercy Otis Warren, perhaps exaggerated the importance of the two men.[255][256][257]

    The Continental Congress worked under a secrecy rule, so Adams’s precise role in congressional deliberations is not fully documented. He appears to have had a major influence, working behind the scenes as a sort of “parliamentary whip”[259] and Thomas Jefferson credits Samuel Adams—the lesser-remembered Adams—with steering the Congress toward independence, saying, “If there was any Palinurus to the Revolution, Samuel Adams was the man.”[260] He served on numerous committees, often dealing with military matters.[261] Among his more noted acts, Adams nominated George Washington to be commander in chief over the Continental Army.[262]

    Adams was a cautious advocate for a declaration of independence, urging eager correspondents back in Massachusetts to wait for more moderate colonists to come around to supporting separation from Great Britain.[87][263] He was pleased in 1775 when the colonies began to replace their old governments with independent republican governments.[264][265] He praised Thomas Paine’s popular pamphlet Common Sense, writing as “Candidus” in early 1776, and supported the call for American independence.[265] On June 7, Adams’s political ally Richard Henry Lee introduced a three-part resolution calling for Congress to declare independence, create a colonial confederation, and seek foreign aid. After a delay to rally support, Congress approved the language of the United States Declaration of Independence on July 4, 1776, which Adams signed.

    After the Declaration of Independence, Congress continued to manage the war effort. Adams served on military committees, including an appointment to the Board of War in 1777.[266][267] He advocated paying bonuses to Continental Army soldiers to encourage them to reenlist for the duration of the war.[268][269] He called for harsh state legislation to punish Loyalists—Americans who continued to support the British crown—who Adams believed were as dangerous to American liberty as British soldiers. In Massachusetts, more than 300 Loyalists were banished and their property confiscated.[270][271] After the war, Adams opposed allowing Loyalists to return to Massachusetts, fearing that they would work to undermine republican government.[272][273]

    Adams was the Massachusetts delegate appointed to the committee to draft the Articles of Confederation, the plan for the colonial confederation. With its emphasis on state sovereignty, the Articles reflected Congress’s wariness of a strong central government, a concern shared by Adams. Like others at the time, Adams considered himself a citizen of the United States while continuing to refer to Massachusetts as his “country”.[271][274][275] After much debate, the Articles were sent to the states for ratification in November 1777. From Philadelphia, Adams urged Massachusetts to ratify, which it did. Adams signed the Articles of Confederation with the other Massachusetts delegates in 1778, but they were not ratified by all the states until 1781.

    Adams returned to Boston in 1779 to attend a state constitutional convention. The Massachusetts General Court had proposed a new constitution the previous year, but voters rejected it, and so a convention was held to try again. Adams was appointed to a three-man drafting committee with his cousin John Adams and James Bowdoin.[276] They drafted the Massachusetts Constitution, which was amended by the convention and approved by voters in 1780. The new constitution established a republican form of government, with annual elections and a separation of powers. It reflected Adams’s belief that “a state is never free except when each citizen is bound by no law whatever that he has not approved of, either directly, or through his representatives”.[277] By modern standards, the new constitution was not “democratic”; Adams, like most of his peers, believed that only free males who owned property should be allowed to vote, and that the senate and the governor served to balance any excesses that might result from majority rule.[278][277][279]

    In 1781, Adams retired from the Continental Congress. His health was one reason; he was approaching his sixtieth birthday and suffered from tremors that made writing difficult.[280] But he also wanted to return to Massachusetts to influence politics in the Commonwealth.[281] He returned to Boston in 1781, and never left Massachusetts again.[282][283]

    Adams remained active in politics upon his return to Massachusetts. He frequently served as moderator of the Boston Town Meeting, and was elected to the state senate, where he often served as that body’s president.[284]

    Adams focused his political agenda on promoting virtue, which he considered essential in a republican government. If republican leaders lacked virtue, he believed, liberty was endangered. His major opponent in this campaign was his former protégé John Hancock; the two men had a falling out in the Continental Congress. Adams disapproved of what he viewed as Hancock’s vanity and extravagance, which Adams believed were inappropriate in a republican leader. When Hancock left Congress in 1777, Adams and the other Massachusetts delegates voted against thanking him for his service as president of Congress.[285] The struggle continued in Massachusetts. Adams thought that Hancock was not acting the part of a virtuous republican leader by acting like an aristocrat and courting popularity.[285] Adams favored James Bowdoin for governor, and was distressed when Hancock won annual landslide victories.[286][287][281][284]

    Adams’s promotion of public virtue took several forms. He played a major role in getting Boston to provide a free public education for children, even for girls, which was controversial.[288][272][273] Adams was one of the charter members of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences in 1780.[289] After the Revolutionary War, Adams joined others, including Thomas Jefferson, in denouncing the Society of the Cincinnati, an organization of former army officers. Adams worried that the Society was “a stride towards an hereditary military nobility”, and thus a threat to republicanism.[290] Adams also believed that public theaters undermined civic virtue, and he joined an ultimately unsuccessful effort to keep theaters banned in Boston.[272][291] Decades after Adams’s death, orator Edward Everett called him “the last of the Puritans”.[292]

    I firmly believe that the benevolent Creator designed the republican Form of Government for Man.

    Samuel Adams, April 14, 1785[293][294]

    Postwar economic troubles in western Massachusetts led to an uprising known as Shays’s Rebellion, which began in 1786. Small farmers, angered by high taxes and debts, armed themselves and shut down debtor courts in two counties. Governor James Bowdoin sent four thousand militiamen to put down the uprising, an action supported by Adams.[295] His old political ally James Warren thought that Adams had forsaken his principles, but Adams saw no contradiction. He approved of rebellion against an unrepresentative government, as had happened during the American Revolution, but he opposed taking up arms against a republican government, where problems should be remedied through elections. He thought that the leaders of Shays’s Rebellion should be hanged, reportedly saying that “the man who dares to rebel against the laws of a republic ought to suffer death”.[220][221][295][296]

    Shays’s Rebellion contributed to the belief that the Articles of Confederation needed to be revised. In 1787, delegates to the Philadelphia Convention, instead of revising the Articles, created a new United States Constitution with a much stronger national government. The Constitution was sent to the states for ratification, when Adams expressed his displeasure. “I confess,” he wrote to Richard Henry Lee in 1787, “as I enter the Building I stumble at the Threshold. I meet with a National Government, instead of a Federal Union of States.”[296] Adams was one of those derisively labeled “Anti-Federalists” by proponents of the new Constitution, who called themselves “Federalists”.[296][297] Adams was elected to the Massachusetts ratifying convention which met in January 1788. Despite his reservations, Adams rarely spoke at the convention, and listened carefully to the arguments rather than raising objections.[298][299] Adams and John Hancock had reconciled, and they finally agreed to give their support for the Constitution, with the proviso that some amendments be added later.[300][301] Even with the support of Hancock and Adams, the Massachusetts convention narrowly ratified the Constitution by a vote of 187 to 168.[302]

    While Adams was attending the ratifying convention, his only son Samuel Adams, Jr. died at just 37 years of age. The younger Adams had served as surgeon in the Revolutionary War, but had fallen ill and never fully recovered. The death was a stunning blow to the elder Adams.[303] The younger Adams left his father the certificates that he had earned as a soldier, giving Adams and his wife unexpected financial security in their final years. Investments in land made them relatively wealthy by the mid-1790s, but this did not alter their frugal lifestyle.[304][305]

    Adams was concerned about the new Constitution and made an attempt to re-enter national politics. He allowed his name to be put forth as a candidate for the United States House of Representatives in the December 1788 election, but lost to Fisher Ames, apparently because Ames was a stronger supporter of the Constitution, a more popular position.[306] Despite his defeat, Adams continued to work for amendments to the Constitution, a movement that ultimately resulted in the addition of a Bill of Rights in 1791.[307] Adams subsequently became a firm supporter of the Constitution, with these amendments and the possibility of more.[308][309]

    In 1789, Adams was elected Lieutenant Governor of Massachusetts and served in that office until Governor Hancock’s death in 1793, when he became acting governor. The next year, Adams was elected as governor in his own right, the first of four annual terms. He was generally regarded as the leader of his state’s Jeffersonian Republicans, who were opposed to the Federalist Party.[310] Unlike some other Republicans, Adams supported the suppression of the Whiskey Rebellion in 1794 for the same reasons that he had opposed Shays’s Rebellion.[308] Like his fellow Republicans, he spoke out against the Jay Treaty in 1796, a position that drew criticism in a state that was increasingly Federalist.[311][312] In that year’s U. S. presidential election, Republicans in Virginia cast 15 electoral votes for Adams in an effort to make him Jefferson’s vice-president,[313] but Federalist John Adams won the election, with Jefferson becoming vice-president. The Adams cousins remained friends, but Samuel was pleased when Jefferson defeated John Adams in the 1800 presidential election.[305]

    Samuel Adams took a cue from President Washington, who declined to run for reelection in 1796: he retired from politics at the end of his term as governor in 1797.[314] Adams suffered from what is now believed to have been essential tremor, a movement disorder that rendered him unable to write in the final decade of his life.[315] He died at the age of 81 on October 2, 1803, and was interred at the Granary Burying Ground in Boston.[316][317] Boston’s Republican newspaper the Independent Chronicle eulogized him as the “Father of the American Revolution”.[318]

    Samuel Adams is a controversial figure in American history. Disagreement about his significance and reputation began before his death and continues to the present.[319][320][321]

    Adams’s contemporaries, both friends and foes, regarded him as one of the foremost leaders of the American Revolution. Thomas Jefferson, for example, characterized Adams as “truly the Man of the Revolution.”[322] Leaders in other colonies were compared to him; Cornelius Harnett was called the “Samuel Adams of North Carolina”, Charles Thomson the “Samuel Adams of Philadelphia”,[323] and Christopher Gadsden the “Sam Adams of the South”.[324] When John Adams traveled to France during the Revolution, he had to explain that he was not Samuel, “the famous Adams”.[323]

    Supporters of the Revolution praised Adams, but Loyalists viewed him as a sinister figure. Peter Oliver, the exiled chief justice of Massachusetts, characterized him as a devious Machiavellian with a “cloven Foot”.[321] Thomas Hutchinson, Adams’s political foe, took his revenge in his History of Massachusetts Bay, in which he denounced him as a dishonest character assassin, emphasizing his failures as a businessman and tax collector. This hostile “Tory interpretation” of Adams was revived in the 20th century by historian Clifford K. Shipton in the Sibley’s Harvard Graduates reference series.[325][326] Shipton wrote positive portraits of Hutchinson and Oliver and scathing sketches of Adams and Hancock; his entry on Adams was characterized by historian Pauline Maier as “forty-five pages of contempt”.[327]

    Whig historians challenged the “Tory interpretation” of Adams. William Gordon and Mercy Otis Warren, two historians who knew Adams, wrote of him as a man selflessly dedicated to the American Revolution.[326][328] But in the early 19th century, Adams was often viewed as an old-fashioned Puritan, and was consequently neglected by historians.[329][319] Interest in Adams was revived in the mid-19th century. Historian George Bancroft portrayed him favorably in his monumental History of the United States from the Discovery of the American Continent (1852). The first full biography of Adams appeared in 1865, a three-volume work written by William Wells, his great-grandson.[329][319][328][330] The Wells biography is still valuable for its wealth of information,[41] although Whig portrayals of Adams were uncritically pro-American and had elements of hagiography, a view that influenced some later biographies written for general audiences.[328][142][331][332]

    In the late 19th century, many American historians were uncomfortable with contemporary revolutions and found it problematic to write approvingly about Adams. Relations had improved between the United States and the United Kingdom, and Adams’s role in dividing Americans from Britons was increasingly viewed with regret.[333][330] In 1885, James Hosmer wrote a biography that praised Adams, but also found some of his actions troubling, such as the 1773 publication of Hutchinson’s private letters.[334] Subsequent biographers became increasingly hostile towards Adams and the common people whom he represented. In 1923, Ralph V. Harlow used a “Freudian” approach to characterize Adams as a “neurotic crank” driven by an “inferiority complex”.[335][327][80][336] Harlow argued that, because the masses were easily misled, Adams “manufactured public opinion” to produce the Revolution, a view that became the thesis of John C. Miller’s 1936 biography Sam Adams: Pioneer in Propaganda.[327][80] Miller portrayed Adams more as an incendiary revolutionary than an adroit political operative, attributing to this one man all the acts of Boston’s “body of the people”, and consistently calling his subject “Sam”, despite the fact that Adams was almost always known as “Samuel” in his lifetime.[41][337][338]

    Miller’s influential book became, in the words of historian Charles Akers, the “scholarly enshrinement” of “the myth of Sam Adams as the Boston dictator who almost single-handedly led his colony into rebellion”.[339] According to Akers, Miller and other historians used “Sam did it” to explain crowd actions and other developments, without citing any evidence that Adams directed those events.[340] In 1974, Akers called on historians to critically re-examine the sources rather than simply repeating the myth.[341] By then, scholars were increasingly rejecting the notion that Adams and others used “propaganda” to incite “ignorant mobs”, and were instead portraying a revolutionary Massachusetts too complex to have been controlled by one man.[143][144][145] Historian Pauline Maier argued that Adams, far from being a radical mob leader, took a moderate position based on the English revolutionary tradition that imposed strict constraints on resistance to authority. That belief justified force only against threats to the constitutional rights so grave that the “body of the people” recognized the danger, and only after all peaceful means of redress had failed. Within that revolutionary tradition, resistance was essentially conservative. In 2004, Ray Raphael’s Founding Myths continued Maier’s line by deconstructing several of the “Sam” Adams myths that are still repeated in many textbooks and popular histories.[342]

    Samuel Adams’s name has been appropriated by commercial and non-profit ventures since his death. The Boston Beer Company created Samuel Adams Boston Lager in 1985, drawing upon the tradition that Adams had been a brewer; it became a popular award-winning brand.[343] Adams’s name is also used by a pair of non-profit organizations, the Sam Adams Alliance and the Sam Adams Foundation. These groups take their names from Adams in homage to his ability to organize citizens at the local level to achieve a national goal.[344]


    Samuel Adams is the flagship brand of the Boston Beer Company. The brand name (often shortened to Sam Adams) was chosen in honor of Founding Father of the United States Samuel Adams. Adams inherited his father’s brewery on King Street (modern day State Street). Some historians say he was a brewer, while others describe him as a maltster.[1] The Samuel Adams brewery is located in Boston, Massachusetts, United States, where visitors can take a tour, and shop beers and merchandise.[2] Samuel Adams beer is brewed by the Boston Beer Company, which was founded by Jim Koch in Cambridge, MA, where he started the micro-brewery out of his home. Koch comes from a long line of Cincinnati brewers, and Samuel Adams beer was started using a recipe now known as the Samuel Adams Boston Lager.[3]

    The flagship product of Boston Brewing Company, Boston Lager is brewed according to Koch’s great-great grandfather’s recipe. The process includes decoction mash (a four vessel process) and krausening (a secondary fermentation). Boston Lager is also dry hopped using the Hallertau Mittelfrueh and Tettnang Tettnanger hops.[4]

    A New England-style “hazy and juicy” India pale ale, formerly marketed as “New England IPA.”

    Introduced in 2018 as “Sam ’76 Lager,” Wicked Easy is a light lager with citrus notes.

    A double New England-style IPA introduced in 2021.

    samuel adams

    A non-alcoholic hazy IPA introduced in 2021.

    A New England-style pale ale, with peach and mango notes.

    An American-style wheat ale brewed with Michigan cherries and honey.

    An ale brewed with East Kent Goldings and Fuggles hops.

    First brewed in 2014, Samuel Adams Rebel IPA is a West Coast style India pale ale. The beer is brewed with five American hops: American Cascade, Simcoe, Chinook, Centennial, and Amarillo.[5] In early 2015, Samuel Adams released Rebel Rouser, a double IPA, and Rebel Rider, a session IPA. There are five flavor options in the Rebel Family: Rebel Juiced IPA, Rebel Grapefruit IPA, Rebel Rouser IPA, Rebel Cascade IPA, and Rebel Raw IPA.

    Introduced in 2001, Sam Adams Light is the second light beer produced by Boston Beer Company. The company previously sold Boston Lightship, which was introduced in 1993.[6]

  • what six states border south dakota
  • These Belgian style beers are left in large wood barrels to age and pick up some of the flavors of the wood.[7] The beers in this collection include American Kriek, New World, Stony Brook Red, Thirteenth Hour and Tetravis.[8]

    Originally brewed in a nano brewery in 2014, the Nitro Project is a collection of two styles that are infused with nitrogen gas in the carbonation process. The two brews are Nitro Coffee Stout and Nitro White Ale. There was also a third style, Nitro IPA, which is not currently brewed. In a Boston Globe article, Jim Koch describes the process of infusing the nitrogen as “difficult”.[9]

    In 2002, the company released Utopias. At 24% abv, it was marketed as the strongest commercial beer in the world (a mark that has since been challenged).[citation needed] The company subsequently released new “vintages” of Utopias annually, increasing the alcoholic content to 27% abv by 2007, and increasing further to 28% abv in 2019.[10]

    Utopias is made with caramel, Vienna, Moravian and Bavarian smoked malts, and four varieties of noble hops: Hallertauer Mittelfrüh, Tettnanger, Spalter, and Saaz hops. The beer is matured in scotch, cognac and port barrels for almost a year. A limited number of bottles are released each year; in 2007, only 12,000 bottles were produced, and in 2009, only 9,000 bottles were released.[11][12] Sold in a ceramic bottle resembling a copper-finished brewing kettle, a single bottle of Utopias cost $100 in 2002, $150 in 2009, $200 in 2017, and $210 in 2019.[13]

    Because of legal restrictions, Utopias is not offered in the states of Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Idaho, Missouri, Mississippi, Montana, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Carolina, Utah, Vermont, or West Virginia.[14]

    In addition to year-round offerings, Samuel Adams also has limited release varieties for each season, available both individually and in seasonal variety packs. The spring seasonal beers are Cold Snap, a Witbier brewed with orange peel and spices, and Alpine Lager, an unfiltered lager, with a third spring seasonal, Golden Ale, available exclusively in the Gameday Beers variety pack. The spring seasonals are sold from January to March. The summer offerings are available from April through July, and include Summer Ale, a wheat ale brewed with grains of paradise, and Porch Rocker, a radler. Two additional summer seasonals are available exclusively in the Sips of Summer variety pack: Beach Session IPA and Lawn Chair Lager. The fall seasonal beers are available August through October and include OctoberFest, a Marzen, Jack-O, a pumpkin shandy, and Festbier, a German-style pale lager. The winter seasonal beers are available November through December and include Winter Lager, a bock, and Holiday White Ale, a spiced white ale. Two additional winter beers are available exclusively in the Winter Classics variety pack: American IPA, an American-style India pale ale, and Holiday Porter, a porter.

    Samuel Adams offers additional limited release beers for purchase at its breweries in Boston and Cincinnati. Other limited release beers are made available in the Boston/New England market, such as 26.2 Brew, brewed in honor of the Boston Marathon.

    Beginning with the 2018 season, Samuel Adams became the official beer of the Boston Red Sox replacing Budweiser. The eight-year deal will last through the 2025 season and include signage at Fenway Park. The agreement also allows Boston Beer to use the Red Sox logo for marketing purposes, as well as to conduct Red Sox related contests with tickets to games.[15]

    As of 2020, Samuel Adams’s Fenway Faithful IPA, a session IPA, is the official beer of the Boston Red Sox.

    The Boston Brewery opened in 1989 and it is where every beer was first made, aside from the Boston Lager. There are two other breweries in Cincinnati, Ohio and Lehigh Valley, Pennsylvania. Only the Boston Brewery is open for public tours and tastings.[16]

    Samuel Adams beer has gained attention in the media for its various beers. In a list of “Best Christmas/Winter Beer in Each State”, Samuel Adams’ Fezziwig brew won in the state of Massachusetts.[17] Additionally, Samuel Adams brewery itself was named the best brewery in all of Massachusetts according to a Yelp-based Buzzed article.[18]

    Samuel Adams Sr. (1689–1748) was an American brewer, father of American founding father Samuel Adams and first cousin once removed of John Adams.

