Welcome back to part two of Samuel Adams. Before we get into it, we did get a little bit behind during the holidays, and the next episode won't be out until the first Wednesday of February. In the last episode, we learned that Sam Adams is an educated man with deep religious beliefs. We learned that he really doesn't care about business or making money. But he cares deeply about liberty and fairness. In this episode, we're going to talk about beer a little bit.
We're going to talk about the one time that he almost had a slave but then didn't. And then another time where he was nearly assassinated. I was reading something a couple of days ago and they were talking about after the destruction of the T, after that day that there were lots of witnesses And nobody saw anything. ? How do you contain that? Well, I would say that they saw, they knew, but the Tories that despised the Patriot movement to such a degree that they would let the powers to be know.
But it was already well known who potentially would be the instigators. It was pretty well known who were some of the members of the Sons of Liberty, not all. But at the same time, the expectation would be that, oh, the government knows this and what are they going to do about it?
Without having, at that time, a bloody insurrection on the part of the government, is the way that I would look at it, versus what they would do in, again, firing upon, or taking into custody, and somewhat unjustly causing issues throughout the citizenry. It would have been a riotous. . I quelled more riots than what I'm blamed for starting. Really? Yes, there were a number of them that would come in.
And as you may know, is that the governor's mansion at one point in time was ransacked and personal property and papers. We're being destroyed and it was myself that called into that crowd and into the, those rioters to just cease and desist what they were doing because they had no right to destroy personal property like they did. And there were other instances when there would have been moments of. activity and it just did not make sense at that point in time.
What was it that we were looking for in trying to develop our liberties? And if you instigate something to that level, is it really Getting your cause moving forward, instead of being that rebellious mob. Instead of being an organized people that can affect the change in government. Are you talking about when they ransacked governor, I think it was Hutchinson's Yes, So you tried to stand in the way of that and say, Whoa, this is a little too much.
We don't need to be throwing pictures out the window and burning his clothes. That's what you're saying. And were there not times where you instigated the mob and said, we need to go tar and feather this guy? Well, of course. Well, where's the personal property there? I mean, I would rather you throw my picture out the window than light me on fire or cover me in tar. Well, Well, let's have that in the light of the moment. Those people did act, again, at that.
It was, the instigation was to stop what was happening with the tax collectors and the injustice of that. Taking it too far and tar and feathering was, again, , destructive not only to property but to a person. And that was when a mob does get out of control. So. Lesson that was well taken from that is how is it that you take and Encourage your people to act but encourage them to act in a manner that is not going to even put their own Persons in jeopardy.
So speaking of that as far as going too far, were there times as you look back at your life where you feel like, okay, I went too far there. I'm having a hard time recalling any time that I would have looked at that My personal approach to look at how we would need to interact was that what was the greater value within the necessity to do something and ensuring that the overall, the citizenry would benefit from the action. And in doing that, it does take a long time.
a hard look into what would occur. But as I look back, there's not an instance of anything that I participated in over all these many years that I can say, . I didn't want to do that or needed to do that. I can't reflect on that in any other manner than it was the necessity to move this nation forward. Do you recall, was there a time where you tarred and feathered a tax collector? Not personally, I don't recall that. . You were a tax collector at one I was, yes. How'd you enjoy that?
I despised it. How in the world do you become a tax collector? I mean, you might as well be the king, you know what I mean? That seems just as likely to me. Well, I was elected to the position. And if you know whole of it all, is that I would not collect the taxes of those that I did not think could afford it. And because of that, the governor, actually sent the sheriff to confiscate all my personal property to pay for all those taxes, which I did not collect.
And at that point, the people did intervene for me and took it upon themselves to make sure all of those back taxes were resolved. So my being a tax collector was one to look at what is the justice in the tax? Where was it that it, made sense that it should be collected and who had the capacity to pay at the time that it needed to be collected. I see.
So when you're out collecting taxes, you ride your horse up to a house and then there is a single mother with three kids, her husband died in some war and she has no income and she owes some tax. You will look at that situation and say, well, how can we charge her a tax? You know, then she can't feed her kids. And so you don't, Collect that and then you're responsible for it. Is that how it works? I was personally responsible for all the taxes that were to be collected.