    He was born in Boston, on May 16, 1689 to Captain John Adams and Hannah Adams (nee Webb). He was a deacon in the Congregational Church.[1]

    He was a Boston Caucus member with Elisha Cooke.[2]
    In 1740, he helped create a Land Bank, in Massachusetts Bay Colony, using paper money to promote commerce, with a scarcity of gold and silver coins. In July 1741, the House of Commons passed a bill destroying the land bank, by making shareholders liable for the bank’s debts.[3][4]

    In 1713, he married Mary Fifield.[1]
    They had twelve children. Three survived into adulthood, including Samuel Adams.[5] Adams Sr. died in 1748.


    The Granary Burying Ground in Massachusetts is the city of Boston’s third-oldest cemetery, founded in 1660 and located on Tremont Street. It is the final resting place for many notable Revolutionary War-era patriots, including Paul Revere, the five victims of the Boston Massacre, and three signers of the Declaration of Independence: Samuel Adams, John Hancock, and Robert Treat Paine. The cemetery has 2,345 grave-markers, but historians estimate that as many as 5,000 people are buried in it.[1] The cemetery is adjacent to Park Street Church, behind the Boston Athenaeum and immediately across from Suffolk University Law School. It is a site on Boston’s Freedom Trail.

    The cemetery’s Egyptian revival gate and fence were designed by architect Isaiah Rogers (1800–1869), who designed an identical gate for Newport’s Touro Cemetery.[2]

    The Burying Ground was the third cemetery established in the city of Boston and dates to 1660.[3] The need for the site arose because the land set aside for the city’s first cemetery—King’s Chapel Burying Ground, located a block east—was insufficient to meet the city’s growing population. The area was known as the South Burying Ground until 1737, at which point it took on the name of the granary building which stood on the site of the present-day Park Street Church. In May 1830, trees were planted in the area and an attempt was made to change the name to “Franklin Cemetery” to honor the family of Benjamin Franklin, but the effort failed.

    The Burying Ground was originally part of the Boston Common, which then encompassed the entire block. The southwest portion of the block was taken for public buildings two years after the cemetery was established, which included the Granary and a house of correction,[4] and the north portion of the block was used for housing.

    Tombs were initially placed near the back of the property. Puritan churches did not believe in religious icons or imagery, so the people of Boston used tombstones as an outlet for artistic expression of their beliefs about the afterlife. One of the most popular motifs was the “Soul Effigy,” a skull or “death’s head” with a wing on each side that was a representation of the soul flying to heaven after death. On May 15, 1717, a vote was passed by the town to enlarge the Burying Ground by taking part of the highway on the eastern side (now Tremont Street). The enlargement was carried out in 1720 when 15 tombs were created and assigned to a number of Boston families.
    samuel adams

    Eleven large European elms fronted it on Tremont Street.[5] The elms were planted in 1762 by Major Adino Paddock and John Ballard and reached ten feet in circumference by 1856. The walk under the elms was known as “Paddock’s Mall,” while the rest of the grounds were devoid of any trees at all. The first major improvement was undertaken in 1830, when a number of trees were planted around the grounds. The property was improved again in 1840 by the construction of an iron fence on Tremont Street. The fence was designed by Boston architect Isaiah Rogers at a cost of $5,000, half paid by the city and half by public subscription.[6] Rogers designed an identical Egyptian revival gateway for Newport’s Touro Cemetery.[2]

    In January 2009, a previously unknown crypt was discovered when a tourist on a self-guided tour through the cemetery fell through the ground into what appeared to be a stairway leading to a crypt. The stairway had been covered with a piece of slate which eventually gave way due to advanced age. (The tourist was not hurt, nor did she come into contact with any human remains.) The crypt is reported to be 8 by 12 feet and is structurally intact. It is possibly the resting place of Jonathan Armitage, a Boston selectman from 1732 to 1733.[7] Officials from the City of Boston announced in May, 2011 a $300,000 refurbishment project designed to repair and restore the historic site, including widening paths in the cemetery and providing new observation sites: $125,000 will be provided by the Freedom Trail Foundation and the city will pay the rest.[8]

    Prominently displayed in the Burying Ground is an obelisk erected in 1827 to the parents and relatives of Benjamin Franklin who was born in Boston and is buried in Philadelphia. Franklin’s father was Josiah Franklin, originally from Ecton, Northamptonshire, England, and his mother was Abiah, who was born in Nantucket and was Josiah’s second wife. Constructed of granite from the Bunker Hill Monument quarry, the obelisk was constructed to replace the original Franklin family gravestones which had been in poor condition. The new memorial was dedicated on 15 June 1827.

    The second oldest memorial in the yard lies near the Franklin monument memorializing John Wakefield, aged 52 who died 18 June 1667. The reason(s) for the seven-year gap between the establishment of the burying ground and the oldest memorial are unknown.[9] The oldest stone is that of the Neal Children, carved by the ‘Charlestown Carver’ dating to 1666.

    Near the Tremont Street entrance are the ashes of the American casualties in the Boston Massacre which occurred 5 March 1770. The grave markers were moved during the 1800s to be in straight lines, to conform to nineteenth century ideas of order, as well as to allow for more modern groundskeeping (i.e., the lawn mower).[10]

    Grave of Samuel Adams.

  • how many children did aretha franklin have
  • Grave of Crispus Attucks, Christopher Seider, and other victims of the Boston Massacre

    James Bowdoin’s tomb

    Peter Faneuil’s tomb

    Mary Goose’s grave

    John Hancock memorial

    James Otis’ grave

    Paul Revere memorial

    USS Trumbull (1776) depicted on the 1780 grave of Lt. Jabez Smith, killed aboard the ship

    Grave of Increase Sumner, fifth Governor of Massachusetts

    Grave of John Wheatley, owner of Phillis Wheatley

    Granary Burying Ground from above

    Increase Sumner (November 27, 1746 – June 7, 1799) was an American lawyer, jurist, and politician from Massachusetts. He was the fifth governor of Massachusetts, serving from 1797 to 1799. Trained as a lawyer, he served in the provisional government of Massachusetts during the American Revolutionary War, and was elected to the Confederation Congress in 1782. Appointed to the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court the same year, he served there as an associate justice until 1797.

    He was elected governor of Massachusetts three times by wide margins, but died shortly after the start of his third term. His descendants include his son William H. Sumner, for whom the Sumner Tunnel in Boston, Massachusetts is named, and 20th-century diplomats Sumner Welles and Sumner Gerard.

    Increase Sumner was born on November 27, 1746 in Roxbury, Province of Massachusetts Bay, one of eight children of Increase Sumner and Sarah Sharp.[1][2] The elder Increase Sumner was a successful farmer descended from early settlers of Dorchester; he held a number of public offices including coroner for Suffolk County, and selectman of Roxbury.[3]

    In 1752 Sumner enrolled in the grammar school in Roxbury, now Roxbury Latin School, where the headmaster was William Cushing, future justice of the Supreme Court of the United States.[2] Sumner excelled at school, and over the resistance of his father (who envisioned his son’s future to be in agriculture) was enrolled at Harvard College in 1763. He graduated in 1767.[4]
    samuel adams

    After graduating from Harvard, Sumner took charge of the Roxbury school, where he taught for two years while he apprenticed law under Samuel Quincy, the provincial solicitor general. He sought to study under John Adams, but the latter had enough students. Adams wrote that Sumner “was a promising genius, and a studious and virtuous youth.”[4] Sumner was admitted to the bar in 1770 and opened a law office in Roxbury that year.[5]

    Sumner was chosen a member of the Massachusetts Provincial Congress in 1776 where he represented the town of Roxbury.[4] In 1777 he participated in a state convention to draft a new constitution, whose result was not adopted.[6][7] He continued to serve in the provincial congress until the state constitution was adopted in 1780, when he was elected state senator for Suffolk County. This post he held for two years.[6] In June 1782 he was elected to the Confederation Congress by the state legislature, replacing Timothy Danielson, who resigned, but Sumner never actually took the seat. In August 1782 Governor John Hancock nominated him as an associate justice of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court to replace James Sullivan. He accepted this position instead of the senate seat, and served from 1782 to 1797.[8] Details on his judicial record are sparse, in part because few official court records survive from the time, and decisions were usually oral (the court did not begin formal record keeping with written decisions until 1805).[9] Sumner did take detailed notes of many of the cases he heard; these notes, preserved at the Massachusetts Historical Society, now form a valuable repository of early Massachusetts judicial history.[10][11]

    The period when he served in the Supreme Judicial Court included a time of great turmoil in Massachusetts. Following the American Revolutionary War the value of the paper currency then in circulation fell significantly leaving many citizens in financial difficulties. The administration of James Bowdoin in 1786 raised taxes to pay the public debt which had run up during the war, and stepped up collection of back taxes. These economic pressures led to outbreaks of civil unrest which culminated in Shays’ Rebellion, an uprising in central and western Massachusetts lasting from 1786 to 1787. Sumner sat on the criminal cases in which participants of the rebellion were tried. Many participants were pardoned, but eighteen were convicted and sentenced to death. Most of these sentences were commuted; two men were hanged.[12][13]

    Sumner sat on the court when it heard the appeals in the Quock Walker cases in 1783, concerning a former slave who was seeking confirmation of his freedom. A ruling in one of these cases confirmed that the state constitution had effectively abolished slavery.[14] In 1785 he was chosen by the legislature to sit on a committee which revised the laws of the state, to modernize them and remove references to British authority.[15][16] In 1789 he was a member of the state convention that met to ratify the United States Constitution, in which he explained to the convention the meaning and importance of habeas corpus.[17] He was elected a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences in 1791.[18]

    In 1795 some factions of the Federalist Party sought to promote Sumner as a candidate for governor, but he was not formally nominated, and Governor Samuel Adams was reelected.[19] The following year Sumner was actively promoted by the Federalists, but Adams was able to prevail by a comfortable margin.[20] The campaign was not very divisive: Sumner was presented as comparatively youthful alternative to the aging Adams.[21] Sumner wrote afterwards that Adams “has waded through a sea of political troubles and grown old in labors for the good of his country.”[22]

    Adams’ popularity, however, was declining, and he decided not to run for reelection in 1797. A number of popular figures were raised as nominees, and in that year’s election, Sumner won the vote with 15,000 out of a total of 25,000 votes cast against a divided opposition.[23][24] On June 2 Sumner rode from his home in Roxbury accompanied by 300 citizens on horseback to the State House in Boston, where the Secretary of the Commonwealth proclaimed his governorship from the eastern balcony. Sumner was the last governor to preside in what is now called the Old State House as the seat of government was moved to the New State House the following year.[25]

  • chicago bears mascot name
  • Sumner was reelected in 1798 and 1799 against minimal opposition.[26] His popularity as governor was seen by his garnering a larger share of the vote for his third term, where he won 17,000 out of 21,000 votes cast,[23] receiving unanimous votes in 180 towns out of 393 in the state.[27] During Sumner’s period in office the state was principally preoccupied with the threat of attack by France as a result of the ongoing naval Quasi-War. Comparatively younger and more vigorous than his predecessors, Sumner actively built up the state militia and worked to ensure its preparedness in case of attack.[28]

    Sumner never assumed the duties of office after winning the 1799 election as he was sick on his death bed at the time. In order to avoid constitutional issues surrounding the succession to the governor’s office, he managed to take the oath of office in early June.[27] He died in office from angina pectoris, aged 52 on June 7, 1799. His funeral, with full military honors, took place on June 12, and was attended by United States President John Adams.[29] The funeral procession which included four regiments of militia ran from the governor’s Roxbury mansion to a service at the Old South Meeting House.[30] He is interred at the northerly corner of Boston’s Granary Burying Ground.[31] The brass epitaph indicates:

    Here repose the remains of Increase Sumner. He was born at Roxbury, November 27, 1746, and died at the same place, June 7, 1799 in the 53rd year of his age. He was for sometime a practitioner at the bar; and for fifteen years an associate judge of the supreme judicial court; was thrice elected governor of Massachusetts in which office he died. As a lawyer he was faithful and able. As a judge, patient, impartial and decisive. As a chief magistrate, accessible, frank and decisive. In private life, he was affectionate and mild. In public life was dignified and firm. Party feuds were allayed by the correctness of his conduct. Calumny was silenced by the weight of his virtues and rancour softened by the amenity of his manners in the vigour of intellectual attainments and in the midst of usefulness. He was called by Divine Providence to rest with his fathers and went down to the chambers of death in the full belief that the grave is the pathway to future existence.

    The lieutenant governor, Moses Gill, became acting governor and ran the state until elections were held in 1800.[32]

    Sumner was married on September 30, 1779 to Elizabeth Hyslop, daughter of William Hyslop.[33] Upon his father-in-law’s death, Sumner inherited a sizable estate which allowed him to maintain a dignified lifestyle during his public service.[34] The couple had three children;[35] his son William H. Sumner is well known for his efforts to develop what is now East Boston and for whom Boston’s Sumner Tunnel is named.[36] His later descendants include Sumner Welles, a 20th-century diplomat and advisor to President Franklin Delano Roosevelt,[37][38] and Sumner Gerard, a 20th-century diplomat, Montana politician, and U.S. Ambassador to Jamaica.[39] Sumner, Maine, incorporated while he was governor in 1798, was named in his honor.[40]

    Sumner was described by his son as a talented and practical farmer and an excellent horseman. He was fond of agriculture and personally grafted an entire orchard of fruit trees on his farm.[34] He was a member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and President of the Board of Trustees of the Roxbury Latin School.[41]

    At his confirmation hearings in 2017, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch recalled being moved by reading Sumner’s gravestone as a law student at Harvard. Gorsuch closed his opening statement by reading a portion of Sumner’s epitaph and adding “[T]hose words stick with me. I keep them on my desk. They serve for me as a daily reminder of the law’s integrity, that a useful life can be led in its service, of the hard work it takes, and an encouragement to good habits when I fail and when I falter. At the end of it all, I can ask for nothing more than to be described as he was. And if confirmed, I pledge to you that I will do everything in my power to be that man.”[42]


    “Book of Members, 1780–2010: Chapter S”Downloads-icon


    John Hancock (January 23, 1737 [O.S. January 12, 1736] – October 8, 1793) was an American merchant, statesman, and prominent Patriot of the American Revolution. He served as president of the Second Continental Congress and was the first and third Governor of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. He is remembered for his large and stylish signature on the United States Declaration of Independence, so much so that the term John Hancock or Hancock has become a nickname in the United States for one’s signature.[2]

    Before the American Revolution, Hancock was one of the wealthiest men in the Thirteen Colonies, having inherited a profitable mercantile business from his uncle. He began his political career in Boston as a protégé of Samuel Adams, an influential local politician, though the two men later became estranged. Hancock used his wealth to support the colonial cause as tensions increased between colonists and Great Britain in the 1760s. He became very popular in Massachusetts, especially after British officials seized his sloop Liberty in 1768 and charged him with smuggling. Those charges were eventually dropped; he has often been described as a smuggler in historical accounts, but the accuracy of this characterization has been questioned.

    Hancock was one of Boston’s leaders during the crisis that led to the outbreak of the American Revolutionary War in 1775. He served more than two years in the Continental Congress in Philadelphia, and he was the first to sign the Declaration of Independence in his position as president of Congress. He returned to Massachusetts and was elected governor of the Commonwealth, serving in that role for most of his remaining years. He used his influence to ensure that Massachusetts ratified the United States Constitution in 1788.
    samuel adams

    John Hancock was born on January 23, 1737[3] in Braintree, Massachusetts, in a part of town that eventually became the separate city of Quincy.[4] He was the son of Col. John Hancock Jr. of Braintree and Mary Hawke Thaxter (widow of Samuel Thaxter Junior), who was from nearby Hingham. As a child, Hancock became a casual acquaintance of young John Adams, whom the Reverend Hancock had baptized in 1735.[5][6] The Hancocks lived a comfortable life, and owned one slave to help with household work.[5]

    After Hancock’s father died in 1744, John was sent to live with his uncle and aunt, Thomas Hancock and Lydia (Henchman) Hancock. Thomas Hancock was the proprietor of a firm known as the House of Hancock, which imported manufactured goods from Britain and exported rum, whale oil, and fish.[7] Thomas Hancock’s highly successful business made him one of Boston’s richest and best-known residents.[8][9] He and Lydia, along with several servants and slaves, lived in Hancock Manor on Beacon Hill. The couple, who did not have any children of their own, became the dominant influence on John’s life.[10]

    After graduating from the Boston Latin School in 1750, Hancock enrolled in Harvard College and received a bachelor’s degree in 1754.[11][12] Upon graduation, he began to work for his uncle, just as the French and Indian War (1754–1763) had begun. Thomas Hancock had close relations with the royal governors of Massachusetts and secured profitable government contracts during the war.[13] John Hancock learned much about his uncle’s business during these years and was trained for eventual partnership in the firm. Hancock worked hard, but he also enjoyed playing the role of a wealthy aristocrat and developed a fondness for expensive clothes.[14][15]

    From 1760 to 1761, Hancock lived in England while building relationships with customers and suppliers. Upon returning to Boston, Hancock gradually took over the House of Hancock as his uncle’s health failed, becoming a full partner in January 1763.[16][17][18] He became a member of the Masonic Lodge of St. Andrew in October 1762, which connected him with many of Boston’s most influential citizens.[19] When Thomas Hancock died in August 1764, John inherited the business, Hancock Manor, two or three household slaves, and thousands of acres of land, becoming one of the wealthiest men in the colonies.[20][21] The household slaves continued to work for John and his aunt, but were eventually freed through the terms of Thomas Hancock’s will; there is no evidence that John Hancock ever bought or sold slaves.[22]

    After its victory in the Seven Years’ War (1756–1763), the British Empire was deeply in debt. Looking for new sources of revenue, the British Parliament sought, for the first time, to directly tax the colonies, beginning with the Sugar Act of 1764.[23] The earlier Molasses Act of 1733, a tax on shipments from the West Indies, had produced hardly any revenue because it was widely bypassed by smuggling, which was seen as a victimless crime.

    Not only was there little social stigma attached to smuggling in the colonies, but in port cities, where trade was the primary generator of wealth, smuggling enjoyed considerable community support, and it was even possible to obtain insurance against being caught. Colonial merchants developed an impressive repertoire of evasive maneuvers to conceal the origin, nationality, routes, and content of their illicit cargoes. This included the frequent use of fraudulent paperwork to make the cargo appear legal and authorized. And much to the frustration of the British authorities, when seizures did happen local merchants were often able to use sympathetic provincial courts to reclaim confiscated goods and have their cases dismissed. For instance, Edward Randolph, the appointed head of customs in New England, brought 36 seizures to trial from 1680 to the end of 1682—and all but two of these were acquitted. Alternatively, merchants sometimes took matters into their own hands and stole illicit goods back while impounded.[24]

  • octopus number of hearts
  • The Sugar Act provoked outrage in Boston, where it was widely viewed as a violation of colonial rights. Men such as James Otis and Samuel Adams argued that because the colonists were not represented in Parliament, they could not be taxed by that body; only the colonial assemblies, where the colonists were represented, could levy taxes upon the colonies. Hancock was not yet a political activist; however, he criticized the tax for economic, rather than constitutional, reasons.[23]

    Hancock emerged as a leading political figure in Boston just as tensions with Great Britain were increasing. In March 1765, he was elected as one of Boston’s five selectmen, an office previously held by his uncle for many years.[26] Soon after, Parliament passed the 1765 Stamp Act, a tax on legal documents, such as wills, that had been levied in Britain for many years but which was wildly unpopular in the colonies, producing riots and organized resistance. Hancock initially took a moderate position: as a loyal British subject, he thought that the colonists should submit to the act, even though he believed that Parliament was misguided.[27] Within a few months, Hancock had changed his mind, although he continued to disapprove of violence and the intimidation of royal officials by mobs.[28] Hancock joined the resistance to the Stamp Act by participating in a boycott of British goods, which made him popular in Boston. After Bostonians learned of the impending repeal of the Stamp Act, Hancock was elected to the Massachusetts House of Representatives in May 1766.[29]

    Hancock’s political success benefited from the support of Samuel Adams, the clerk of the House of Representatives and a leader of Boston’s “popular party”, also known as “Whigs” and later as “Patriots”. The two men made an unlikely pair. Fifteen years older than Hancock, Adams had a somber, Puritan outlook that stood in marked contrast to Hancock’s taste for luxury and extravagance.[30][31] Apocryphal stories later portrayed Adams as masterminding Hancock’s political rise so that the merchant’s wealth could be used to further the Whig agenda.[32] Historian James Truslow Adams portrayed Hancock as shallow and vain, easily manipulated by Adams.[33] Historian William M. Fowler, who wrote biographies of both men, argued that this characterization was an exaggeration, and that the relationship between the two was symbiotic, with Adams as the mentor and Hancock the protégé.[34][35]

    After the repeal of the Stamp Act, Parliament took a different approach to raising revenue, passing the 1767 Townshend Acts, which established new duties on various imports and strengthened the customs agency by creating the American Customs Board. The British government believed that a more efficient customs system was necessary because many colonial American merchants had been smuggling. Smugglers violated the Navigation Acts by trading with ports outside of the British Empire and avoiding import taxes. Parliament hoped that the new system would reduce smuggling and generate revenue for the government.[36]

    Colonial merchants, even those not involved in smuggling, found the new regulations oppressive. Other colonists protested that new duties were another attempt by Parliament to tax the colonies without their consent. Hancock joined other Bostonians in calling for a boycott of British imports until the Townshend duties were repealed.[37] [38] In their enforcement of the customs regulations, the Customs Board targeted Hancock, Boston’s wealthiest Whig. They may have suspected that he was a smuggler, or they may have wanted to harass him because of his politics, especially after Hancock snubbed Governor Francis Bernard by refusing to attend public functions when the customs officials were present.[39][40]

    On April 9, 1768, two customs employees (called tidesmen) boarded Hancock’s brig Lydia in Boston Harbor. Hancock was summoned, and finding that the agents lacked a writ of assistance (a general search warrant), he did not allow them to go below deck. When one of them later managed to get into the hold, Hancock’s men forced the tidesman back on deck.[41][42][43][44] Customs officials wanted to file charges, but the case was dropped when Massachusetts Attorney General Jonathan Sewall ruled that Hancock had broken no laws.[45][39][46] Later, some of Hancock’s most ardent admirers would call this incident the first act of physical resistance to British authority in the colonies and credit Hancock with initiating the American Revolution.[47]

    The next incident proved to be a major event in the coming of the American Revolution. On the evening of May 9, 1768, Hancock’s sloop Liberty arrived in Boston Harbor, carrying a shipment of Madeira wine. When custom officers inspected the ship the next morning, they found that it contained 25 pipes of wine, just one fourth of the ship’s carrying capacity.[48][49][50] Hancock paid the duties on the 25 pipes of wine, but officials suspected that he had arranged to have more wine unloaded during the night to avoid paying the duties for the entire cargo.[49][51] They did not have any evidence to prove this, however, since the two tidesmen who had stayed on the ship overnight gave a sworn statement that nothing had been unloaded.[52][48]

    One month later, while the British warship HMS Romney was in port, one of the tidesmen changed his story: he now claimed that he had been forcibly held on the Liberty while it had been illegally unloaded.[53][54][55] On June 10, customs officials seized the Liberty. Bostonians were already angry because the captain of the Romney had been impressing colonists, and not just deserters from the Royal Navy, an arguably illegal activity.[56] A riot broke out when officials began to tow the Liberty out to the Romney, which was also arguably illegal.[57][58] The confrontation escalated when sailors and marines coming ashore to seize the Liberty were mistaken for a press gang.[59] After the riot, customs officials relocated to the Romney, and then to Castle William (an island fort in the harbor), claiming that they were unsafe in town.[60][54] Whigs insisted that the customs officials were exaggerating the danger so that London would send troops to Boston.[61]

    British officials filed two lawsuits stemming from the Liberty incident: an in rem suit against the ship, and an in personam suit against Hancock. Royal officials, as well as Hancock’s accuser, stood to gain financially, since, as was the custom, any penalties assessed by the court would be awarded to the governor, the informer, and the Crown, each getting a third.[62] The first suit, filed on June 22, 1768, resulted in the confiscation of the Liberty in August. Customs officials then used the ship to enforce trade regulations until it was burned by angry colonists in Rhode Island the following year.[63][64][65]

    The second trial began in October 1768, when charges were filed against Hancock and five others for allegedly unloading 100 pipes of wine from the Liberty without paying the duties.[66][67] If convicted, the defendants would have had to pay a penalty of triple the value of the wine, which came to £9,000. With John Adams serving as his lawyer, Hancock was prosecuted in a highly publicized trial by a vice admiralty court, which had no jury and did not always allow the defense to cross-examine the witnesses.[68] After dragging out for nearly five months, the proceedings against Hancock were dropped without explanation.[69][70][71]

    Although the charges against Hancock were dropped, many writers later described him as a smuggler.[72] The accuracy of this characterization has been questioned. “Hancock’s guilt or innocence and the exact charges against him”, wrote historian John W. Tyler in 1986, “are still fiercely debated.”[73] Historian Oliver Dickerson argued that Hancock was the victim of an essentially criminal racketeering scheme perpetrated by Governor Bernard and the customs officials. Dickerson believed that there is no reliable evidence that Hancock was guilty in the Liberty case, and that the purpose of the trials was to punish Hancock for political reasons and to plunder his property.[74] Opposed to Dickerson’s interpretation were Kinvin Wroth and Hiller Zobel, the editors of John Adams’s legal papers, who argued that “Hancock’s innocence is open to question”, and that the British officials acted legally, if unwisely.[75] Lawyer and historian Bernard Knollenberg concluded that the customs officials had the right to seize Hancock’s ship, but towing it out to the Romney had been illegal.[76] Legal historian John Phillip Reid argued that the testimony of both sides was so politically partial that it is not possible to objectively reconstruct the incident.[77]

    Aside from the Liberty affair, the degree to which Hancock was engaged in smuggling, which may have been widespread in the colonies, has been questioned. Given the clandestine nature of smuggling, records are scarce.[78] If Hancock was a smuggler, no documentation of this has been found. John W. Tyler identified 23 smugglers in his study of more than 400 merchants in revolutionary Boston, but found no written evidence that Hancock was one of them.[79] Biographer William Fowler concluded that while Hancock was probably engaged in some smuggling, most of his business was legitimate, and his later reputation as the “king of the colonial smugglers” is a myth without foundation.[39]

    The Liberty affair reinforced a previously made British decision to suppress unrest in Boston with a show of military might. The decision had been prompted by Samuel Adams’s 1768 Circular Letter, which was sent to other British American colonies in hopes of coordinating resistance to the Townshend Acts. Lord Hillsborough, secretary of state for the colonies, sent four regiments of the British Army to Boston to support embattled royal officials, and instructed Governor Bernard to order the Massachusetts legislature to revoke the Circular Letter. Hancock and the Massachusetts House voted against rescinding the letter, and instead drew up a petition demanding Governor Bernard’s recall.[81] When Bernard returned to England in 1769, Bostonians celebrated.[82][83]

    The British troops remained, however, and tensions between soldiers and civilians eventually resulted in the killing of five civilians in the Boston Massacre of March 1770. Hancock was not involved in the incident, but afterwards he led a committee to demand the removal of the troops. Meeting with Bernard’s successor, Governor Thomas Hutchinson, and the British officer in command, Colonel William Dalrymple, Hancock claimed that there were 10,000 armed colonists ready to march into Boston if the troops did not leave.[84][85] Hutchinson knew that Hancock was bluffing, but the soldiers were in a precarious position when garrisoned within the town, and so Dalrymple agreed to remove both regiments to Castle William.[84] Hancock was celebrated as a hero for his role in getting the troops withdrawn.[86][85] His reelection to the Massachusetts House in May was nearly unanimous.[87][88]

    After Parliament partially repealed the Townshend duties in 1770, Boston’s boycott of British goods ended.[90] Politics became quieter in Massachusetts, although tensions remained.[91] Hancock tried to improve his relationship with Governor Hutchinson, who in turn sought to woo Hancock away from Adams’s influence.[92][93] In April 1772, Hutchinson approved Hancock’s election as colonel of the Boston Cadets, a militia unit whose primary function was to provide a ceremonial escort for the governor and the General Court.[94][95] In May, Hutchinson even approved Hancock’s election to the Council, the upper chamber of the General Court, whose members were elected by the House but subject to veto by the governor. Hancock’s previous elections to the Council had been vetoed, but now Hutchinson allowed the election to stand. Hancock declined the office, however, not wanting to appear to have been co-opted by the governor. Nevertheless, Hancock used the improved relationship to resolve an ongoing dispute. To avoid hostile crowds in Boston, Hutchinson had been convening the legislature outside of town; now he agreed to allow the General Court to sit in Boston once again, to the relief of the legislators.[96]

    Hutchinson had dared to hope that he could win over Hancock and discredit Adams.[97] To some, it seemed that Adams and Hancock were indeed at odds: when Adams formed the Boston Committee of Correspondence in November 1772 to advocate colonial rights, Hancock declined to join, creating the impression that there was a split in the Whig ranks.[98] But whatever their differences, Hancock and Adams came together again in 1773 with the renewal of major political turmoil. They cooperated in the revelation of private letters of Thomas Hutchinson, in which the governor seemed to recommend “an abridgement of what are called English liberties” to bring order to the colony.[99] The Massachusetts House, blaming Hutchinson for the military occupation of Boston, called for his removal as governor.[100]

    Even more trouble followed Parliament’s passage of the 1773 Tea Act. On November 5, Hancock was elected as moderator at a Boston town meeting that resolved that anyone who supported the Tea Act was an “Enemy to America”.[101] Hancock and others tried to force the resignation of the agents who had been appointed to receive the tea shipments. Unsuccessful in this, they attempted to prevent the tea from being unloaded after three tea ships had arrived in Boston Harbor. Hancock was at the fateful meeting on December 16, where he reportedly told the crowd, “Let every man do what is right in his own eyes.”[102][103] Hancock did not take part in the Boston Tea Party that night, but he approved of the action, although he was careful not to publicly praise the destruction of private property.[104]

    Over the next few months, Hancock was disabled by gout, which would trouble him with increasing frequency in the coming years. By March 5, 1774, he had recovered enough to deliver the fourth annual Massacre Day oration, a commemoration of the Boston Massacre. Hancock’s speech denounced the presence of British troops in Boston, who he said had been sent there “to enforce obedience to acts of Parliament, which neither God nor man ever empowered them to make”.[105] The speech, probably written by Hancock in collaboration with Adams, Joseph Warren, and others, was published and widely reprinted, enhancing Hancock’s stature as a leading Patriot.[106]

    Parliament responded to the Tea Party with the Boston Port Act, one of the so-called Coercive Acts intended to strengthen British control of the colonies. Hutchinson was replaced as governor by General Thomas Gage, who arrived in May 1774. On June 17, the Massachusetts House elected five delegates to send to the First Continental Congress in Philadelphia, which was being organized to coordinate colonial response to the Coercive Acts. Hancock did not serve in the first Congress, possibly for health reasons, or possibly to remain in charge while the other Patriot leaders were away.[108][109]

    Gage soon dismissed Hancock from his post as colonel of the Boston Cadets.[110] In October 1774, Gage canceled the scheduled meeting of the General Court. In response, the House resolved itself into the Massachusetts Provincial Congress, a body independent of British control. Hancock was elected as president of the Provincial Congress and was a key member of the Committee of Safety.[111] The Provincial Congress created the first minutemen companies, consisting of militiamen who were to be ready for action on a moment’s notice.[111][112]

    On December 1, 1774, the Provincial Congress elected Hancock as a delegate to the Second Continental Congress to replace James Bowdoin, who had been unable to attend the first Congress because of illness.[111][114] Before Hancock reported to the Continental Congress in Philadelphia, the Provincial Congress unanimously reelected him as their president in February 1775. Hancock’s multiple roles gave him enormous influence in Massachusetts, and as early as January 1774 British officials had considered arresting him.[115] After attending the Provincial Congress in Concord in April 1775, Hancock and Samuel Adams decided that it was not safe to return to Boston before leaving for Philadelphia. They stayed instead at Hancock’s childhood home in Lexington.[113][116]

    Gage received a letter from Lord Dartmouth on April 14, 1775, advising him “to arrest the principal actors and abettors in the Provincial Congress whose proceedings appear in every light to be acts of treason and rebellion”.[117][118][119] On the night of April 18, Gage sent out a detachment of soldiers on the fateful mission that would spark the American Revolutionary War. The purpose of the British expedition was to seize and destroy military supplies that the colonists had stored in Concord. According to many historical accounts, Gage also instructed his men to arrest Hancock and Adams; if so, the written orders issued by Gage made no mention of arresting the Patriot leaders.[120] Gage apparently decided that he had nothing to gain by arresting Hancock and Adams, since other leaders would simply take their place, and the British would be portrayed as the aggressors.[121][122]

    Although Gage had evidently decided against seizing Hancock and Adams, Patriots initially believed otherwise. From Boston, Joseph Warren dispatched messenger Paul Revere to warn Hancock and Adams that British troops were on the move and might attempt to arrest them. Revere reached Lexington around midnight and gave the warning.[123][124] Hancock, still considering himself a militia colonel, wanted to take the field with the Patriot militia at Lexington, but Adams and others convinced him to avoid battle, arguing that he was more valuable as a political leader than as a soldier.[125][126] As Hancock and Adams made their escape, the first shots of the war were fired at Lexington and Concord. Soon after the battle, Gage issued a proclamation granting a general pardon to all who would “lay down their arms, and return to the duties of peaceable subjects”—with the exceptions of Hancock and Samuel Adams. Singling out Hancock and Adams in this manner only added to their renown among Patriots.[127]

    With the war underway, Hancock made his way to the Continental Congress in Philadelphia with the other Massachusetts delegates. On May 24, 1775, he was unanimously elected President of the Continental Congress, succeeding Peyton Randolph after Henry Middleton declined the nomination. Hancock was a good choice for president for several reasons.[128][129] He was experienced, having often presided over legislative bodies and town meetings in Massachusetts. His wealth and social standing inspired the confidence of moderate delegates, while his association with Boston radicals made him acceptable to other radicals. His position was somewhat ambiguous because the role of the president was not fully defined, and it was not clear if Randolph had resigned or was on a leave of absence.[130] Like other presidents of Congress, Hancock’s authority was mostly limited to that of a presiding officer.[131] He also had to handle a great deal of official correspondence, and he found it necessary to hire clerks at his own expense to help with the paperwork.[132][133]

    In Congress on June 15, 1775, Massachusetts delegate John Adams nominated George Washington as commander-in-chief of the army then gathered around Boston. Years later, Adams wrote that Hancock had shown great disappointment at not getting the command for himself. This brief comment from 1801 is the only source for the oft-cited claim that Hancock sought to become commander-in-chief.[134] In the early 20th century, historian James Truslow Adams wrote that the incident initiated a lifelong estrangement between Hancock and Washington, but some subsequent historians have expressed doubt that the incident, or the estrangement, ever occurred. According to historian Donald Proctor, “There is no contemporary evidence that Hancock harbored ambitions to be named commander-in-chief. Quite the contrary.”[135] Hancock and Washington maintained a good relationship after the alleged incident, and in 1778 Hancock named his only son John George Washington Hancock.[136] Hancock admired and supported General Washington, even though Washington politely declined Hancock’s request for a military appointment.[137][138]

    When Congress recessed on August 1, 1775, Hancock took the opportunity to wed his fiancée, Dorothy “Dolly” Quincy. The couple was married on August 28 in Fairfield, Connecticut.[139][140] John and Dorothy would have two children, neither of whom survived to adulthood. Their daughter Lydia Henchman Hancock was born in 1776 and died ten months later.[141] Their son John was born in 1778 and died in 1787 after suffering a head injury while ice skating.[142][143]

    While president of Congress, Hancock became involved in a long-running controversy with Harvard. As treasurer of the college since 1773, he had been entrusted with the school’s financial records and about £15,000 in cash and securities.[144][145] In the rush of events at the onset of the Revolutionary War, Hancock had been unable to return the money and accounts to Harvard before leaving for Congress.[145] In 1777, a Harvard committee headed by James Bowdoin, Hancock’s chief political and social rival in Boston, sent a messenger to Philadelphia to retrieve the money and records.[146] Hancock was offended, but he turned over more than £16,000, though not all of the records, to the college.[147][148][149] When Harvard replaced Hancock as treasurer, his ego was bruised, and for years he declined to settle the account or pay the interest on the money he had held, despite pressure put on him by Bowdoin and other political opponents.[150][151] The issue dragged on until after Hancock’s death, when his estate finally paid the college more than £1,000 to resolve the matter.[150][151]

    Hancock served in Congress through some of the darkest days of the Revolutionary War. The British drove Washington from New York and New Jersey in 1776, which prompted Congress to flee to Baltimore, Maryland.[152] Hancock and Congress returned to Philadelphia in March 1777 but were compelled to flee six months later when the British occupied Philadelphia.[153] Hancock wrote innumerable letters to colonial officials, raising money, supplies, and troops for Washington’s army.[154] He chaired the Marine Committee, and took pride in helping to create a small fleet of American frigates, including the USS Hancock, which was named in his honor.[155][156]

    Hancock was president of Congress when the Declaration of Independence was adopted and signed. He is primarily remembered by Americans for his large, flamboyant signature on the Declaration, so much so that “John Hancock” became, in the United States, an informal synonym for signature.[157] According to legend, Hancock signed his name largely and clearly so that King George could read it without his spectacles, but the story is apocryphal and originated years later.[158][159]
    samuel adams

    Contrary to popular mythology, there was no ceremonial signing of the Declaration on July 4, 1776.[158] After Congress approved the wording of the text on July 4, the fair copy was sent to be printed. As president, Hancock may have signed the document that was sent to the printer John Dunlap, but this is uncertain because that document is lost, perhaps destroyed in the printing process.[160] Dunlap produced the first published version of the Declaration, the widely distributed Dunlap broadside. Hancock, as President of Congress, was the only delegate whose name appeared on the broadside, although the name of Charles Thomson, secretary of the Continental Congress, but not a delegate, was also on it as “Attested by” implying that Hancock had signed the fair copy. This meant that until a second broadside was issued six months later with all of the signers listed, Hancock was the only delegate whose name was publicly attached to the treasonous document.[161] Hancock sent a copy of the Dunlap broadside to George Washington, instructing him to have it read to the troops “in the way you shall think most proper”.[162]

    Hancock’s name was printed, not signed, on the Dunlap broadside; his iconic signature appears on a different document—a sheet of parchment that was carefully handwritten sometime after July 19 and signed on August 2 by Hancock and those delegates present.[163] Known as the engrossed copy, this is the famous document on display at the National Archives in Washington, D.C.[164]

    In October 1777, after more than two years in Congress, President Hancock requested a leave of absence.[165][166] He asked George Washington to arrange a military escort for his return to Boston. Although Washington was short on manpower, he nevertheless sent fifteen horsemen to accompany Hancock on his journey home.[167][168] By this time Hancock had become estranged from Samuel Adams, who disapproved of what he viewed as Hancock’s vanity and extravagance, which Adams believed were inappropriate in a republican leader. When Congress voted to thank Hancock for his service, Adams and the other Massachusetts delegates voted against the resolution, as did a few delegates from other states.[131][169]

    Back in Boston, Hancock was reelected to the House of Representatives. As in previous years, his philanthropy made him popular. Although his finances had suffered greatly because of the war, he gave to the poor, helped support widows and orphans, and loaned money to friends. According to biographer William Fowler, “John Hancock was a generous man and the people loved him for it. He was their idol.”[170] In December 1777, he was reelected as a delegate to the Continental Congress and as moderator of the Boston town meeting.[171]