And if you were to squeeze her and I mean that in a I don't mean exactly actually squeeze her But if you were to push her and say look, I don't want to hear your sad story Then how does it work as a tax collector? Do you get a portion of what you collect?
There was a stipend that the tax collector received based on the fact of being an elected person, but not anything that would be immoral as to take more than what would have been taxed, but in the instance that you described of that particular person, in my opinion, she should not have been taxed. gosh that talk about a job that was never gonna fit you. That was it right there That was it. So that, that was, I'm sorry, but that, that was as bad as being in Mr. Cushing's counting house.
It did not do well for me. What was that? What did you do That was my first job as I mentioned, my father was able to get me a position in Mr. Cushing's accounting firm. And the idea of sitting there and doing numbers and the Tits and toddles did not appeal. So I spent the majority of my time at various meetings, public meetings, or private meetings to discuss the issues of the day. And as a result Mr. Cushing did let me go. So that's, That was when you said you got fired.
That was the job you got fired from. that doesn't seem like a very good fit. Let's talk about your ability to influence people. I think that obviously you are a well educated man going to Harvard, certainly and a prolific writer for sure. , you clearly have a, the ability to inspire people , that are less educated, that are trying to figure out what they're supposed to do and certainly educated. But do you have, is there a method that you have to this? Is there a theory that you have on this?
It was to be able to approach people regarding the issues of the day. , these were already issues that they.
were living in and through, and some may not necessarily have had the words to express it themselves, but having sat and listened and talked with people and met with people, it was then putting that into writing and putting it into the expressions of, , I heard from others as well as then from the historical truth of knowing our English constitution, as you well know, loosely written, but English law and understanding Mr. Blackstone, Mr.
Blackstone was one of the , well read, books in the Americas and to understand, and I think it might have been that gentleman, . General Gage that you talked to he did not have a very kind thing to say about the colonists and that, , we were all little flitters with the law because so many had read Blackstone and understood the English law and constitution better than many sitting in parliament.
So being able to take that into account, take the issues of what was happening in the day and being able then to put that to pen so that others were able to agree or disagree. Those that were suffering the hand of tyranny and despotism. agreed with what I would say. The Tories, on the other hand, who were locked into their thought process and were benefiting from what was in that established monarchical rule, they would not take it to hand.
So you weren't necessarily trying to influence everybody. You just knew that there was a group of people like you that were fed up with stamp taxes and sugar taxes and. Sending nails across the ocean, or, , iron across the ocean to make nails. You knew there were people fed up, and you were just trying to put it into writing so they could get on board. Correct. And if you look at Many of the articles or pamphlets that I wrote, it draws on those common principles of liberty, of rights.
What are the rights of an Englishman? How is that? , how is that being affected by the policies being put in place and the rules and taxation that are coming out of Parliament? And addressing it from a perspective, especially to the king, and appealing to him. To that idea that we were chartered through him to live in a way that we were originally doing. And where those violations by a legislative body that we did not have direct representation in.
And you have to understand there were areas in England that also did not have representation in Parliament. And they were also Additionally, under the same types of travesties and despotism or tyrannies that we were in the colonies within the mother country itself. So that's why there was commonality in what we were doing in the Americas by a number of different people and even some in parliament.
They're just out of touch with the regular citizens, and even some of the regions of the motherland were being treated in the same way that the colonists were being treated? Is that what you're saying? Correct? Yes. And again, when it takes three months to travel and get messages across to How is it that you can govern well?
And other than implementing those ideas and policies of that, as you mentioned out of touch group of people, the governor is looking at maintaining his own point of reference. And remember, he would get a nice retirement. , where is it that you can govern well if you're not governing locally? And that was one thing that I would say over and over is all good government is local. And that's what we didn't have.
With such a distance between us by having to cross over the Atlantic, How in the world can you get anything done with three months apart? I mean, King sends a letter, how are things? Three months later he gets a response, Good! How about with you? I mean, you'd never get anything done. correct? And the expectation of that was, in the early charters, were to give, , some sense of self government. and self governing. And that is where we started to have a number of our disputes.
And again, it goes back to both trade and then it also started to fall into the realm of , how would the Church of England come in and especially in the Northern colonies. So there were so many, you know, Areas that started to impact economically, as well as then in personal conscience that drove us into the decisions that we ultimately made, but as you were asking earlier, also influenced my writings. Concerning your writings, what are some , of your most important writings in your opinion?