    Hancock rejoined the Continental Congress in Pennsylvania in June 1778, but his brief time there was unhappy. In his absence, Congress had elected Henry Laurens as its new president, which was a disappointment to Hancock, who had hoped to reclaim his chair. Hancock got along poorly with Samuel Adams, and missed his wife and newborn son.[172] On July 9, 1778, Hancock and the other Massachusetts delegates joined the representatives from seven other states in signing the Articles of Confederation; the remaining states were not yet prepared to sign, and the Articles would not be ratified until 1781.[173]

    Hancock returned to Boston in July 1778, motivated by the opportunity to finally lead men in combat. Back in 1776, he had been appointed as the senior major general of the Massachusetts militia.[174] Now that the French fleet had come to the aid of the Americans, General Washington instructed General John Sullivan of the Continental Army to lead an attack on the British garrison at Newport, Rhode Island, in August 1778. Hancock nominally commanded 6,000 militiamen in the campaign, although he let the professional soldiers do the planning and issue the orders. It was a fiasco: French Admiral d’Estaing abandoned the operation, after which Hancock’s militia mostly deserted Sullivan’s Continentals.[175][176] Hancock suffered some criticism for the debacle but emerged from his brief military career with his popularity intact.[177][178] He was a charter member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences in 1780.[179]

    After much delay, the new Massachusetts Constitution finally went into effect in October 1780. To no one’s surprise, Hancock was elected Governor of Massachusetts in a landslide, garnering over 90% of the vote.[180] In the absence of formal party politics, the contest was one of personality, popularity, and patriotism. Hancock was immensely popular and unquestionably patriotic given his personal sacrifices and his leadership of the Second Continental Congress. James Bowdoin, his principal opponent, was cast by Hancock’s supporters as unpatriotic, citing among other things his refusal (which was due to poor health) to serve in the First Continental Congress.[181] Bowdoin’s supporters, who were principally well-off commercial interests from Massachusetts coastal communities, cast Hancock as a foppish demagogue who pandered to the populace.[182]

    Hancock governed Massachusetts through the end of the Revolutionary War and into an economically troubled postwar period, repeatedly winning reelection by wide margins. Hancock took a hands-off approach to governing, avoiding controversial issues as much as possible. According to William Fowler, Hancock “never really led” and “never used his strength to deal with the critical issues confronting the commonwealth.”[183] Hancock governed until his surprise resignation on January 29, 1785. Hancock cited his failing health as the reason, but he may have become aware of growing unrest in the countryside and wanted to get out of office before the trouble came.[184]

    Hancock’s critics sometimes believed that he used claims of illness to avoid difficult political situations.[185] Historian James Truslow Adams wrote that Hancock’s “two chief resources were his money and his gout, the first always used to gain popularity, and the second to prevent his losing it”.[186] The turmoil that Hancock avoided ultimately blossomed as Shays’s Rebellion, which Hancock’s successor James Bowdoin had to deal with. After the uprising, Hancock was reelected in 1787, and he promptly pardoned all the rebels.[187][188] The next year, a controversy arose when three free blacks were kidnapped from Boston and sent to work as slaves in the French colony of Martinique in the West Indies.[189] Governor Hancock wrote to the governors of the islands on their behalf.[190] As a result, the three men were released and returned to Massachusetts.[191]

    Hancock was reelected to annual terms as governor for the remainder of his life.[192]

    When he had resigned as governor in 1785, Hancock was again elected as a delegate to Congress, known as the Confederation Congress after the ratification of the Articles of Confederation in 1781. Congress had declined in importance after the Revolutionary War, and was frequently ignored by the states. Hancock was elected to serve as its president on November 23, 1785, but he never attended because of his poor health and because he was disinterested. He sent Congress a letter of resignation in June 1786.[194]

    In an effort to remedy the perceived defects of the Articles of Confederation, delegates were first sent to the Annapolis Convention in 1786 and then to the Philadelphia Convention in 1787, where they drafted the United States Constitution, which was then sent to the states for ratification or rejection. Hancock, who was not present at the Philadelphia Convention, had misgivings about the new Constitution’s lack of a bill of rights and its shift of power to a central government.[195] In January 1788, Hancock was elected president of the Massachusetts ratifying convention, although he was ill and not present when the convention began.[196] Hancock mostly remained silent during the contentious debates, but as the convention was drawing to close, he gave a speech in favor of ratification. For the first time in years, Samuel Adams supported Hancock’s position.[197] Even with the support of Hancock and Adams, the Massachusetts convention narrowly ratified the Constitution by a vote of 187 to 168. Hancock’s support was probably a deciding factor in the ratification.[198][199]

    Hancock was put forth as a candidate in the 1789 U. S. presidential election. As was the custom in an era where political ambition was viewed with suspicion, Hancock did not campaign or even publicly express interest in the office; he instead made his wishes known indirectly. Like everyone else, Hancock knew that George Washington was going to be elected as the first president, but Hancock may have been interested in being vice president, despite his poor health.[200] Hancock received only four electoral votes in the election, however, none of them from his home state; the Massachusetts electors all voted for another Massachusetts native, John Adams, who received the second-highest number of electoral votes and thus became vice president.[201] Although Hancock was disappointed with his performance in the election, he continued to be popular in Massachusetts.[201]

    His health failing, Hancock spent his final few years as essentially a figurehead governor. With his wife at his side, he died in bed on October 8, 1793, at 56 years of age.[202][203] By order of acting governor Samuel Adams, the day of Hancock’s burial was a state holiday; the lavish funeral was perhaps the grandest given to an American up to that time.[204][205]

    Despite his grand funeral, Hancock faded from popular memory after his death. According to historian Alfred F. Young, “Boston celebrated only one hero in the half-century after the Revolution: George Washington.”[206] As early as 1809, John Adams lamented that Hancock and Samuel Adams were “almost buried in oblivion”.[207] In Boston, little effort was made to preserve Hancock’s historical legacy. His house on Beacon Hill was torn down in 1863 after both the city of Boston and the Massachusetts legislature decided against maintaining it.[208] According to Young, the conservative “new elite” of Massachusetts “was not comfortable with a rich man who pledged his fortune to the cause of revolution”.[208] In 1876, with the centennial of American independence renewing popular interest in the Revolution, plaques honoring Hancock were put up in Boston.[209] In 1896, a memorial column was finally erected over Hancock’s essentially unmarked grave in the Granary Burying Ground.[193]

    No full-length biography of Hancock appeared until the 20th century. A challenge facing Hancock biographers is that, compared to prominent Founding Fathers like Jefferson and John Adams, Hancock left relatively few personal writings for historians to use in interpreting his life. As a result, most depictions of Hancock have relied on the voluminous writings of his political opponents, who were often scathingly critical of him. According to historian Charles Akers, “The chief victim of Massachusetts historiography has been John Hancock, the most gifted and popular politician in the Bay State’s long history. He suffered the misfortune of being known to later generations almost entirely through the judgments of his detractors, Tory and Whig.”[210]

    Hancock’s most influential 20th-century detractor was historian James Truslow Adams, who wrote negative portraits of Hancock in Harper’s Magazine and the Dictionary of American Biography in the 1930s.[211] Adams argued that Hancock was a “fair presiding officer” but had “no great ability”, and was prominent only because of his inherited wealth.[33] Decades later, historian Donald Proctor argued that Adams had uncritically repeated the negative views of Hancock’s political opponents without doing any serious research.[212] Adams “presented a series of disparaging incidents and anecdotes, sometimes partially documented, sometimes not documented at all, which in sum leave one with a distinctly unfavorable impression of Hancock”.[213] According to Proctor, Adams evidently projected his own disapproval of 1920s businessmen onto Hancock,[212] and ended up misrepresenting several key events in Hancock’s career.[214] Writing in the 1970s, Proctor and Akers called for scholars to evaluate Hancock based on his merits, rather than on the views of his critics. Since that time, historians have usually presented a more favorable portrait of Hancock, while acknowledging that he was not an important writer, political theorist, or military leader.[215]

    Many places and things in the United States have been named in honor of John Hancock. The U.S. Navy has named vessels USS Hancock and USS John Hancock; a World War II Liberty ship was also named in his honor.[216] Ten states have a Hancock County named for him;[217] other places named after him include Hancock, Massachusetts; Hancock, Michigan; Hancock, New Hampshire; Hancock, New York; and Mount Hancock in New Hampshire.[217] The defunct John Hancock University was named for him,[218] as was the John Hancock Financial company, founded in Boston in 1862; it had no connection to Hancock’s own business ventures.[219] The financial company passed on the name to the John Hancock Tower in Boston, the John Hancock Center in Chicago, as well as the John Hancock Student Village at Boston University.[220]


    Moses Gill (January 18, 1733 – May 20, 1800) was a Massachusetts politician who briefly served as the state’s Acting Governor. He is the state’s only acting governor to die in office. A successful businessman, he became one of the leading settlers of Princeton, Massachusetts, entering politics shortly before the American Revolutionary War. He served on the Massachusetts Provincial Congress’s executive committee until the state adopted its constitution in 1780, after which he continued to serve on the state’s Governor’s Council.

    Elected lieutenant governor in 1794, he served in that office under Governors Samuel Adams and Increase Sumner until the latter died shortly after winning reelection in 1799. Gill served an apparently undistinguished term as acting governor until his own death in 1800, ten days before his successor, Caleb Strong, assumed office. Gill was a significant benefactor and founder of Leicester Academy, and supported the congregational church in Princeton, where the family had a large estate.

    Moses Gill was born January 18, 1733 [1] to John and Elizabeth (Abbot) Gill in Charlestown, Massachusetts. He was one of the younger sons in a long line of children which included John Gill, who would become well known in the colonies as printer of the Boston Gazette.[2][3] Gill entered business as a local merchant in Boston.[4] In 1759 he married Sarah Prince, daughter to pastor Thomas Prince of Boston’s Old South Church. Upon her father’s death the couple inherited Prince’s lands in western Worcester County, one of the largest tracts in what became the town of Princeton.[5] In 1767 he retired from his business activities, and the couple divided their time between Boston and Princeton. Sarah died childless in 1771.[6] Gill remarried in 1772 to Rebecca Boylston, a scion of the influential Boylston family and sister of Harvard College benefactor Nicholas Boylston.[2] They were also childless; when his brother John died, Gill adopted one of his sons.[2] The Gills were known to own several slaves.[7]

    In 1774 Gill entered politics, winning election to the provincial assembly.[6] The assembly was dissolved by Governor Thomas Gage under the terms of the Massachusetts Government Act (a punishment of Massachusetts for the Boston Tea Party), but its members met shortly afterwards and reconstituted themselves as the Massachusetts Provincial Congress.[8][9] Gill served on this body’s executive council, which functioned as the de facto executive of the state until its constitution was adopted in 1780.[10] When the American Revolutionary War broke in April 1775, Gill became involved in the early military organization of the Siege of Boston, heading the provincial congress’ supply committee.[11] He was also delegated, along with General Artemas Ward, to meet George Washington in Springfield and escort him to the army camps outside Boston.[12]
    samuel adams

    Because of his prominence in Worcester County Gill was appointed to the county’s district court when it was reorganized after the revolution began.[13] In this role he sat on the panel that heard the preliminary cases in 1781 involving Quock Walker, an African American seeking a declaration of his freedom. Gill’s panel decided in Walker’s favor, and the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court eventually confirmed the judgments on appeal, declaring that slavery was incompatible with the state constitution.[14]

    He continued to serve in the General Court (state legislature), winning election to the state senate annually from 1780, and being chosen by that body to serve on the Governor’s Council. He stood for election to the United States House of Representatives in the 1789 election (the first after the adoption of the United States Constitution) but was defeated by Jonathan Grout.[10] After the death of the immensely popular Governor John Hancock in 1793, the state’s gubernatorial election of 1794 was a wide open race. Gill was one of several nominees for lieutenant governor, and received more votes than all nominees except the winning gubernatorial candidate, Samuel Adams. With no candidates for lieutenant governor receiving a majority, the General Court decided the election, choosing Gill.[15] He thereafter won annual reelection to that post. In 1796 the aging Adams announced he would not run for reelection the following spring, and again the election was a wide open affair. The party system was still taking shape in the state, and the Federalists nominated Increase Sumner, while more populist factions that had previously supported Hancock and Adams nominated Gill and James Sullivan. Although Gill polled well in Boston and the eastern counties (present-day Maine), the Federalists won a decisive victory over the divided opposition. Since he was also nominated by one faction as lieutenant governor, Gill was again returned to that post.[16] The principal issues in this and subsequent elections were over federal policy: specifically the national response to threats of war with Revolutionary France, and the consequent need for increased taxes to arm the nation.[17] Gill’s politics are unclear: historian Anson Morse is of the opinion that his popularity was not sufficient to head the ticket of either the Federalists or the Democratic-Republicans.[18] Historian John Barry observes that Gill’s term as acting governor, even though it was for essentially a full year, was “too short to be particularly distinguished”.[19]

    Sumner easily won reelection in 1798 and 1799, but was ill during the 1799 race, which he won by a landslide. Constitutional issues were raised because he was on his deathbed and it was uncertain that he could even take the oath of office. Sumner finally took the oath of office in early June, but died a few days later, at which point Gill became acting governor.[20] Gill served out Sumner’s term, and was considered a candidate for the governorship as the 1800 election approached.[18] The election primarily pitted Federalist Caleb Strong against Democratic-Republican Elbridge Gerry, and was won by Strong.[21] Gill was derided by his opponents as the preferred candidate of the wealthy, and Federalists were accused of promoting him as a candidate in order to divide the opposition. Gill died on May 20, before Strong was informed of the victory, resulting in the only time in the state’s history when the offices of governor and lieutenant governor were both formally vacant.[22] As a result, the Governor’s Council ruled the state for ten days.[23] (The council had governed several times during the colonial period under similar circumstances;[24] the state constitution was amended in 1918 to remove the council from the gubernatorial succession.)[25]

    Gill was a member and major supporter of the Congregational Church in Princeton, and a founding trustee and benefactor of Leicester Academy.[4] He was also for many years president of the Society for Propagating the Gospel among the Indians.[10] Gill, Massachusetts is named in his honor.[26]

    Gill also made civic contributions to the town of Princeton. Land he donated became the town’s original center (located about one-half mile from the current town center). This land includes one the town’s earliest cemeteries, which is where Gill and other members of his family are interred. His estate, located near the town center, was reputed to be one of the largest and most magnificent of its time in Worcester County. His second wife’s nephew, Ward Nicholas Boylston, inherited the estate; in addition to many other charitable works, Boylston was a major contributor to the establishment of Princeton’s present town center.[27]

    The Democratic-Republican Party, also referred to as the Jeffersonian Republican Party and known at the time under various other names,[a] was an American political party founded by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison in the early 1790s that championed republicanism, political equality, and expansionism. The party became increasingly dominant after the 1800 elections as the opposing Federalist Party collapsed. The Democratic-Republicans later splintered during the 1824 presidential election. The majority faction of the Democratic-Republicans eventually coalesced into the modern Democratic Party, while the minority faction ultimately formed the core of what became the Whig Party.[9]

    The Democratic-Republican Party originated as a faction in Congress that opposed the centralizing policies of Alexander Hamilton, who served as Secretary of the Treasury under President George Washington. The Democratic-Republicans and the opposing Federalist Party each became more cohesive during Washington’s second term, partly as a result of the debate over the Jay Treaty. Though he was defeated by Federalist John Adams in the 1796 presidential election, Jefferson and his Democratic-Republican allies came into power following the 1800 elections. As president, Jefferson presided over a reduction in the national debt and government spending, and completed the Louisiana Purchase with France.

    Madison succeeded Jefferson as president in 1809 and led the country during the largely inconclusive War of 1812 with Britain. After the war, Madison and his congressional allies established the Second Bank of the United States and implemented protective tariffs, marking a move away from the party’s earlier emphasis on states’ rights and a strict construction of the United States Constitution. The Federalists collapsed after 1815, beginning a period known as the Era of Good Feelings. Lacking an effective opposition, the Democratic-Republicans split into groups after the 1824 presidential election; one faction supported President John Quincy Adams, while the other faction backed General Andrew Jackson. Jackson’s faction eventually coalesced into the Democratic Party, while supporters of Adams became known as the National Republican Party, which itself later merged into the Whig Party.

    Democratic-Republicans were deeply committed to the principles of republicanism, which they feared were threatened by the supposed aristocratic tendencies of the Federalists. During the 1790s, the party strongly opposed Federalist programs, including the national bank. After the War of 1812, Madison and many other party leaders came to accept the need for a national bank and federally funded infrastructure projects. In foreign affairs, the party advocated western expansion and tended to favor France over Britain, though the party’s pro-French stance faded after Napoleon took power. The Democratic-Republicans were strongest in the South and the western frontier, and weakest in New England.
    samuel adams

    In the 1788–89 presidential election, the first such election following the ratification of the United States Constitution in 1788, George Washington won the votes of every member of the Electoral College.[10] His unanimous victory in part reflected the fact that no formal political parties had formed at the national level in the United States prior to 1789, though the country had been broadly polarized between the Federalists, who supported ratification of the Constitution, and the Anti-Federalists, who opposed ratification.[11] Washington selected Thomas Jefferson as Secretary of State and Alexander Hamilton as Secretary of the Treasury,[12] and he relied on James Madison as a key adviser and ally in Congress.[13]

    Hamilton implemented an expansive economic program, establishing the First Bank of the United States,[14] and convincing Congress to assume the debts of state governments.[15] Hamilton pursued his programs in the belief that they would foster a prosperous and stable country.[16] His policies engendered an opposition, chiefly concentrated in the Southern United States, that objected to Hamilton’s anglophilia and accused him of unduly favoring well-connected wealthy Northern merchants and speculators. Madison emerged as the leader of the congressional opposition while Jefferson, who declined to publicly criticize Hamilton while both served in Washington’s Cabinet, worked behind the scenes to stymie Hamilton’s programs.[17] Jefferson and Madison established the National Gazette, a newspaper which recast national politics not as a battle between Federalists and Anti-Federalists, but as a debate between aristocrats and republicans.[18] In the 1792 election, Washington effectively ran unopposed for president, but Jefferson and Madison backed New York Governor George Clinton’s unsuccessful attempt to unseat Vice President John Adams.[19]

    Political leaders on both sides were reluctant to label their respective faction as a political party, but distinct and consistent voting blocs emerged in Congress by the end of 1793. Ultimately, Jefferson’s followers became known as the Republicans (or the Democratic-Republicans)[20] and Hamilton’s followers became known as the Federalists.[21] While economic policies were the original motivating factor in the growing partisan split, foreign policy also became a factor as Hamilton’s followers soured on the French Revolution and Jefferson’s allies continued to favor it.[22] In 1793, after Britain entered the French Revolutionary Wars, several Democratic-Republican Societies were formed in opposition to Hamilton’s economic policies and in support of France.[23] Partisan tensions escalated as a result of the Whiskey Rebellion and Washington’s subsequent denunciation of the Democratic-Republican Societies, a group of local political societies that favored democracy and generally supported the Democratic-Republican Party.[24] The ratification of the Jay Treaty further inflamed partisan warfare, resulting in a hardening of the divisions between the Federalists and the Democratic-Republicans.[23]

    By 1795–96, election campaigns—federal, state and local—were waged primarily along partisan lines between the two national parties, although local issues continued to affect elections, and party affiliations remained in flux.[25] As Washington declined to seek a third term, the 1796 presidential election became the first contested president election. Having retired from Washington’s Cabinet in 1793, Jefferson had left the leadership of the Democratic-Republicans in Madison’s hands. Nonetheless, the Democratic-Republican congressional nominating caucus chose Jefferson as the party’s presidential nominee on the belief that he would be the party’s strongest candidate; the caucus chose Senator Aaron Burr of New York as Jefferson’s running mate.[26] Meanwhile, an informal caucus of Federalist leaders nominated a ticket of John Adams and Thomas Pinckney.[27] Though the candidates themselves largely stayed out of the fray, supporters of the candidates waged an active campaign; Federalists attacked Jefferson as a francophile and atheist, while the Democratic-Republicans accused Adams of being an anglophile and a monarchist.[28] Ultimately, Adams won the presidency by a narrow margin, garnering 71 electoral votes to 68 for Jefferson, who became the vice president.[27][b]

    Shortly after Adams took office, he dispatched a group of envoys to seek peaceful relations with France, which had begun attacking American shipping after the ratification of the Jay Treaty. The failure of talks, and the French demand for bribes in what became known as the XYZ Affair, outraged the American public and led to the Quasi-War, an undeclared naval war between France and the United States. The Federalist-controlled Congress passed measures to expand the army and navy and also pushed through the Alien and Sedition Acts. The Alien and Sedition Acts restricted speech that was critical of the government, while also implementing stricter naturalization requirements.[30] Numerous journalists and other individuals aligned with the Democratic-Republicans were prosecuted under the Sedition Act, sparking a backlash against the Federalists.[31] Meanwhile, Jefferson and Madison drafted the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions, which held that state legislatures could determine the constitutionality of federal laws.[32]

    In the 1800 presidential election, the Democratic-Republicans once again nominated a ticket of Jefferson and Burr. Shortly after a Federalist caucus re-nominated President Adams on a ticket with Charles Cotesworth Pinckney, Adams dismissed two Hamilton allies from his Cabinet, leading to an open break between the two key figures in the Federalist Party.[33] Though the Federalist Party united against Jefferson’s candidacy and waged an effective campaign in many states, the Democratic-Republicans won the election by winning most Southern electoral votes and carrying the crucial state of New York.[34] A significant element in the party’s success in New York City, Philadelphia, Baltimore and other east-coast cities were United Irish exiles, and other Irish immigrants, whom the Federalists regarded with distinct suspicion.[35][36]

  • what goes into 49
  • Jefferson and Burr both finished with 73 electoral votes, more than Adams or Pinckney, necessitating a contingent election between Jefferson and Burr in the House of Representatives.[b] Burr declined to take his name out of consideration, and the House deadlocked as most Democratic-Republican congressmen voted for Jefferson and most Federalists voted for Burr. Preferring Jefferson to Burr, Hamilton helped engineer Jefferson’s election on the 36th ballot of the contingent election.[37] Jefferson would later describe the 1800 election, which also saw Democratic-Republicans gain control of Congress, as the “Revolution of 1800”, writing that it was “as real of a revolution in the principles of our government as that of [1776] was in its form.”[38] In the final months of his presidency, Adams reached an agreement with France to end the Quasi-War[39] and appointed several Federalist judges, including Chief Justice John Marshall.[40]

    Despite the intensity of the 1800 election, the transition of power from the Federalists to the Democratic-Republicans was peaceful.[41] In his inaugural address, Jefferson indicated that he would seek to reverse many Federalist policies, but he also emphasized reconciliation, noting that “every difference of opinion is not a difference of principle”.[42] He appointed a geographically balanced and ideologically moderate Cabinet that included Madison as Secretary of State and Albert Gallatin as Secretary of the Treasury; Federalists were excluded from the Cabinet, but Jefferson appointed some prominent Federalists and allowed many other Federalists to keep their positions.[43] Gallatin persuaded Jefferson to retain the First Bank of the United States, a major part of the Hamiltonian program, but other Federalist policies were scrapped.[44] Jefferson and his Democratic-Republican allies eliminated the whiskey excise and other taxes,[45] shrank the army and the navy,[46] repealed the Alien and Sedition Acts, and pardoned all ten individuals who had been prosecuted under the acts.[47]

    With the repeal of Federalist laws and programs, many Americans had little contact with the federal government in their daily lives, with the exception of the postal service.[48] Partly as a result of these spending cuts, Jefferson lowered the national debt from $83 million to $57 million between 1801 and 1809.[49] Though he was largely able to reverse Federalist policies, Federalists retained a bastion of power on the Supreme Court; Marshall Court rulings continued to reflect Federalist ideals until Chief Justice Marshall’s death in the 1830s.[50] In the Supreme Court case of Marbury v. Madison, the Marshall Court established the power of judicial review, through which the judicial branch had the final word on the constitutionality of federal laws.[51]

    By the time Jefferson took office, Americans had settled as far west as the Mississippi River.[52] Many in the United States, particularly those in the west, favored further territorial expansion, and especially hoped to annex the Spanish province of Louisiana.[53] In early 1803, Jefferson dispatched James Monroe to France to join ambassador Robert Livingston on a diplomatic mission to purchase New Orleans.[54] To the surprise of the American delegation, Napoleon offered to sell the entire territory of Louisiana for $15 million.[55] After Secretary of State James Madison gave his assurances that the purchase was well within even the strictest interpretation of the Constitution, the Senate quickly ratified the treaty, and the House immediately authorized funding.[56] The Louisiana Purchase nearly doubled the size of the United States, and Treasury Secretary Gallatin was forced to borrow from foreign banks to finance the payment to France.[57] Though the Louisiana Purchase was widely popular, some Federalists criticized it; Congressman Fisher Ames argued that “We are to spend money of which we have too little for land of which we already have too much.”[58]

    By 1804, Vice President Burr had thoroughly alienated Jefferson, and the Democratic-Republican presidential nominating caucus chose George Clinton as Jefferson’s running mate for the 1804 presidential election. That same year, Burr challenged Hamilton to a duel after taking offense to a comment allegedly made by Hamilton; Hamilton died in the subsequent duel. Bolstered by a superior party organization, Jefferson won the 1804 election in a landslide over Federalist candidate Charles Cotesworth Pinckney.[59] In 1807, as the Napoleonic Wars continued, the British announced the Orders in Council, which called for a blockade on the French Empire.[60] In response to subsequent British and French attacks on American shipping, the Jefferson administration passed the Embargo Act of 1807, which cut off trade with Europe.[61] The embargo proved unpopular and difficult to enforce, especially in Federalist-leaning New England, and expired at the end of Jefferson’s second term.[62] Jefferson declined to seek a third term in the 1808 presidential election, but helped Madison triumph over George Clinton and James Monroe at the party’s congressional nominating caucus. Madison won the general election in a landslide over Pinckney.[63]

    As attacks on American shipping continued after Madison took office, both Madison and the broader American public moved towards war.[64] Popular anger towards Britain led to the election of a new generation of Democratic-Republican leaders, including Henry Clay and John C. Calhoun, who championed high tariffs, federally funded internal improvements, and a belligerent attitude towards Britain.[65] On June 1, 1812, Madison asked Congress for a declaration of war.[66] The declaration was passed largely along sectional and party lines, with intense opposition coming from the Federalists and some other congressmen from the Northeast.[67] For many who favored war, national honor was at stake; John Quincy Adams wrote that the only alternative to war was “the abandonment of our right as an independent nation.”[68] George Clinton’s nephew, DeWitt Clinton, challenged Madison in the 1812 presidential election. Though Clinton assembled a formidable coalition of Federalists and anti-Madison Democratic-Republicans, Madison won a close election.[69]

    Madison initially hoped for a quick end to the War of 1812, but the war got off to a disastrous start.[70] The United States had more military success in 1813, and a force under William Henry Harrison crushed Native American and British resistance in the Old Northwest with a victory in the Battle of the Thames. The British shifted soldiers to North America in 1814 following the abdication of Napoleon, and a British detachment burned Washington in August 1814.[71] In early 1815, Madison learned that his negotiators in Europe had reached the Treaty of Ghent, ending the war without major concessions by either side.[72] Though it had no effect on the treaty, General Andrew Jackson’s victory in the January 1815 Battle of New Orleans ended the war on a triumphant note.[73] Napoleon’s defeat at the June 1815 Battle of Waterloo brought a final end to the Napoleonic Wars and attacks on American shipping.[74] With Americans celebrating a successful “second war of independence” from Britain, the Federalist Party slid towards national irrelevance.[75] The subsequent period of virtually one-party rule by the Democratic-Republican Party is known as the “Era of Good Feelings.”[citation needed]

    In his first term, Madison and his allies had largely hewed to Jefferson’s domestic agenda of low taxes and a reduction of the national debt, and Congress allowed the national bank’s charter to expire during Madison’s first term.[76] The challenges of the War of 1812 led many Democratic-Republicans to reconsider the role of the federal government.[77] When the 14th Congress convened in December 1815, Madison proposed the re-establishment of the national bank, increased spending on the army and the navy, and a tariff designed to protect American goods from foreign competition. Madison’s proposals were strongly criticized by strict constructionists like John Randolph, who argued that Madison’s program “out-Hamiltons Alexander Hamilton.”[78] Responding to Madison’s proposals, the 14th Congress compiled one of the most productive legislative records up to that point in history, enacting the Tariff of 1816 and establishing the Second Bank of the United States.[79] At the party’s 1816 congressional nominating caucus, Secretary of State James Monroe defeated Secretary of War William H. Crawford in a 65-to-54 vote.[80] The Federalists offered little opposition in the 1816 presidential election and Monroe won in a landslide election.[81]

    Monroe believed that the existence of political parties was harmful to the United States,[82] and he sought to usher in the end of the Federalist Party by avoiding divisive policies and welcoming ex-Federalists into the fold.[83] Monroe favored infrastructure projects to promote economic development and, despite some constitutional concerns, signed bills providing federal funding for the National Road and other projects.[84] Partly due to the mismanagement of national bank president William Jones, the country experienced a prolonged economic recession known as the Panic of 1819.[85] The panic engendered a widespread resentment of the national bank and a distrust of paper money that would influence national politics long after the recession ended.[86] Despite the ongoing economic troubles, the Federalists failed to field a serious challenger to Monroe in the 1820 presidential election, and Monroe won re-election essentially unopposed.[87]

    During the proceedings over the admission of Missouri Territory as a state, Congressman James Tallmadge, Jr. of New York “tossed a bombshell into the Era of Good Feelings” by proposing amendments providing for the eventual exclusion of slavery from Missouri.[88] The amendments sparked the first major national slavery debate since the ratification of the Constitution,[89] and instantly exposed the sectional polarization over the issue of slavery.[90] Northern Democratic-Republicans formed a coalition across partisan lines with the remnants of the Federalist Party in support of the amendments, while Southern Democratic-Republicans were almost unanimously against such the restrictions.[91] In February 1820, Congressman Jesse B. Thomas of Illinois proposed a compromise, in which Missouri would be admitted as a slave state, but slavery would be excluded in the remaining territories north of the parallel 36°30′ north.[92] A bill based on Thomas’s proposal became law in April 1820.[93]

    By 1824, the Federalist Party had largely collapsed as a national party, and the 1824 presidential election was waged by competing members of the Democratic-Republican Party.[94] The party’s congressional nominating caucus was largely ignored, and candidates were instead nominated by state legislatures.[95] Secretary of State John Quincy Adams, former Speaker of the House Henry Clay, Secretary of the Treasury William Crawford, and General Andrew Jackson emerged as the major candidates in the election.[96] The regional strength of each candidate played an important role in the election; Adams was popular in New England, Clay and Jackson were strong in the West, and Jackson and Crawford competed for the South.[96]

    As no candidate won a majority of the electoral vote in the 1824 election, the House of Representatives held a contingent election to determine the president.[97] Clay personally disliked Adams but nonetheless supported him in the contingent election over Crawford, who opposed Clay’s nationalist policies, and Jackson, whom Clay viewed as a potential tyrant.[c] With Clay’s backing, Adams won the contingent election.[98] After Clay accepted appointment as Secretary of State, Jackson’s supporters claimed that Adams and Clay had reached a “Corrupt Bargain” in which Adams promised Clay the appointment in return for Clay’s support in the contingent election.[97] Jackson, who was deeply angered by the result of the contingent election, returned to Tennessee, where the state legislature quickly nominated him for president in the 1828 election.[99]

    Adams shared Monroe’s goal of ending partisan conflict, and his Cabinet included individuals of various ideological and regional backgrounds.[100] In his 1825 annual message to Congress, Adams presented a comprehensive and ambitious agenda, calling for major investments in internal improvements as well as the creation of a national university, a naval academy, and a national astronomical observatory.[101] His requests to Congress galvanized the opposition, spurring the creation of an anti-Adams congressional coalition consisting of supporters of Jackson, Crawford, and Vice President Calhoun.[102] Following the 1826 elections, Calhoun and Martin Van Buren (who brought along many of Crawford’s supporters) agreed to throw their support behind Jackson in the 1828 election.[103] In the press, the two major political factions were referred to as “Adams Men” and “Jackson Men”.[104]

    The Jacksonians formed an effective party apparatus that adopted many modern campaign techniques and emphasized Jackson’s popularity and the supposed corruption of Adams and the federal government.[105] Though Jackson did not articulate a detailed political platform in the same way that Adams did, his coalition was united in opposition to Adams’s reliance on government planning and tended to favor the opening of Native American lands to white settlement.[106] Ultimately, Jackson won 178 of the 261 electoral votes and just under 56 percent of the popular vote.[107] Jackson won 50.3 percent of the popular vote in the free states and 72.6 percent of the vote in the slave states.[108] The election marked the permanent end of the Era of Good Feelings and the start of the Second Party System. The dream of non-partisan politics, shared by Monroe, Adams, and many earlier leaders, was shattered, replaced with Van Buren’s ideal of partisan battles between legitimated political parties.[109]

    In the 1790s, political parties were new in the United States and people were not accustomed to having formal names for them. There was no single official name for the Democratic-Republican Party, but party members generally called themselves Republicans and voted for what they called the “Republican party”, “republican ticket” or “republican interest”.[110][111] Jefferson and Madison often used the terms “republican” and “Republican party” in their letters.[112] As a general term (not a party name), the word republican had been in widespread usage from the 1770s to describe the type of government the break-away colonies wanted to form: a republic of three separate branches of government derived from some principles and structure from ancient republics; especially the emphasis on civic duty and the opposition to corruption, elitism, aristocracy and monarchy.[113]

    The term “Democratic-Republican” was used by contemporaries only occasionally,[20] but is used by some modern sources.[114] Some present-day sources describe the party as the “Jeffersonian Republicans”.[115][116] Other sources have labeled the party as the “Democratic Party”,[117][118][119] though that term was sometimes used pejoratively by Federalist opponents.[120][121] Some argue that the party is not to be confused with the present-day Democratic Party, however, a direct historical political lineage between them is often affirmed by some historians, political scientists, commentators, and by modern Democrats, reinforcing both names’ continued and occasionally interchangeable use.[1][9][122]

    The Democratic-Republican Party saw itself as a champion of republicanism and denounced the Federalists as supporters of monarchy and aristocracy.[123][page needed] Ralph Brown writes that the party was marked by a “commitment to broad principles of personal liberty, social mobility, and westward expansion.”[124] Political scientist James A. Reichley writes that “the issue that most sharply divided the Jeffersonians from the Federalists was not states rights, nor the national debt, nor the national Bank… but the question of social equality.”[125] In a world in which few believed in democracy or egalitarianism, Jefferson’s belief in political equality for white men stood out from many of the other Founding Fathers of the United States, who held that the rich and powerful should lead society. Jefferson advocated a philosophy that historians would later call Jeffersonian democracy, which was marked by his belief in agrarianism and strict limits on the national government.[126] Influenced by the Jeffersonian belief in equality, by 1824 all but three states had removed property-owning requirements for voting.[127]

    Though open to some redistributive measures, Jefferson saw a strong centralized government as a threat to freedom.[128] Thus, the Democratic-Republicans opposed Federalist efforts to build a strong, centralized state, and resisted the establishment of a national bank, the build-up of the army and the navy, and passage of the Alien and Sedition Acts.[129] Jefferson was especially averse to a national debt, which he believed to be inherently dangerous and immoral.[130] After the party took power in 1800, Jefferson became increasingly concerned about foreign intervention and more open to programs of economic development conducted by the federal government. In an effort to promote economic growth and the development of a diversified economy, Jefferson’s Democratic-Republican successors would oversee the construction of numerous federally funded infrastructure projects and implement protective tariffs.[131]

    While economic policies were the original catalyst to the partisan split between the Democratic-Republicans and the Federalists, foreign policy was also a major factor that divided the parties. Most Americans supported the French Revolution prior to the Execution of Louis XVI in 1793, but Federalists began to fear the radical egalitarianism of the revolution as it became increasingly violent.[22] Jefferson and other Democratic-Republicans defended the French Revolution.[132] until Napoleon ascended to power between 1797 and 1803.[55] Democratic-Republican foreign policy was marked by support for expansionism, as Jefferson championed the concept of an “Empire of Liberty” that centered on the acquisition and settlement of western territories.[133] Under Jefferson, Madison, and Monroe, the United States completed the Louisiana Purchase, acquired Spanish Florida, and reached a treaty with Britain providing for shared sovereignty over Oregon Country.[citation needed] In 1823, the Monroe administration promulgated the Monroe Doctrine, which reiterated the traditional U.S. policy of neutrality with regard to European wars and conflicts, but declared that the United States would not accept the recolonization of any country by its former European master.[134]

    From the foundation of the party, slavery divided the Democratic-Republicans. Many Southern Democratic-Republicans, especially from the Deep South, defended the institution. Jefferson and many other Democratic-Republicans from Virginia held an ambivalent view on slavery; Jefferson believed it was an immoral institution, but he opposed the immediate emancipation of all slaves on economic grounds.[135] Meanwhile, Northern Democratic-Republicans often took stronger anti-slavery positions than their Federalist counterparts, supporting measures like the abolition of slavery in Washington. In 1807, with President Jefferson’s support, Congress outlawed the international slave trade, doing so at the earliest possible date allowed by the Constitution.[136]

    After the War of 1812, Southerners increasingly came to view slavery as a beneficial institution rather than an unfortunate economic necessity, further polarizing the party over the issue.[136] Anti-slavery Northern Democratic-Republicans held that slavery was incompatible with the equality and individual rights promised by the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. They further held that slavery had been permitted under the Constitution only as a local and impermanent exception, and thus, slavery should not be allowed to spread outside of the original thirteen states. The anti-slavery positions developed by Northern Democratic-Republicans would influence later anti-slavery parties, including the Free Soil Party and the Republican Party.[137] Some Democratic-Republicans from the border states, including Henry Clay, continued to adhere to the Jeffersonian view of slavery as a necessary evil; many of these leaders joined the American Colonization Society, which proposed the voluntary recolonization of Africa as part of a broader plan for the gradual emancipation of slaves.[138]

    Madison and Jefferson formed the Democratic-Republican Party from a combination of former Anti-Federalists and supporters of the Constitution who were dissatisfied with the Washington administration’s policies.[139] Nationwide, Democratic-Republicans were strongest in the South, and many of party’s leaders were wealthy Southern slaveowners. The Democratic-Republicans also attracted middle class Northerners, such as artisans, farmers, and lower-level merchants, who were eager to challenge the power of the local elite.[140] Every state had a distinct political geography that shaped party membership; in Pennsylvania, the Republicans were weakest around Philadelphia and strongest in Scots-Irish settlements in the west.[141] The Federalists had broad support in New England, but in other places they relied on wealthy merchants and landowners.[142] After 1800, the Federalists collapsed in the South and West, though the party remained competitive in New England and in some Mid-Atlantic states.[143]

    Historian Sean Wilentz writes that, after assuming power in 1801, the Democratic-Republicans began to factionalize into three main groups: moderates, radicals, and Old Republicans.[144] The Old Republicans, led by John Randolph, were a loose group of influential Southern plantation owners who strongly favored states’ rights and denounced any form of compromise with the Federalists. The radicals consisted of a wide array of individuals from different sections of the country who were characterized by their support for far-reaching political and economic reforms; prominent radicals include William Duane and Michael Leib, who jointly led a powerful political machine in Philadelphia. The moderate faction consisted of many former supporters of the ratification of the Constitution, including James Madison, who were more accepting of Federalist economic programs and sought conciliation with moderate Federalists.[145]

    After 1810, a younger group of nationalist Democratic-Republicans, led by Henry Clay and John C. Calhoun, rose to prominence. These nationalists favored federally funded internal improvements and high tariffs, positions that would form the basis for Clay’s American System.[146] In addition to its base among the leaders of Clay and Calhoun’s generation, nationalist policies also proved attractive to many older Democratic-Republicans, including James Monroe.[147] The Panic of 1819 sparked a backlash against nationalist policies, and many of those opposed to the nationalist policies rallied around William H. Crawford until he had a major stroke in 1823.[148] After the 1824 election, most of Crawford’s followers, including Martin Van Buren, gravitated to Andrew Jackson, forming a major part of the coalition that propelled Jackson to victory in the 1828 election.[149]

    The Democratic-Republican Party invented campaign and organizational techniques that were later adopted by the Federalists and became standard American practice. It was especially effective in building a network of newspapers in major cities to broadcast its statements and editorialize its policies.[150] Fisher Ames, a leading Federalist, used the term “Jacobin” to link members of Jefferson’s party to the radicals of the French Revolution. He blamed the newspapers for electing Jefferson and wrote they were “an overmatch for any Government…. The Jacobins owe their triumph to the unceasing use of this engine; not so much to skill in use of it as by repetition”.[151]

    As one historian explained: “It was the good fortune of the Republicans to have within their ranks a number of highly gifted political manipulators and propagandists. Some of them had the ability… to not only see and analyze the problem at hand but to present it in a succinct fashion; in short, to fabricate the apt phrase, to coin the compelling slogan and appeal to the electorate on any given issue in language it could understand”. Outstanding propagandists included editor William Duane (1760–1835) and party leaders Albert Gallatin, Thomas Cooper and Jefferson himself.[152] Just as important was effective party organization of the sort that John J. Beckley pioneered. In 1796, he managed the Jefferson campaign in Pennsylvania, blanketing the state with agents who passed out 30,000 hand-written tickets, naming all 15 electors (printed tickets were not allowed). Beckley told one agent: “In a few days a select republican friend from the City will call upon you with a parcel of tickets to be distributed in your County. Any assistance and advice you can furnish him with, as to suitable districts & characters, will I am sure be rendered”. Beckley was the first American professional campaign manager and his techniques were quickly adopted in other states.[153]

    The emergence of the new organizational strategies can be seen in the politics of Connecticut around 1806, which have been well documented by Cunningham. The Federalists dominated Connecticut, so the Republicans had to work harder to win. In 1806, the state leadership sent town leaders instructions for the forthcoming elections. Every town manager was told by state leaders “to appoint a district manager in each district or section of his town, obtaining from each an assurance that he will faithfully do his duty”. Then the town manager was instructed to compile lists and total the number of taxpayers and the number of eligible voters, find out how many favored the Republicans and how many the Federalists and to count the number of supporters of each party who were not eligible to vote but who might qualify (by age or taxes) at the next election. These highly detailed returns were to be sent to the county manager and in turn were compiled and sent to the state manager. Using these lists of potential voters, the managers were told to get all eligible people to town meetings and help the young men qualify to vote. The state manager was responsible for supplying party newspapers to each town for distribution by town and district managers.[154] This highly coordinated “get-out-the-vote” drive would be familiar to future political campaigners, but was the first of its kind in world history.