The first and most important would be the the rights of the colonist.
Because it was going back and reviewing for the people and also was an appeal, not just to the king, but it was an appeal to the world of our rights as Englishmen and that we were those people of the same blood as those that were in England and for the whole world to hear that the charges that we were laying against the king for violating the his relationship and charter some of the other writings, the articles that I wrote as Candidas were some of the articles that I felt had the
most impact in my early writings and the periods around 1748, 1750 and that period. So that pseudonym was one. from that Roman general that I carried forward in trying to make that effort on. looking at the tyranny that was going on.
There was one that I recall and I can't recall the detail of, but it was in reference to some of the squabble that was happening on a theological basis as well within the colony between the Anglicans and the Puritans and where we were trying to look at the congregationalists and seeing where We're, the imposition of what they wanted to do with bishopry from an Anglican position was not where we saw from a Congregationalist Puritan perspective.
And I did take and write a couple articles in reference to that as well. So just a. Several off the top of my head. As you were saying before, when you are writing and you are trying to influence people, and I'm thinking maybe influence people isn't the right word. It seems like you're trying to find the people that believe the way that you believe or are suffering in the way that you feel that many people are suffering rather than specifically influence. Is that correct?
Yes. I would say that it was during which period? In some cases it was already what people knew and felt and were trying to express and to bring it to light and to try and communicate to those elsewhere as to what is happening in Massachusetts relative to what is happening in Virginia or what is happening in New York or one of the other colonies in Georgia or the Carolinas. And find that commonality of, look, you're not alone, or are we alone?
Or that drove it to the idea of then what would be the committees of correspondence early on during the revolution itself. We did a lot of that in New England, but for that to work and that to carry forward, We needed Virginia to take the lead on it. And so I did take a hand in holding back on what we were doing in Massachusetts and having that become predominant, but encouraging through other letters for Virginia to take a lead on that committee of correspondence.
So then we would develop a communication front across all of the various colonies. So influencing at different times. When it was necessitated. Otherwise, it was drawing others into what they already knew and to take and solidify all of that thinking and beliefs in such a way that where did it require then the appropriate action. That actually makes a lot more sense. And and thank you for clearing that up.
And I want to ask you about the committees of correspondence, because I've had a revelation about this as I was preparing to speak with you. But before I do that, how does your method of communicating through your writings, as you've described, compare to your method of getting people fired up when you're sitting in the bars, having a beer, I would have to say that there was more listening. If you're sitting and having a beer, there would be enough emotion to go around.
And so it would be, how do you take and listen to determine then to direct with others and allow them to direct their ideas and emotions in a productive manner. So the writing would be very much similar. Is that after hearing what was going on either in the legislature, through the letters of the king, the dictates of the governor, or with every person on the street.
then it would come together in the writings to be able to say, okay, look at the governor here and challenge him on those policies that he's promulgating and to get the people then to take and support the legislature in any activities that it would try to do to change policy based on what the legislature could do. And it was always about How do people influence government? How do they influence the governed? So do you do that by having conversations? Absolutely.
And do you do that through the pen, which then gives you the ability to communicate with more than those that are sitting at table with you? So I believe that's the directions that I use to look at how is it that we can bring the people together, And what they should know and already have in their hearts of their ideas of self governing and ensuring that their voices are heard in the best way that I possibly could. I see.
So the time in the taverns was almost like research for what needed to be written. It was being a part of the community, especially as someone that was elected to office. It was a necessity to be able to do what needed to be accomplished. So being there is, was part of the, what I saw is not as much as research.
I never thought of it that way, but as understanding, What the needs of my fellow citizens were, or what they were trying to express based on the issues that were affecting their lives, that was a good place to, to be for that. You can't help all these people that you want to help if you're not in touch with what they need and what they're feeling and what they're struggling with. That makes a lot of sense. that's correct.
And just to, as a side note of that was one of the areas that I was very upset with in the Constitution of 87, was the lack of representation. How in the world can one person represent 30, 000 people? I can't, it's unimaginable in my mind when I know how we, just in the Massachusetts legislature, there was maybe a couple thousand people each legislator represented. So in the 87 Constitution, , so what did you do about that? The fact that you had one person representing too many people?
Well, we tried to see about getting it amended, But that was the original First Amendment. If you study the history of the amendments that were submitted, that was one of the amendments that were submitted to the to the Congress, was to take and reduce the number of citizens and increase the number of representatives per population. Smart. If it's got to be local, if it only works, if it's local, You can't have 30, 000 people represented by one person.
There's no way that person could get their voice I know. And that's, so Congress continued that, the House of Representatives, under the Constitution of the United States. That was what held. And I do hope that is still the number of citizens to representative in your future. Well, I'm going to tell you this in the future. We don't get everything right. There's a lot of things we get right, but it, it is a work in progress as it was during your time.
And I suspect 200 years from now people will be saying the same thing. It's always going to be a work in progress. It's always going to be broken and on its way to being fixed, but never quite all the way. But I think that might be okay. When I was preparing for this conversation and I was reading about the committees of correspondence, one thing about this organization or this process that you had that I just could never understand it is the name.
It is just, the name is so like, it just doesn't catch your attention. I know that sounds simple, but it was almost too boring for me to read about it every time I would see it. And then I started. preparing to have this conversation with you and I got really interested because This is something that you either started or played a big role in starting and this is very important And is that right? This is this something you started? In the Massachusetts colonies I did.
It was very important to be able to communicate with the other districts throughout Massachusetts and then into Connecticut and Rhode Island. A lot of the issues were common issues and how do we draw that together? How can we come back and speak in a very similar voice?
And for a period of time, , they consolidated Rhode Island and once again, Connecticut towards Massachusetts, and it was no, they, they have their separate their separate entities, but at the same time, we need to be able to know that we're definitely of the same mind and direction that we needed to have. And then Virginia began, New York as well. We sent people in there to say, okay, we need to be able to communicate at a larger scale. And it grew from there.
And once again, I did try to encourage Virginia to take the lead on that, to make sure that , it wasn't being driven just from the Northern colony, because we were seeing enough as a troublemaker. And it was it was a necessity to have the Southern colonies. come together a stronger format with us and their committees and correspondence became that format by which we were able to communicate effectively.
So is the the committee of correspondence am I right to say that this is then just a network that allows all of the colonies to communicate with one another. A network that didn't exist prior to you either creating or fine tuning it. Correct. It was a means of communication on the common issues of the day and in a manner that would then be able to draw us together to some points of not only questioning, but actionable concepts and items and methodologies.
There is absolutely no chance that the colonies, the colonists stand up against what the English were sending over , without that committee of correspondence. Do you agree with that? I would agree. It brought us together quite a bit. And you have to understand as well.
That in Boston at the time, that we did in particular have a committee of safety and I was elected to head that committee of safety and even though there were the regular troops that were coming in, we did exercise the citizenry in small arms drills and activities. We were making sure that the families knew how to take care of themselves in times of trouble.
And it was very effective Ultimately, when Boston was embargoed, if you will, when we were blockaded as you're well aware, Boston is a peninsula to the extent that they were able to the British set up a blockade across that peninsula where The only way that we were able to get our food and other goods in was across the Charles River and that. But we did exercise our rights at that time as free citizens to gather in military formations and , do small arms drills too.
So when I talked to General Gage the Committee of Safety came up and he was laughing about the name of that. So what actually is, if you're gonna put it in a sentence or two, what actually is the Committee of Safety? What is it? Committee of Safety is the Organization of the citizens for self protection. So I would in a second sentence is I would put that as the beginning of the militia because the militia was allowed even under our charter for self protection or protection even to the frontier.
So it was it was simply taken out the militaristic term of militia gathering to the committee of safety. Okay, so I'm gonna be tarred and feathered myself by people who listen to this if I don't ask you if you make beer Or have made beer No, that, that is I, some, for some reason I've had that question before. My father, we had a malt house on our property.
So we, were malters and you were asking of one of the disparaging names that I had and it was Sam the Maltser and It was even to the effect when I'd work in the malt house That if you're not familiar with that At that process at all when you're in there and you're trying to work with that malt You actually acquire some of the aromas of that malt. So, for myself to go out into public without preparing necessarily to go, I did have a sweet aroma that caused people to stand off.