    The coalition of Jacksonians, Calhounites, and Crawfordites built by Jackson and Van Buren would become the Democratic Party, which dominated presidential politics in the decades prior to the Civil War. Supporters of Adams and Clay would form the main opposition to Jackson as the National Republican Party. The National Republicans in turn eventually formed part of the Whig Party, which was the second major party in the United States between the 1830s and the early 1850s.[109] The diverse and changing nature of the Democratic-Republican Party allowed both major parties to claim that they stood for Jeffersonian principles.[155] Historian Daniel Walker Howe writes that Democrats traced their heritage to the “Old Republicanism of Macon and Crawford”, while the Whigs looked to “the new Republican nationalism of Madison and Gallatin.”[156]

    The Whig Party fell apart in the 1850s due to divisions over the expansion of slavery into new territories. The modern Republican Party was formed in 1854 to oppose the expansion of slavery, and many former Whig Party leaders joined the newly formed anti-slavery party.[157] The Republican Party sought to combine Jefferson and Jackson’s ideals of liberty and equality with Clay’s program of using an active government to modernize the economy.[158] The Democratic-Republican Party inspired the name and ideology of the Republican Party, but is not directly connected to that party.[159][160]
    samuel adams

    Fear of a large debt is a major legacy of the party. Andrew Jackson believed the national debt was a “national curse” and he took special pride in paying off the entire national debt in 1835.[161] Politicians ever since have used the issue of a high national debt to denounce the other party for profligacy and a threat to fiscal soundness and the nation’s future.[162]

    The affiliation of many Congressmen in the earliest years is an assignment by later historians. The parties were slowly coalescing groups; at first there were many independents. Cunningham noted that only about a quarter of the House of Representatives up until 1794 voted with Madison as much as two-thirds of the time and another quarter against him two-thirds of the time, leaving almost half as fairly independent.[164]


    Contingent Election of the President and Vice President by Congress: Perspectives and Contemporary AnalysisDownloads-icon


    Exiles of ’98: Ulster Presbyterians and the United StatesDownloads-icon


    The Presidential Campaign of 1832Downloads-icon


    Cambridge (/ˈkeɪmbrɪdʒ/[5] KAYM-brij) is a city in Middlesex County, Massachusetts, and part of the Boston metropolitan area as a major suburb of Boston. As of July 2019[update], it was the fifth most populous city in the state, behind Boston, Worcester, Springfield, and Lowell.[6] According to the 2010 Census, the city’s population was 105,162.[7] It is one of two de jure county seats of Middlesex County, although the county’s government was abolished in 1997. Situated directly north of Boston, across the Charles River, it was named in honor of the University of Cambridge in England, once also an important center of the Puritan theology embraced by the town’s founders.[8]:18

    Harvard University, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Lesley University, and Hult International Business School are in Cambridge,[9] as was Radcliffe College before it merged with Harvard. Kendall Square in Cambridge has been called “the most innovative square mile on the planet” owing to the high concentration of successful startups that have emerged in the vicinity of the square since 2010.[10][11]

    In December 1630, the site of what would become Cambridge was chosen because it was safely upriver from Boston Harbor, making it easily defensible from attacks by enemy ships. Thomas Dudley, his daughter Anne Bradstreet, and her husband, Simon Bradstreet, were the town’s founders. The first houses were built in the spring of 1631. The settlement was initially referred to as “the newe towne”.[12][13] Official Massachusetts records show the name rendered as Newe Towne by 1632, and as Newtowne by 1638.[13][14]

    Located at the first convenient Charles River crossing west of Boston, Newtowne was one of several towns (including Boston, Dorchester, Watertown, and Weymouth) founded by the 700 original Puritan colonists of the Massachusetts Bay Colony under Governor John Winthrop. Its first preacher was Thomas Hooker, who led many of its original inhabitants west in 1636 to found Hartford and the Connecticut Colony; before leaving, they sold their plots to more recent immigrants from England.[12] The original village site is now within Harvard Square. The marketplace where farmers sold crops from surrounding towns at the edge of a salt marsh (since filled) remains within a small park at the corner of John F. Kennedy and Winthrop Streets.
    samuel adams

    In 1636, the Newe College (later renamed Harvard College after benefactor John Harvard) was founded by the Massachusetts Bay Colony to train ministers. According to Cotton Mather, Newtowne was chosen for the site of the college by the Great and General Court (the Massachusetts legislature) primarily for its proximity to the popular and highly respected Puritan preacher Thomas Shepard. In May 1638,[15] the settlement’s name was changed to Cambridge in honor of the university in Cambridge, England.[12][16]

    The town comprised a much larger area than the present city,[12] with various outlying parts becoming independent towns over the years: Cambridge Village (later Newtown and now Newton) in 1688,[17] Cambridge Farms (now Lexington) in 1712[12] or 1713,[18] and Little or South Cambridge (now Brighton)[a] and Menotomy or West Cambridge (now Arlington) in 1807.[12][19][b] In the late 19th century, various schemes for annexing Cambridge to Boston were pursued and rejected.[20]

    Newtowne’s ministers, Hooker and Shepard, the college’s first president, the college’s major benefactor, and the first schoolmaster Nathaniel Eaton were all Cambridge alumni, as was the colony’s governor John Winthrop. In 1629, Winthrop had led the signing of the founding document of the city of Boston, which was known as the Cambridge Agreement, after the university.[21] In 1650, Governor Thomas Dudley signed the charter creating the corporation that still governs Harvard College.[22]

    Cambridge grew slowly as an agricultural village eight miles (13 km) by road from Boston, the colony’s capital. By the American Revolution, most residents lived near the Common and Harvard College, with most of the town comprising farms and estates. Most inhabitants were descendants of the original Puritan colonists, but there was also a small elite of Anglican “worthies” who were not involved in village life, made their livings from estates, investments, and trade, and lived in mansions along “the Road to Watertown” (today’s Brattle Street, still known as Tory Row).

    Coming north from Virginia, George Washington took command of the volunteer American soldiers camped on Cambridge Common on July 3, 1775,[12] now reckoned the birthplace of the U.S. Army.[c] Most of the Tory estates were confiscated after the Revolution. On January 24, 1776, Henry Knox arrived with artillery captured from Fort Ticonderoga, which enabled Washington to drive the British army out of Boston.

    Between 1790 and 1840, Cambridge grew rapidly, with the construction of the West Boston Bridge in 1792 connecting Cambridge directly to Boston, so that it was no longer necessary to travel eight miles (13 km) through the Boston Neck, Roxbury, and Brookline to cross the Charles River. A second bridge, the Canal Bridge, opened in 1809 alongside the new Middlesex Canal. The new bridges and roads made what were formerly estates and marshland into prime industrial and residential districts.

  • a phrase expressing the aim of a group or par
  • In the mid-19th century, Cambridge was the center of a literary revolution. It was home to some of the famous Fireside Poets—so called because their poems would often be read aloud by families in front of their evening fires. The Fireside Poets—Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, James Russell Lowell, and Oliver Wendell Holmes—were highly popular and influential in their day.

    Soon after, turnpikes were built: the Cambridge and Concord Turnpike (today’s Broadway and Concord Ave.), the Middlesex Turnpike (Hampshire St. and Massachusetts Ave. northwest of Porter Square), and what are today’s Cambridge, Main, and Harvard Streets connected various areas of Cambridge to the bridges. In addition, the town was connected to the Boston & Maine Railroad,[23] leading to the development of Porter Square as well as the creation of neighboring Somerville from the formerly rural parts of Charlestown.

    Cambridge was incorporated as a city in 1846[12]. The city’s commercial center began to shift from Harvard Square to Central Square, which became the city’s downtown around that time.

    Between 1850 and 1900, Cambridge took on much of its present character—streetcar suburban development along the turnpikes, with working-class and industrial neighborhoods focused on East Cambridge, comfortable middle-class housing on the old Cambridgeport and Mid-Cambridge estates, and upper-class enclaves near Harvard University and on the minor hills. The coming of the railroad to North Cambridge and Northwest Cambridge led to three major changes: the development of massive brickyards and brickworks between Massachusetts Ave., Concord Ave. and Alewife Brook; the ice-cutting industry launched by Frederic Tudor on Fresh Pond; and the carving up of the last estates into residential subdivisions to house the thousands of immigrants who arrived to work in the new industries.

    For many decades, the city’s largest employer was the New England Glass Company, founded in 1818. By the middle of the 19th century, it was the world’s largest and most modern glassworks. In 1888, Edward Drummond Libbey moved all production to Toledo, Ohio, where it continues today under the name Owens-Illinois. The company’s flint glassware with heavy lead content is prized by antique glass collectors. There is none on public display in Cambridge, but the Toledo Museum of Art has a large collection. The Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, and the Sandwich Glass Museum on Cape Cod also have a few pieces.

    In 1895, Edwin Ginn, founder of Ginn and Company built the Athenaeum Press Building for his publishing textbook empire.

    By 1920, Cambridge was one of New England’s main industrial cities, with nearly 120,000 residents. Among the largest businesses in Cambridge during the period of industrialization was Carter’s Ink Company, whose neon sign long adorned the Charles River and which was for many years the world’s largest ink manufacturer. Next door was the Athenaeum Press. Confectionery and snack manufacturers in the Cambridgeport-Area 4-Kendall corridor included the Kennedy Biscuit Factory (later part of Nabisco and originator of the Fig Newton),[24] Necco, Squirrel Brands,[25] George Close Company (1861–1930s),[26] Page & Shaw, Daggett Chocolate (1892–1960s, recipes bought by Necco),[27] Fox Cross Company (1920–1980, originator of the Charleston Chew, and now part of Tootsie Roll Industries),[28] Kendall Confectionery Company, and James O. Welch (1927–1963, originator of Junior Mints, Sugar Daddies, Sugar Mamas, and Sugar Babies, now part of Tootsie Roll Industries).[29]

    Only the Cambridge Brands subsidiary of Tootsie Roll Industries remains in town, still manufacturing Junior Mints in the old Welch factory on Main Street.[29] The Blake and Knowles Steam Pump Company (1886), the Kendall Boiler and Tank Company (1880, now in Chelmsford, Massachusetts), and the New England Glass Company (1818–1878) were among the industrial manufacturers in what are now Kendall Square and East Cambridge.

    In 1935, the Cambridge Housing Authority and the Public Works Administration demolished an integrated low-income tenement neighborhood with African Americans and European immigrants, built in its place the whites-only “Newtowne Court” public housing development and the adjoining segregated “Washington Elms” project for Black people in 1940, and the city required segregation in its other public housing projects as well.[30][31][32]

    As industry in New England began to decline during the Great Depression and after World War II, Cambridge lost much of its industrial base. It also began to become an intellectual, rather than an industrial, center. Harvard University had always been important as both a landowner and an institution, but it began to play a more dominant role in the city’s life and culture. When Radcliffe College was established in 1879 the town became a mecca for some of the nation’s most academically talented female students. The Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s move from Boston in 1916 reinforced Cambridge’s status as an intellectual center of the United States.

    After the 1950s, the city’s population began to decline slowly as families tended to be replaced by single people and young couples. In Cambridge Highlands, the technology company Bolt, Beranek, & Newman produced the first network router in 1969 and hosted the invention of computer-to-computer email in 1971. The 1980s brought a wave of high-technology startups. Those selling advanced minicomputers were overtaken by the microcomputer.[citation needed] Cambridge-based VisiCorp made the first spreadsheet software for personal computers, Visicalc, and helped propel the Apple II to major consumer success. It was overtaken and purchased by Cambridge-based Lotus Development, maker of Lotus 1-2-3. (This was in turn replaced in the market by Microsoft Excel).

    The city continues to be home to many startups. Kendall Square was a major software hub through the dot-com boom and today hosts offices of such technology companies as Google, Microsoft, and Amazon. The Square also now houses the headquarters of Akamai.[33]

    In 1976, Harvard’s plans to start experiments with recombinant DNA led to a three-month moratorium and a citizen review panel. In the end, Cambridge decided to allow such experiments but passed safety regulations in 1977. This led to regulatory certainty and acceptance when Biogen opened a lab in 1982, in contrast to the hostility that caused the Genetic Institute (a Harvard spinoff) to abandon Somerville and Boston for Cambridge.[34] The biotech and pharmaceutical industries have since thrived in Cambridge, which now includes headquarters for Biogen and Genzyme; laboratories for Novartis, Teva, Takeda, Alnylam, Ironwood, Catabasis, Moderna Therapeutics, Editas Medicine; support companies such as Cytel; and many smaller companies.

    By the end of the 20th century, Cambridge had one of the most costly housing markets in the Northeastern United States.[35] While considerable class, race, and age diversity persisted, it became harder for those who grew up in the city to afford to stay. The end of rent control in 1994 prompted many Cambridge renters to move to more affordable housing in Somerville and other cities or towns.

    Until recently, Cambridge’s mix of amenities and proximity to Boston kept housing prices relatively stable despite the bursting of the United States housing bubble.[36] Cambridge has been a sanctuary city since 1985 and reaffirmed its status as such in 2006.[37]

    According to the United States Census Bureau, Cambridge has a total area of 7.1 square miles (18 km2), of which 6.4 square miles (17 km2) is land and 0.7 square miles (1.8 km2) (9.82%) is water.

    Cambridge is located in eastern Massachusetts, bordered by:

    The border between Cambridge and the neighboring city of Somerville passes through densely populated neighborhoods which are connected by the MBTA Red Line. Some of the main squares, Inman, Porter, and to a lesser extent, Harvard and Lechmere, are very close to the city line, as are Somerville’s Union and Davis Squares.

    Through the City of Cambridge’s exclusive municipal water system, the city further controls two exclave areas, one being Payson Park Reservoir and Gatehouse, a 2009 listed American Water Landmark located roughly one mile west of Fresh Pond and surrounded by the town of Belmont. The second area is the larger Hobbs Brook and Stony Brook watersheds, which share borders with neighboring towns and cities including Lexington, Lincoln, Waltham and Weston.

    Cambridge has been called the “City of Squares”,[38] as most of its commercial districts are major street intersections known as squares. Each square acts as a neighborhood center. These include:

    Central Square

    Harvard Square

    Inman Square

    Cambridge’s residential neighborhoods border but are not defined by the squares.

    In the Koppen-Geiger classification Cambridge has a warm continental summer climate (Dfa) that can appear in the southern end of New England’s interior. Abundant rain falls on the city; it has no dry season. The average January temperature is 26.6 °F (- 3 °C), making Cambridge part of Group D, independent of the isotherm. There are four well-defined seasons.[40]

    As of the census[57] of 2010, there were 105,162 people, 44,032 households, and 17,420 families residing in the city. The population density was 16,354.9 people per square mile (6,314.6/km2). There were 47,291 housing units at an average density of 7,354.7 per square mile (2,840.3/km2). The racial makeup of the city was 66.60% White, 11.70% Black or African American, 0.20% Native American, 15.10% Asian (3.7% Chinese, 1.4% Asian Indian, 1.2% Korean, 1.0% Japanese[58]), 0.01% Pacific Islander, 2.10% from other races, and 4.30% from two or more races. 7.60% of the population were Hispanic or Latino of any race (1.6% Puerto Rican, 1.4% Mexican, 0.6% Dominican, 0.5% Colombian & Salvadoran, 0.4% Spaniard). Non-Hispanic Whites were 62.1% of the population in 2010,[54] down from 89.7% in 1970.[55] An individual resident of Cambridge is known as a Cantabrigian.

    In 2010, there were 44,032 households, out of which 16.9% had children under the age of 18 living with them, 28.9% were married couples living together, 8.4% had a female householder with no husband present, and 60.4% were non-families. 40.7% of all households were made up of individuals, and 9.6% had someone living alone who was 65 years of age or older. The average household size was 2.00 and the average family size was 2.76.

    In the city, the population was spread out, with 13.3% of the population under the age of 18, 21.2% from 18 to 24, 38.6% from 25 to 44, 17.8% from 45 to 64, and 9.2% who were 65 years of age or older. The median age was 30.5 years. For every 100 females, there were 96.1 males. For every 100 females age 18 and over, there were 94.7 males.

    The median income for a household in the city was $47,979, and the median income for a family was $59,423 (these figures had risen to $58,457 and $79,533 respectively as of a 2007 estimate[update][59]). Males had a median income of $43,825 versus $38,489 for females. The per capita income for the city was $31,156. About 8.7% of families and 12.9% of the population were below the poverty line, including 15.1% of those under age 18 and 12.9% of those age 65 or over.
    samuel adams

    Cambridge has been ranked as one of the most liberal cities in America.[60] Locals living in and near the city jokingly refer to it as “The People’s Republic of Cambridge.”[61] For 2016, the residential property tax rate in Cambridge was $6.99 per $1,000.[62] Cambridge enjoys the highest possible bond credit rating, AAA, with all three Wall Street rating agencies.[63]

    In 2000, 11.0% of city residents were of Irish ancestry; 7.2% were of English, 6.9% Italian, 5.5% West Indian and 5.3% German ancestry. 69.4% spoke only English at home, while 6.9% spoke Spanish, 3.2% Chinese or Mandarin, 3.0% Portuguese, 2.9% French Creole, 2.3% French, 1.5% Korean, and 1.0% Italian.