And I thought it might have been my personality, but I knew much better than that. Sam the Molster, huh, Yes. but you don't have some Brand of beer some family name that you guys are the greatest beer producers ever that never happened No. No. We were, we strictly were the producers of malt for those that were brewers. What about slavery? , that becomes a big thing over the next few years for sure. And what are your views on that?
, I read something that you're the only founding father that never owned a slave. Is that correct? That's absolutely correct. I was absolutely against slavery in the context that it was in the Americas and taking and bringing people over the way that they were brought over. Biblically, slavery had its places and purposes, if you understand that concept of it, but to take and to force people over.
away from their homes and the methods that were being used by the English originally and then carried even into this period of time with Mr. Jefferson. My wife Elizabeth was given a black woman and she came home with her and I refused to have her live in the house unless she was free. And so I told her she was a free woman and she's lived with us ever since. She was part of my family and still is part of my family.
And she's participated and helped live in our household as a family member, helped even as I would educate our children. And at this point, sadly say my son has passed. But I, I thought slavery in the context that England brought it to bear and then how it's been carried out in throughout the colonies and then these United States now has been a travesty to humanity. I'm not at all surprised that you have these feelings, for sure.
But if this black woman that lives in your house and is a part of your family one day said, , I think I'm gonna move, and I'm gonna go to I don't know, she's gonna go to Connecticut, right? You'd say, okay, thanks a lot. Yes. She, I said, she's a free woman. She can do as she pleases. . That's a hard position to take with so many people owning slaves. Good for you. Education. You have some strong feelings about education, don't you? I do. Absolutely do.
What do you think about , in a democracy, people have a vote. People have , one vote . They represent, one of whatever the total is. But as you know, there's a lot of people that are not educated at all and can be manipulated. In fact, I think you would argue that, you might argue that the Tories have been manipulated to believe that it's good for them to have pay stamp taxes and be under the rule of the king.
, is that where education comes into this to get those people to understand, , what is right and what is wrong? , what are your thoughts on that? First, I think you need to understand, and you may have been misguided, the ability of the people to read for themselves in the colonies has always been in that 80 plus percent of the population.
So for them to have a formal education in mathematics and history and sciences has nothing to do with the family educations that they received in their ability to read. Not everybody may have been able to write in a script format. But they had the ability and have the ability to read so that they could understand what was in print and the issues of the day. My heart in education was first and foremost, as I wrote not only to my cousin, John, when he was a president, but also as governor.
to the state legislature that the purpose of education would be first and foremost that these would be moral individuals that would have a capacity for self government and that they would be educated not only in the religious principles of the truth of the day but also that they would be educated in how government should function. And what does that mean, then, for the Constitution of Massachusetts, and then the Constitution of the United States?
If someone is unintelligent, or lacks the knowledge of functionality in how government should work, Then you're correct. They will not be able to self govern and they will not know how to vote well, even though they have that vote. As a free individual, and as you well know now, we're more of a republic than a pure democracy, so making those choices for who will represent them only can be done well if they understand how that is supposed to function.
And then, for the opportunities in their future, help them understand the gifts of God that they were created as the person that they are in mathematics and science and literature. Then to be able to go into those areas of life that they have a capacity for, the rest of that helps them to define what it is that , they're designed to do. , that's my whole heart on education. . Is it true that at one point you were fifth in line to be president? It is. Would you have been a good president?
I don't know that I would. I cannot say that I wouldn't know. all of the, as I stated earlier, to have all the good counsel around me to help me function in that position. So that was never anything that I desired to do. I was reluctant even to take the governorship, but it was because of Mr. Hancock passing away that I was brought up from lieutenant governor to governor. So to become president, that would have been a difficult one for me to ascend to.
Yeah. Do you think a person could be a good president without having strong religious beliefs? I have a hard time I'm going to be cautious with what I'm going to say is because I think that Would this be the first time you've ever done that, by the way? I'm kidding. Keep going. No I, there have been other times that I was cautious of what I was saying, especially when the young lieutenant was sitting there with a pistol in his hand, ready to assassinate me during one of the town meetings.
So I was relatively cautious at that point. But the, to be cautious now is because I look at the changes. In what has happened, even from the time of the beginning of the revolution, what has happened within the context of what is the meaning and idea of religious and how we shifted throughout the teachings within the pulpits, if you will, and how much the rise of Unitarianism or Deism has come to play.
to the point that definition of a religious perspective I do have a lot of feeling around that. My personal sense is that one needs to understand who is the ultimate sovereign to be able to govern exceptionally well. But I do believe, as with General Washington, who, although he was Anglican, was more of a deist, as well as I know my cousin was a Unitarian, so that is totally different in a theological perspective.
And then now, with Mr. Jefferson, who is a deist as well, if you will, the principles Of those governing now are those of the principles of the revolution. Their hearts and minds are focused on those truths in such a way that, yeah, my cousin John may have had some bad luck. Blips because of what was going on with the Federalists and Hamilton and Jay and the, how they believe the structure should be under the constitution.
And yes, those of us that are more Federalist Republicans and that have now are more in tune with Mr. Jefferson in the Democratic Republican party format. It all comes down to our principles of the fight for independence. Now, I believe you have to have that to govern well. Those principles are lost, then I don't know what your world is going to look like.
We're definitely not going to just mention a , young lieutenant pointing a pistol at your head, trying to assassinate you without hearing what the rest of that story is. What happened there? Well, , I can't remember the exact speech, but it was a large gathering at Old South and it was in that moment of talking about one of the egregious acts and what are we going to do and the large gathering of the people there. And this is when already the parliament is not happy with me at all.
But the young lieutenant actually was sitting at the steps for the platform and he had his revolver under a kerchief in his lap. Actually, the kerchief was dropped by Mr. Hancock, I believe. It was Mr. Hancock, or I don't recall the exact person, again at my age. But I do recall that him sitting there at the steps of the platform, and with the full intention, I believe, to shoot me.
And one of our Patriot friends went ahead and dropped his kerchief over that pistol, which obviously then stopped him from shooting me there at that time. But it was a very tenuous moment in looking down and seeing someone there, knowing that I was going to go down for the fight, no matter what, for our liberties. And yet the intervention of cooler hands, if you will, took place.
For the cause of American liberty and the freedom that I live under right now, that would have been a terrible thing because it seems to me that , this flame of rebellion, that it would fire up sometimes and then it would calm down and then it would fire up sometimes and then it would calm down. And it appears from my end that behind the scenes.
That you were the person behind that, that kept stoking that fire when it would get too low, so until it eventually caught fire, which may have been that moment in Concord and Lexington that you said where you raised your hands in the air, and I just can't imagine what would have happened if that person hadn't been there to stoke the fire. Is that how you see it? Not at all. I think there were many others as well in, in other areas, in other of the colonies at the time that were doing the same.
I mean, the young Patrick Henry in Virginia, there were Some of the others, the Yates in New York and then what was going on all through even with Pennsylvania and when those that were in Dr. Franklin's close circle of friends I would just say that I was just one person that had the opportunities to be able to communicate the intent and emotions of the people of the time in such a way that we were able to say enough is enough when it came to , those tyrannies about us.
And I think it was well captured again, as we began with my friend young friend Thomas Jefferson and composing the Declaration of Independence. Yes. of the Thomases Thomas Paine obviously had something to say that people wanted to hear just like you. Do you have some feelings about him? I think he was a brilliant young man. Everything that he did with Common Sense. If you really want to put a finger on the pulse of moving the revolution forward, it would be his pamphlet Common Sense.
I give great credit to what he wrote there. My feelings at this age that I'm at are those where Now that he's been in France for the period of time that he has not, or I should rather say that he has stepped away from any understanding of foundational biblical religion. He's even gone further than what I would qualify as a deist. He's come against, become a writer of theology that is so far away from his early days of understanding, even in this nation.
that we had an exchange, a kind exchange via some letters and where he tried to express his sentiments and tried to even do it with scriptures and I have to reject all of that. His early days, Brilliant. As I said, I think that common sense was the real catalyst for what took the nation forward. But now, in this time, this age, I would rather him stay with his writing of common sense instead of his writings of reason, which are a true attack on Christianity in particular.
Yeah, he definitely went a different direction where, of course, stayed the same course. Yes. Do you think that where the republic is right now, do you think that maybe after the revolution, that as the United States started to transform into what it's becoming and what it will be, do you think maybe that you're not evolving at that same pace. A number of my Detractors would have said that, may say that even now.