    Data is from the 2009–2013 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates.[64]

    Manufacturing was an important part of Cambridge’s economy in the late 19th and early 20th century, but educational institutions are its biggest employers today. Harvard and MIT together employ about 20,000.[65][66] As a cradle of technological innovation, Cambridge was home to technology firms Analog Devices, Akamai, Bolt, Beranek, and Newman (BBN Technologies) (now part of Raytheon), General Radio (later GenRad), Lotus Development Corporation (now part of IBM), Polaroid, Symbolics, and Thinking Machines.

    In 1996, Polaroid, Arthur D. Little, and Lotus were Cambridge’s top employers, with over 1,000 employees, but they faded out a few years later. Health care and biotechnology firms such as Genzyme, Biogen Idec, bluebird bio, Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Sanofi, Pfizer and Novartis[67] have significant presences in the city. Though headquartered in Switzerland, Novartis continues to expand its operations in Cambridge.

    Other major biotech and pharmaceutical firms expanding their presence in Cambridge include GlaxoSmithKline, AstraZeneca, Shire, and Pfizer.[68] Most of Cambridge’s biotech firms are in Kendall Square and East Cambridge, which decades ago were the city’s center of manufacturing. Some others are in University Park at MIT, a new development in another former manufacturing area.[69][70]

    None of the high-technology firms that once dominated the economy was among the 25 largest employers in 2005, but by 2008 Akamai and ITA Software were.[65] Google,[71] IBM Research, Microsoft Research, and Philips Research[72] maintain offices in Cambridge. In late January 2012—less than a year after acquiring Billerica-based analytic database management company, Vertica—Hewlett-Packard announced it would also be opening its first offices in Cambridge.[73] Also around that time, e-commerce giants Staples[74] and Amazon.com[75] said they would be opening research and innovation centers in Kendall Square. And LabCentral provides a shared laboratory facility for approximately 25 emerging biotech companies.[76][77][unreliable source?]

    The proximity of Cambridge’s universities has also made the city a center for nonprofit groups and think tanks, including the National Bureau of Economic Research, the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory, the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, Cultural Survival, and One Laptop per Child.[citation needed]

    In September 2011, the City of Cambridge launched the “Entrepreneur Walk of Fame” initiative. The Walk recognizes people who have made contributions to innovation in global business.[78]

    As of 2019[update], the city’s ten largest employers are:[66]

    Cambridge has a large and varied collection of permanent public art, on both city property (managed by the Cambridge Arts Council)[79] and the Harvard[80] and MIT[81] campuses. Temporary public artworks are displayed as part of the annual Cambridge River Festival on the banks of the Charles River, during winter celebrations in Harvard and Central Squares, and at university campus sites. Experimental forms of public artistic and cultural expression include the Central Square World’s Fair, the annual Somerville-based Honk! Festival,[82] and If This House Could Talk,[83] a neighborhood art and history event.

    Street musicians and other performers entertain tourists and locals in Harvard Square during the warmer months. The performances are coordinated through a public process that has been developed collaboratively by the performers,[84] city administrators, private organizations and business groups.[85] The Cambridge public library contains four Works Progress Administration murals completed in 1935 by Elizabeth Tracy Montminy: Religion, Fine Arts, History of Books and Paper, and The Development of the Printing Press.[86]

    Despite intensive urbanization during the late 19th century and the 20th century, Cambridge has several historic buildings, including some from the 17th century. The city also has abundant contemporary architecture, largely built by Harvard and MIT.

    Notable historic buildings in the city include:

    Contemporary architecture:

    The city has an active music scene, from classical performances to the latest popular bands. Beyond its colleges and universities, Cambridge has many music venues, including The Middle East, Club Passim, The Plough and Stars, The Lizard Lounge and the Nameless Coffeehouse.

    Consisting largely of densely built residential space, Cambridge lacks significant tracts of public parkland. Easily accessible open space on the university campuses, including Harvard Yard, the Radcliffe Yard, and MIT’s Great Lawn, as well as the considerable open space of Mount Auburn Cemetery and Fresh Pond Reservation, partly compensates for this. At Cambridge’s western edge, the cemetery is known as a garden cemetery because of its landscaping (the oldest planned landscape in the country) and arboretum. Although known as a Cambridge landmark, much of the cemetery lies within Watertown.[88] It is also an Important Bird Area (IBA) in the Greater Boston area. Fresh Pond Reservation is the largest open green space in Cambridge with 162 acres (656,000 m2) of land around a 155-acre (627,000 m2) kettle hole lake. This land includes a 2.25-mile walking trail around the reservoir and a public 9-hole golf course.[89]

    Public parkland includes the esplanade along the Charles River, which mirrors its Boston counterpart; Cambridge Common, a busy and historic public park adjacent to Harvard’s campus; Danehy Park, formerly a landfill; and the Alewife Brook Reservation.

    Cambridge is split between Massachusetts’s 5th and 7th U.S. congressional districts. The 5th district seat is held by Democrat Katherine Clark, who replaced now-Senator Ed Markey in a 2013 special election; the 7th is represented by Democrat Ayanna Pressley, elected in 2018. The state’s senior United States Senator is Democrat Elizabeth Warren, elected in 2012, who lives in Cambridge. The governor of Massachusetts is Republican Charlie Baker, elected in 2014.

    Cambridge is represented in six districts in the Massachusetts House of Representatives: the 24th Middlesex (which includes parts of Belmont and Arlington), the 25th and 26th Middlesex (the latter of which includes a portion of Somerville), the 29th Middlesex (which includes a small part of Watertown), and the Eighth and Ninth Suffolk (both including parts of the City of Boston).[91] The city is represented in the Massachusetts Senate as a part of the 2nd Middlesex, Middlesex and Suffolk, and 1st Suffolk and Middlesex districts.[92]

    From 1860 to 1880, Republicans Abraham Lincoln, Ulysses S. Grant, Rutherford B. Hayes, and James Garfield each won Cambridge, Grant doing so by margins of over 20 points in both of his campaigns. Following that, from 1884–1892, Grover Cleveland won Cambridge in all three of his presidential campaigns, by less than ten points each time.

    Then from 1896 to 1924, Cambridge became something of a “swing” city with a slight Republican lean. GOP nominees carried the city in five of the eight presidential elections during that time frame, with five of the elections resulting in either a plurality or a margin of victory of fewer than ten points.

    The city of Cambridge is extremely Democratic in modern times, however. In the last 23 presidential elections dating back to the nomination of Al Smith in 1928, the Democratic nominee has carried Cambridge in every election. Every Democratic nominee since Massachusetts native John F. Kennedy in 1960 has received at least 70% of the vote, except for Jimmy Carter in 1976 and 1980. Since 1928, the only Republican nominee to come within ten points of carrying Cambridge is Dwight Eisenhower in his 1956 re-election bid.

    Cambridge has a city government led by a mayor and a nine-member city council. There is also a six-member school committee that functions alongside the superintendent of public schools. The councilors and school committee members are elected every two years using proportional representation.[124]

    The mayor is elected by the city councilors from among themselves and serves as the chair of city council meetings. The mayor also sits on the school committee. The mayor is not the city’s chief executive. Rather, the city manager, who is appointed by the city council, serves in that capacity.

    Under the city’s Plan E form of government, the city council does not have the power to appoint or remove city officials who are under the direction of the city manager. The city council and its members are also forbidden from giving orders to any subordinate of the city manager.[125]

    Louis DePasquale is the City Manager, having succeeded Lisa C. Peterson, the Acting City Manager and Cambridge’s first woman City Manager, on November 14, 2016.[126] Peterson became Acting City Manager on September 30, 2016, after Richard C. Rossi announced that he would opt out of his contract renewal.[127] Rossi succeeded Robert W. Healy, who retired in June 2013 after 32 years in the position. In recent history, the media has highlighted the salary of the city manager as one of the highest for a Massachusetts civic employee.[128]

    * = current mayor
    ** = former mayor

    On March 8, 2021, Cambridge City Council voted to recognize polyamorous domestic partnerships, becoming the second city in the United States following neighboring Somerville, which had done so in 2020.[129]

    Cambridge was a county seat of Middlesex County, along with Lowell, until the abolition of county government. Though the county government was abolished in 1997, the county still exists as a geographical and political region. The employees of Middlesex County courts, jails, registries, and other county agencies now work directly for the state. The county’s registrars of Deeds and Probate remain in Cambridge, but the Superior Court and District Attorney have had their operations transferred to Woburn. Third District Court has shifted operations to Medford, and the county Sheriff’s office awaits near-term relocation.[130]

    Cambridge is perhaps best known as an academic and intellectual center. Its colleges and universities include:

    At least 258 of the world’s total 962 Nobel Prize winners have at some point in their careers been affiliated with universities in Cambridge.

    The American Academy of Arts and Sciences is also based in Cambridge.

    Five upper schools offer grades 6–8 in some of the same buildings as the elementary schools:[131]

    Cambridge has three district public high school programs, the principal one being Cambridge Rindge and Latin School (CRLS).[132]

    Other public charter schools include Benjamin Banneker Charter School, which serves grades K–6;[133] Community Charter School of Cambridge[134] in Kendall Square, which serves grades 7–12; and Prospect Hill Academy, a charter school whose upper school is in Central Square though it is not a part of the Cambridge Public School District.

    Cambridge also has several private schools, including:

    Cambridge is served by the Cambridge Chronicle, the oldest surviving weekly paper in the United States. Another popular online newspaper is Cambridge Day.

    Cambridge is home to the following commercially licensed and student-run radio stations:

    Cambridge Community Television (CCTV) has served the city since its inception in 1988. CCTV operates Cambridge’s public access television facility and three television channels, 8, 9, and 96, on the Cambridge cable system (Comcast). The city has invited tenders from other cable providers, but Comcast remains its only fixed television and broadband utility,[136] though services from American satellite TV providers are available. In October 2014, Cambridge City Manager Richard Rossi appointed a citizen Broadband Task Force to “examine options to increase competition, reduce pricing, and improve speed, reliability and customer service for both residents and businesses.”[137]

    Cambridge obtains water from Hobbs Brook (in Lincoln and Waltham) and Stony Brook (Waltham and Weston), as well as an emergency connection to the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority.[138] The city owns over 1,200 acres (486 ha) of land in other towns that includes these reservoirs and portions of their watershed.[139] Water from these reservoirs flows by gravity through an aqueduct to Fresh Pond in Cambridge. It is then treated in an adjacent plant and pumped uphill to an elevation of 176 feet (54 m) above sea level at the Payson Park Reservoir (Belmont). The water is then redistributed downhill via gravity to individual users in the city.[140] A new water treatment plant opened in 2001.[141]

    In October 2016, the City of Cambridge announced that, owing to drought conditions, they would begin buying water from the MWRA.[142] On January 3, 2017, Cambridge announced that “As a result of continued rainfall each month since October 2016, we have been able to significantly reduce the need to use MWRA water. We have not purchased any MWRA water since December 12, 2016 and if ‘average’ rainfall continues this could continue for several months.”[143]

    Several major roads lead to Cambridge, including Route 2, Route 16, and the McGrath Highway (Route 28). The Massachusetts Turnpike does not pass through Cambridge but provides access by an exit in nearby Allston. Both U.S. Route 1 and Interstate 93 also provide additional access on the eastern end of Cambridge at Leverett Circle in Boston. Route 2A runs the length of the city, chiefly along Massachusetts Avenue. The Charles River forms the southern border of Cambridge and is crossed by 11 bridges connecting Cambridge to Boston, including the Longfellow Bridge and the Harvard Bridge, eight of which are open to motorized road traffic.

    Cambridge has an irregular street network because many of the roads date from the colonial era. Contrary to popular belief, the road system did not evolve from longstanding cow-paths. Roads connected various village settlements with each other and nearby towns and were shaped by geographic features, most notably streams, hills, and swampy areas. Today, the major “squares” are typically connected by long, mostly straight roads, such as Massachusetts Avenue between Harvard Square and Central Square, or Hampshire Street between Kendall Square and Inman Square.

    Cambridge is served by the MBTA, including the Porter Square Station on the regional Commuter Rail; the Lechmere Station on the Green Line; and the Red Line at Alewife, Porter Square, Harvard Square, Central Square, and Kendall Square/MIT Stations. Alewife Station, the terminus of the Red Line, has a large multi-story parking garage (at a rate of $7 per day as of 2015[update]).[144]

    The Harvard bus tunnel, under Harvard Square, connects to the Red Line underground. This tunnel was originally opened for streetcars in 1912 and served trackless trolleys (trolleybuses) and buses as the routes were converted; four lines of the MBTA trolleybus system continue to use it. The tunnel was partially reconfigured when the Red Line was extended to Alewife in the early 1980s.

    Besides the state-owned transit agency, the city is also served by the Charles River Transportation Management Agency (CRTMA) shuttles which are supported by some of the largest companies operating in the city, in addition to the municipal government itself.[145]

    Cambridge has several bike paths, including one along the Charles River,[146] and the Linear Park connecting the Minuteman Bikeway at Alewife with the Somerville Community Path. A connection to Watertown is under construction. Bike parking is common and there are bike lanes on many streets, although concerns have been expressed regarding the suitability of many of the lanes. On several central MIT streets, bike lanes transfer onto the sidewalk. Cambridge bans cycling on certain sections of sidewalk where pedestrian traffic is heavy.[147]

    While Bicycling Magazine in 2006 rated Boston as one of the worst cities in the nation for bicycling,[148] it has given Cambridge honorable mention as one of the best[149] and was called by the magazine “Boston’s Great Hope”. Boston has since then followed the example of Cambridge and made considerable efforts to improve bicycling safety and convenience.[150]

    Cambridge has an official bicycle committee.[151] The LivableStreets Alliance, headquartered in Cambridge, is an advocacy group for bicyclists, pedestrians, and walkable neighborhoods.[152]

    Walking is a popular activity in Cambridge. In 2000, among US cities with more than 100,000 residents, Cambridge had the highest percentage of commuters who walked to work.[153] Cambridge’s major historic squares have changed into modern walking neighborhoods, including traffic calming features based on the needs of pedestrians rather than of motorists.[154]

    The Boston intercity bus and train stations at South Station, Boston, and Logan International Airport in East Boston, are accessible by subway. The Fitchburg Line rail service from Porter Square connects to some western suburbs. Since October 2010, there has also been intercity bus service between Alewife Station (Cambridge) and New York City.[155]

    In addition to the Cambridge Police Department, the city is patrolled by the Fifth (Brighton) Barracks of Troop H of the Massachusetts State Police.[156] Owing, however, to proximity, the city also practices functional cooperation with the Fourth (Boston) Barracks of Troop H, as well.[157] The campuses of Harvard and MIT are patrolled by the Harvard University Police Department and MIT Police Department, respectively.

    The city of Cambridge is protected by the Cambridge Fire Department. Established in 1832, the CFD operates eight engine companies, four ladder companies, one rescue company, and two paramedic squad companies from eight fire stations located throughout the city. The Acting Chief is Gerard Mahoney.[158]

    The city of Cambridge receives emergency medical services from PRO EMS, a privately contracted ambulance service.[159]

    Further educational services are provided at the Cambridge Public Library. The large modern main building was built in 2009, and connects to the restored 1888 Richardson Romanesque building. It was founded as the private Cambridge Athenaeum in 1849 and was acquired by the city in 1858, and became the Dana Library. The 1888 building was a donation of Frederick H. Rindge.

    Cambridge’s sister cities with active relationships are:[160]

    Cambridge has ten additional inactive sister city relationships:[160]


    “Annexation And Its Fruits”Downloads-icon


    “Boston’s Annexation Schemes.; Proposal To Absorb Cambridge And Other Near-By Towns”Downloads-icon


    “1990 Census of Population, General Population Characteristics: Massachusetts”Downloads-icon


    “1980 Census of the Population, Number of Inhabitants: Massachusetts”Downloads-icon


    “1950 Census of Population”Downloads-icon


    “1920 Census of Population”Downloads-icon


    “1890 Census of the Population”Downloads-icon


    “1870 Census of the Population”Downloads-icon


    “1860 Census”Downloads-icon


    “1850 Census”Downloads-icon


    “1950 Census of Population”Downloads-icon


    “U.S. Census, 2000”Downloads-icon


    the originalDownloads-icon


    “City of Cambridge map”Downloads-icon


    “Registered Voters and Party Enrollment as of February 12, 2020”Downloads-icon


    “Plan E”Downloads-icon


    “Cambridge Public Schools at a Glance 2012–2013”Downloads-icon


    the originalDownloads-icon


    “Water supply system”Downloads-icon

    samuel adams

    The original fest is back.

    The original fest is back.

    Juicy New England IPA.

    Juicy New England IPA.

    This Independence Day, we’re celebrating our shared values with American Giant by getting together for a collection of USA-made products.

    This Independence Day, we’re celebrating our shared values with American Giant by getting together for a collection of USA-made products.

  • mount everest is a part of which mountain ran
  • Samuel Adams, with the support of the Greg Hill Foundation, is donating over $2,000,000 to kick start the Restaurant Strong Fund across 20-states to aid restaurant workers affected by COVID-19 closures.

    Samuel Adams presents the Restaurant Strong Fund, where industry workers will receive our support, and you can donate. Join us today, and donate. For them.

    For everyone who has the desire to find a better way, or believes in a better idea – no matter how big or small it may be. For those who see beyond a glass half full or half empty, and instead want to work to fill it up. We salute your journey with our own.

    Boston Lager helped lead the American craft beer revolution, reviving a passion for full-flavored, high quality brews.

    Boston Lager helped lead the American craft beer revolution, reviving a passion for full-flavored, high quality brews.

    This website uses cookies. By using this website and its offers and continuing navigating, you accept these cookies. You can change them in your browser settings.

    samuel adams

    This website uses cookies. By using this website and its offers and continuing navigating, you accept these cookies. You can change them in your browser settings.

    samuel adams

    We’ve recently launched a brand new website for the Samuel Adams Boston Brewery, visit SamAdamsBostonBrewery.com for the latest beers, news and events.

    This website uses cookies. By using this website and its offers and continuing navigating, you accept these cookies. You can change them in your browser settings.

    samuel adams

    At the Boston Beer Company, we travel the world with boundless curiosity and determination in search of the best ingredients for our beers. We are just as eager to find smart, motivated, hard working people who love beer and want to join our team.

    Today, we are a team of more than 1,400 passionate employees. We have grown to be one of America’s leading craft brewers, and as we grow we work hard to keep the strong culture of a small entrepreneurial business with an incredible work ethic.

    Today, we are a team of more than 1,400 passionate employees. We have grown to be one of America’s leading craft brewers, and as we grow we work hard to keep the strong culture of a small entrepreneurial business with an incredible work ethic.

    We are proud to say that Boston Beer has more than 400 of the best-trained and most respected sales people in the industry.

    We brew, package, and ship more than 60 distinct styles of beer (many of them award-winning) that we sell nationwide.

    Our Boston office is home to more than 200 passionate and hardworking people who are devoted to brewing and selling the best beer in America.

  • lucy walker matterhorn
  • Our people are our most important ingredient. We not only hire the best, but we reward, develop, and retain them too.

    Our people are our most important ingredient. We not only hire the best, but we reward, develop, and retain them too.

    We are The Boston Beer Company, and we make the best beer in America. Our values define our culture and guide our behavior.

    We are The Boston Beer Company, and we make the best beer in America. Our values define our culture and guide our behavior.

    In his National Best Seller, Quench Your Own Thirst: Business Lessons Learned Over a Beer or Two, Jim offers unprecedented insights into the whirlwind ride from scrappy start-up to thriving public company. His story is our story, and gives good insight into who we are as a company.

    In his National Best Seller, Quench Your Own Thirst: Business Lessons Learned Over a Beer or Two, Jim offers unprecedented insights into the whirlwind ride from scrappy start-up to thriving public company. His story is our story, and gives good insight into who we are as a company.