When I was considered for re election as the governor of Massachusetts, there was a lot of rhetoric against me, , based on my age, and that I was not willing to be other than what I am, Amen. My steadfastness in my beliefs and in my republicanism and my religious beliefs. So, that I would say is an honest criticism at this present time and even those few years ago when, as I mentioned, running or being elected for governor when I was put up for that. And I think this is where Mr. Jefferson.
is also looking at why I'm so encouraged with him being the president. As it goes back to the foundational principles that is what holds the people together, if they understand it. That's why when we were talking about education, I was so adamant about the education of the young people, not only in their true understanding of their religious, moral. requirements, what good virtue is, but also what is good government based on constitutionalism, and in particular our constitution.
Other than that, where we grow and how the nation is growing in commerce, I'm all for that and always have been. I think that we need to, with an understanding different than necessarily what the Federalists were, where that becomes the everything. I think that's where Mr. Jefferson is at. such a differentiator and that he sees that we still need to maintain a strong agrarian economy and nation and the thought processes that go hand in hand with that.
Because once a people go too far into elements of commerce only, from my perspective as that old Puritan, is that their frivolity increases to the point that they forget those basic fundamentals and principles of good morality, of good government, and then allow for all of the mechanisms of the excess to overcome their general principles. You can't build anything without that solid foundation, can you? Correct.
. Mr. Adams, I am so thankful for all of your time and your service in some of the darkest, most difficult times in our history. I'm just so thankful. And I just have two last questions for you. And then if there's anything you'd want to add, I'd certainly love to hear it. And that first question is, if you had to look back during the early days of you trying to, , fight for these freedoms and of the two allies that you. Certainly had your cousin, John Adams and John Hancock.
If you could only have one of them and you couldn't have the other supporting you, which one would you want? Because, He even though he and I did have a small falling out, Because as you may be aware, he wanted to be the general of the Revolutionary Forces, and my preference was with Mr. Washington. His youth, areas of influence, and his desire for the same freedoms, was my preference. much akin to mine. Whereas my cousin John was more subdued.
He didn't even want to get into the political arena until I requested that he come in and defend those British soldiers that fired upon our citizens there in Boston and having killed a couple of them. oh, you pulled him in. Yes, I did. Yes. And then from that point, , he became more active, but he was always more of a reluctant soul, but of a great mind. In many of his writings in his early days , in some of his writings in relationship to the Constitution, I think was a brilliant work.
But if I was going to have someone at that same period of time and could only have one person with me definitely Mr. Hancock. . I appreciate you answering all my questions and having this conversation cause it really has been fantastic. So thank you for all of your time. Is there anything that you would like to add to wrap this up? The only thing that I can think is a great prayer that as my posterity, you and the future would hold to the truth and principles of our foundation.
And as you recognize that without that it could only mean a travesty in governing. That's perfect. I appreciate your time so much and thank you again, and I'll be wishing you the And you're most welcome. Thank you What can I say? This is nothing like what I expected. I don't know why I expected Samuel Adams to be an uneducated hothead. When the reality is that he's a well-educated man that was deeply involved in political philosophy, religion, and writings that moved people to take action.
He spent his life as a passionate advocate for independence and played a gigantic role in organizing protests like the Boston Tea Party when he threw his hands in the air, praying to God after the first shots and conquered, it wasn't because he was dying to get to the battle and see the bullets start flying.
It was because it meant he was one step closer to the moment where the people that he cared about in his community would be treated fairly and never again be stripped of the rights that they were all born with. And if that meant fighting, so be it. When I think about Thomas Paine and his role in giving the people a voice through his writing Common Sense, I wonder if a fair way to describe Samuel Adams would have been as the organizer.
Without somebody like him, would the committees of correspondence have turned into this powerful communication network that it became? Could someone else have pulled together a group of people that would risk so much at the Boston Tea Party? And would the Sons of Liberty have been the strong force that it became to see things through despite the hardship? Fortunately, that young lieutenant never took the action that would cause us never to know.
Thanks for listening, and don't forget that when you tell a friend about the Calling History podcast, a mosquito decides it's time to switch to a plant based diet. I'm Tony Dean, and until next time, I'm history.