    As a new hire, you’ll embark on a week-long cultural and beer industry immersion — this includes learning the traditional brewing process, interacting with drinkers at local Boston establishments, and participating in a (really thorough) product tasting session with Jim Koch.

    As a new hire, you’ll embark on a week-long cultural and beer industry immersion — this includes learning the traditional brewing process, interacting with drinkers at local Boston establishments, and participating in a (really thorough) product tasting session with Jim Koch.

    America is built on the dreams and triumphs of people who took a chance to pursue better. We support the people who continue to believe in pushing forward to build a better life, which is why in 2008, Jim Koch launched Brewing the American Dream.

    Each year we hold a homebrew competition, and the company foots the bill for a homebrew kit and special ingredients to anyone who wants to participate. The grand prize? A trip to Munich Oktoberfest and your beer goes on draft at the Boston Brewery Tap Room and at local beer festivals.

    At Boston Beer, we take beer very seriously. So seriously that we offer a rigorous training program for anyone who wants to become a Certified Cicerone, which is equivalent to a Sommelier (but for beer). We have more Certified Cicerones at Boston Beer than any other Brewery in the world.

    We are always looking for smart, motivated, hardworking people who love beer and who want to join our team. Learn more about the open jobs we have available at Boston Beer.

    Looking for your next position in craft beer sales? We are hiring sales reps all over the United States.

    Looking for your next position in craft beer sales? We are hiring sales reps all over the United States.

    We don’t have brick & mortar regional offices, so our sales team spends most of their time in the market. We offer positions in Regional Field Sales, National Account Management, and Category Management.

    A typical day includes 8-12 sales calls, as well as building retail displays, rotating beer for freshness, making sure our beers are merchandised to our standards, and doing draft quality audits to make sure our beer is as good as it gets.

    An important part of the job is educating and sampling drinkers on our beer. Our Brewery Representatives host promotions, tastings and beer dinners at accounts and pour beer at festivals.

    The Sales team builds relationships with accounts and wholesalers, and find creative ways to keep our beer available and visible in the market.

    We are always looking for smart, motivated, hardworking people who love beer and who want to join our team. Learn more about the open jobs we have available at Boston Beer.

    Are you passionate about brewing? How about a career in one of our three historic breweries.

    Are you passionate about brewing? How about a career in one of our three historic breweries.

    Teamwork is championed at our breweries. Whether pitching in at shift change or manning the grill at one of our brewery picnics, the fast pace and complex nature in which our breweries operate requires solid teamwork to bring success.

    Teamwork is championed at our breweries. Whether pitching in at shift change or manning the grill at one of our brewery picnics, the fast pace and complex nature in which our breweries operate requires solid teamwork to bring success.

    We are proud to have been able to save and expand three historic breweries to brew our beers. Our Boston Brewery is our home for innovation, and is where we develop all of our recipes. We also brew in Cincinnati, OH and in Lehigh Valley, PA.

    We are proud to have been able to save and expand three historic breweries to brew our beers. Our Boston Brewery is our home for innovation, and is where we develop all of our recipes. We also brew in Cincinnati, OH and in Lehigh Valley, PA.

    We offer a variety of positions within our three historic breweries, including: Brewing, Quality, Packaging, Warehouse, Maintenance, Brewery Support Staff, and Brewery Tour Staff.

    Training at our breweries is extensive and covers many topics: technical training, leadership training, communication skills, lean manufacturing techniques, and of course, safety training.

    We are always looking for smart, motivated, hardworking people who love beer and who want to join our team. Learn more about the open jobs we have available at Boston Beer.

    Our Boston Office is home to more than 200 passionate and hardworking people who are devoted to brewing and selling the best beer in America.samuel adams

    Our Boston Office is home to more than 200 passionate and hardworking people who are devoted to brewing and selling the best beer in America.

    Sammy’s place is the office bar and our place to unwind. You can find us there at the end of a long day, for our monthly “Cake & Beer” birthday celebrations, or for some pre-game camaraderie before a company softball game.

    Sammy’s place is the office bar and our place to unwind. You can find us there at the end of a long day, for our monthly “Cake & Beer” birthday celebrations, or for some pre-game camaraderie before a company softball game.

    The Boston Office is located at the Innovation and Design center, in the heart of Boston’s seaport district.

    The Boston Office is located at the Innovation and Design center, in the heart of Boston’s seaport district.

    We offer a variety of positions at the Boston Office, including: Brand Development and Creative, Operations, Procurement, Finance and Accounting, Human Resources, Legal, Business Analysis, IT, Collaboration and Execution, and Corporate Services.

    Training at our breweries is extensive and covers many topics: technical training, leadership training, communication skills, lean manufacturing techniques, and of course, safety training.

    We are always looking for smart, motivated, hardworking people who love beer and who want to join our team. Learn more about the open jobs we have available at Boston Beer.

    We believe in working hard and playing hard. We also believe in rewarding, developing, and retaining the best talent.

    We believe in working hard and playing hard. We also believe in rewarding, developing, and retaining the best talent.

    Every employee (who is 21+) receives two cases of beer every month. Let it be known you will be very popular with your friends and family when you bring the beer. Do you need to know more?

    Every employee (who is 21+) receives two cases of beer every month. Let it be known you will be very popular with your friends and family when you bring the beer. Do you need to know more?

    We offer competitive salary with performance incentive bonuses, standard insurance benefits and 401K matching program, paid time off and holidays, a discounted stock program, a comprehensive health and wellness program, maternity and paternity leave, and many other benefits.

    We offer competitive salary with performance incentive bonuses, standard insurance benefits and 401K matching program, paid time off and holidays, a discounted stock program, a comprehensive health and wellness program, maternity and paternity leave, and many other benefits.

    We have a dog friendly workplace with a casual dress code. If that isn’t enough for you, we also have company sports teams, car allowances for regional sales reps, team building events, recognition and employee nominated awards, and oh yeah – Sammy’s Place, our office bar.

    We are always looking for smart, motivated, hardworking people who love beer and who want to join our team. Learn more about the open jobs we have available at Boston Beer.

    Lucky for you, you’re already in the right place! Click HERE to explore our current open positions.

    Thanks for your application. We are fortunate to have a high volume of qualified craft beer enthusiasts who apply to all our open positions. Our Recruiting team carefully reviews each resume submitted. As you can imagine, this can take some time. If your qualifications match the role you’ve applied for, or if we think you’d be a strong candidate for another potential opportunity, we will reach out to you.

    Don’t give up, technology can sometimes have glitches. Please first try reapplying on a different Internet browser. If that still doesn’t work, you can email us at [email protected]

    You should receive an email from Human Resources that says we have your application. Again, be patient. We review all resumes carefully and have a high volume of applicants, so it can take a little time.

    No worries, it’s likely that a pop-up blocker prevented you from completing the PI Survey. If we choose to move forward with your application, the Recruiting team will reach out directly to send it to you.

    We’re so happy you asked… follow us @BostonBeerCareers on Instagram, or on LinkedIn. You can also be the first to know about new job opportunities by signing up for our job alerts on our careers website.

    HireVue is a one-way digital interview platform, similar to Skype, that we use for some of our Sales and other entry-level positions as an additional tool when evaluating applications. This program gives you the opportunity to learn more about The Boston Beer Company and our culture, and also enables us to get to know you better. We understand that a one-way interview may feel a little awkward, but just be yourself and know that it’s only one piece of your application.

    You do not need to be 21+ to be considered for a position with us, though you do need to be 21 to enjoy the beer!

    From time to time, we may have one-off internship opportunities available in our Boston office or breweries. However, we do not have any formal summer or seasonal internship programs in place.

    That being said, we are always looking for hardworking, creative and motivated craft beer lovers. When we do have internship opportunities available, we post them on our careers website.

    This website uses cookies. By using this website and its offers and continuing navigating, you accept these cookies. You can change them in your browser settings.

    samuel adams

    An extreme barrel aged beer that pushes the limits of barrel aging.

    Now a mainstay in American Craft Brewing, Our brewers continually push the brewing and barrel-aging limit with proprietary brewing techniques to create Utopias, a beer unlike any other.

    Now a mainstay in American Craft Brewing, Our brewers continually push the brewing and barrel-aging limit with proprietary brewing techniques to create Utopias, a beer unlike any other.

    Brewing, blending, and aging Utopias is a multi-step, time-intensive and complex process. This beer starts with a special blend of two-row pale malt combined with Munich and Caramel 60 malts that impart a rich, ruby color. Three varieties of German Noble hops – Spalt Spalter, Hallertau Mittelfrueh, and Tettnang Tettnanger – are added to balance the sweetness of the malt.

    Brewing, blending, and aging Utopias is a multi-step, time-intensive and complex process. This beer starts with a special blend of two-row pale malt combined with Munich and Caramel 60 malts that impart a rich, ruby color. Three varieties of German Noble hops – Spalt Spalter, Hallertau Mittelfrueh, and Tettnang Tettnanger – are added to balance the sweetness of the malt.

    Our most recent release is a blend of batches, some having been aged up to 24 years in a variety of barrels. The recipe includes Utopias aged in a variety of barrels including new Scandinavian Aquavit barrels as well as a portion of the final blend aged in Moscat barrels, a first time for the beer.

  • je t’aime meaning
  • Our most recent release is a blend of batches, some having been aged up to 24 years in a variety of barrels. The recipe includes Utopias aged in a variety of barrels including new Scandinavian Aquavit barrels as well as a portion of the final blend aged in Moscat barrels, a first time for the beer.

    Samuel Adams two-row pale malt blend, Caramel 60, Munich

    Spalt Spalter, Hallertau Mittelfrueh, and Tettnang Tettnanger

    Pale Amber, SRM: 10

    Limited Release 25.4 oz custom bottle

    Vermont Maple Syrup

    ABV / 22.0% ABW

    Utopias is not shipped to or sold in 15 states including: AL, AR, GA, ID, MO, MS, MT, NH, NC, OK, OR, SC, UT, VT, and WV.

    Clam Chowder, Cobb Salad

    Fish & Chips, Mango-Chili Chicken

    Pineapple Upside Down Cake, Fruit Topped Bread Pudding

    Map View

    List View

    Delivery View

    Map View

    List View

    Delivery View

    This website uses cookies. By using this website and its offers and continuing navigating, you accept these cookies. You can change them in your browser settings.

    samuel adams

    This website uses cookies. By using this website and its offers and continuing navigating, you accept these cookies. You can change them in your browser settings.

    Tallennettavan ostoslistan nimi:

    Haluatko varmasti tyhjentää koko ostoslistan?

    Remontti aiheuttaa valitettavasti normaalia enemmän tuotepuutteita verkkokaupan keräilyissä. Palvelutiski on suljettuna 16.8. – 12.9. välisenä aikana.

    Lisätiedot

    vaalea lagerolut 4,7%

    samuel adams

    Yhdysvallat

    The Boston Beer Company

    Servaali Oy
    Hämeentie 3b, 00530 Helsinki

    * Aikuisen keskivertokäyttäjän saannin vertailuarvo (8400 kj / 2000 kcal).

    © 2021, foodie.fi. all rights reserved.

    Stock Montage/Getty Images

    Founding Father Samuel Adams was a thorn in the side of the British in the years before the American Revolution. As a political activist and state legislator, he spoke out against British efforts to tax the colonists, and pressured merchants to boycott British products. He also was an important leader in the Sons of Liberty, a radical group that engaged in violent civil disobedience and retaliation against those who cooperated with the British. Additionally, as a writer, Adams was a skillful propagandist, churning out scores of newspaper articles, pamphlets and letters to promote resistance to British rule.

    In fact, while George Washington led the American colonists to victory in the Revolutionary War, there might not have been a revolution at all if it weren’t for provocateurs such as Samuel Adams.

    Adams and other firebrands helped push moderate colonial leaders into joining in the resistance against the British, which eventually led to the war. But Adams wasn’t just a rabble rouser. He also was a serious political theorist who championed the notion of individual rights, which became a core American value. During the Revolutionary War, Adams served in the Continental Congress, and helped draft the Articles of Confederation, the document that was the predecessor to the U.S. Constitution.

    Adams was born in Boston on September 27, 1722 to an affluent Puritan family. His father, Samuel Adams, Sr., was a prominent local merchant and religious deacon who was also active in local politics. His mother, Mary Adams, was the daughter of a local businessman. samuel adams

    Adams attended Boston Latin School and then went to Harvard College. It was there that Adams was introduced to the writings of John Locke, a philosopher in the Enlightenment, who argued that all people were born with certain rights that could not be taken away, and that governments exist by the consent of the people. That idea made a powerful impression upon Adams, who wrote his 1743 master’s degree thesis at Harvard on the legality of resisting British authority.

    When Adams’ father died in 1748, he inherited the family business of making malted barley and supplying it to brewers. He also may have tried his hand at brewing, judging from a 1751 newspaper advertisement in which he offered “strong beer, or malt for those who incline to brew it themselves; to be sold by Samuel Adams, at a reasonable rate.”

    But Adams wasn’t very good at running the business, and eventually went bankrupt. He was similarly unsuccessful as a city tax collector, performing his duties so ineptly that his ledgers came up short by thousands of pounds.

    Though Adams wasn’t very good with money, he was a good writer. He and some friends started their own short-lived newspaper, The Public Advertiser, which published Adams’ opinion pieces. He used that opportunity to exhort other Bostonians to cherish and protect their personal freedom.

    Adams’ voice became more prominent in the mid-1760s, when the British government tried to pay off debt from the Seven Years War by imposing new taxes upon the American colonists. While others merely grumbled about the economic harm, Adams argued in print that the British were violating the colonists’ rights, because they were being taxed without representation in Parliament. He denounced the Stamp Act, a 1765 tax law, as an attempt “to destroy the liberties of America as with one blow.”

    That same year, Adams was elected to the Massachusetts House of Representatives, an office he would hold for nine years. Around that time, he also joined a secretive group of activists called the Loyal Nine, which eventually evolved into a more radical organization called the Sons of Liberty.

  • when was amsterdam founded
  • When British troops arrived in Boston in 1768, Adams became more heavily involved in organizing resistance against the Crown. He wrote scores of newspaper articles under pen names, attacking the British. He also pressured Boston merchants to boycott British goods.

    The political protest known as the Boston Tea Party took place on December 16, 1773 in Boston, Massachusetts.

    Ed Vebell/Getty Images

    After the British Parliament passed the Tea Act in 1773, which sought to force the colonists to buy their tea from the British East India Company, Adams helped organize Bostonians to hinder the tea shipments. One group of resisters took matters even further, dressing up as Indian warriors and boarding several British ships to dump their tea, in what became known as the Boston Tea Party. Adams, who may have played a role in planning the event, afterward he praised it publicly, writing that the protesters “have acted upon pure and upright principle.”

    Eventually, British authorities had enough of Adams and his agitation. In 1775, British General Thomas Gage led a force of soldiers from Boston to Lexington, on a mission to arrest Adams and fellow colonial radical John Hancock. But American spies got wind of the plan, and American militiamen confronted the British on Lexington Common. The ensuing Battles of Lexington and Concord were the opening armed confrontations that sparked the Revolutionary War.

    As a delegate to the Continental Congress, Adams signed the Declaration of Independence, and continued his inflammatory rhetoric. In a 1776 speech in Philadelphia, he castigated Americans who sided with the Crown. “If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animating contest of freedom—go from us in peace,” Adams said. “We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you.”

    As a member of the Continental Congress, Adams also helped draft the Articles of Confederation, the predecessor to the U.S. Constitution.

    After leaving the Continental Congress in 1781, Adams went back to Boston, and eventually got back into state politics. He served for a time as president of the Massachusetts Senate and as Lieutenant Governor under Governor John Hancock, his former fellow radical. When Hancock died in office, Adams took over for him, and subsequently was elected to three one-year terms before retiring.

    Adams died at the age of 81 on October 2, 1803.

    “Among the natural rights of the Colonists are these: First, a right to life; Secondly, to liberty; Thirdly, to property; together with the right to support and defend them in the best manner they can. These are evident branches of, rather than deductions from, the duty of self-preservation, commonly called the first law of nature.”

    “Some of our politicians would have the people believe that the administration are disposed or determined to have all the grievances which we complain of redressed, if we will only be quiet. But apprehend this would be a fatal delusion.”

    “There can be no property in that which another can of right take from us without our consent.”

    “If the British administration and government do not return to the principles of moderation and equity, the evil which they profess to aim at preventing by their own rigorous measures, will the sooner be brought to pass—the entire separation and independence of the colonies.”

    “We cannot make events. Our business is to wisely improve them.”

    “Shame on the men who can court exemption from present trouble and expense at the price of their own posterity’s liberty!”

    “How strangely will the tools of a tyrant perve the plain meaning of words!”

    Rights of the Colonists, by Samuel Adams.

    The Writings of Samuel Adams, Vol. III (1773-1777) by Samuel Adams.

    Biographical sketch of Samuel Adams, American Battlefield Trust.

    Desperate Sons: Samuel Adams, Patrick Henry, John Hancock, and the Secret Bands of Radicals Who Led the Colonies to War, by Lee Standiford

    Biographical sketch of Samuel Adams, National Park Service.

    Biographical Directory of the United States Congress.

    Samuel Adams: The Life of an American Revolutionary, by John K. Alexander.

    Samuel Adams

    History.com Editors

    HISTORY

    https://www.history.com/topics/american-revolution/samuel-adams

    “use strict”;(function(){var insertion=document.getElementById(“citation-access-date”);var date=new Date().toLocaleDateString(undefined,{month:”long”,day:”numeric”,year:”numeric”});insertion.parentElement.replaceChild(document.createTextNode(date),insertion)})();

    A&E Television Networks

    samuel adams

    April 15, 2021

    October 27, 2009

    FACT CHECK: We strive for accuracy and fairness. But if you see something that doesn’t look right, click here to contact us!

    VIDEOS

    Subscribe for fascinating stories connecting the past to the present.

    RELATED CONTENT

    John Adams (1735-1826) was a leader of the American Revolution and served as the second U.S. president from 1797 to 1801. The Massachusetts-born, Harvard-educated Adams began his career as a lawyer. Intelligent, patriotic, opinionated and blunt, Adams became a critic of Great …read more

    The Revolutionary War (1775-83), also known as the American Revolution, arose from growing tensions between residents of Great Britain’s 13 North American colonies and the colonial government, which represented the British crown. Skirmishes between British troops and colonial …read more

    American Revolution leader John Hancock (1737-1793) was a signer of the Declaration of Independence in 1776 and a governor of Massachusetts. The colonial Massachusetts native was raised by his uncle, a wealthy Boston merchant. When his uncle died, Hancock inherited his lucrative …read more

    Patrick Henry was one of the Founding Fathers of the United States and the first governor of Virginia. He was a gifted orator and major figure in the American Revolution. His rousing speeches—which included a 1775 speech to the Virginia legislature in which he famously declared, …read more

    Paul Revere was a colonial Boston silversmith, industrialist, propagandist and patriot immortalized in the Henry Wadsworth Longfellow poem describing Revere’s midnight ride to warn the colonists about a British attack. He gave the local militia a key advantage during the Battles …read more

    The Boston Massacre was a deadly riot that occurred on March 5, 1770, on King Street in Boston. It began as a street brawl between American colonists and a lone British soldier, but quickly escalated to a chaotic, bloody slaughter. The conflict energized anti-British sentiment …read more

    The Boston Tea Party was a political protest that occurred on December 16, 1773, at Griffin’s Wharf in Boston, Massachusetts. American colonists, frustrated and angry at Britain for imposing “taxation without representation,” dumped 342 chests of tea, imported by the British …read more

    Abigail Adams was one of only two women to have been both wife and mother to two U.S. presidents (the other being Barbara Bush). Often separated from her husband due to his political work, the self-educated Abigail oversaw the family’s household and largely raised their four …read more

    From 1774 to 1789, the Continental Congress served as the government of the 13 American colonies and later the United States. The First Continental Congress, which was comprised of delegates from the colonies, met in 1774 in reaction to the Coercive Acts, a series of measures …read more

    Valikko

     

    samuel adams
    samuel adams
    more know:  distance from judea to samaria

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published.