In his youthful days, Sam Adams had an immense influence over the Bostonians (especially during the 1760s and the 1770s). To his credit, Sam Adams led the Bostonians in opposing the British rule. He was at the forefront fighting for the colonies to be freed from the British dominance. This fight was not in vain because soon the states would come together to fight a common enemy: the British rulers. The events in Boston prepared the way for United States to gain self-independence. To a great extent, Sam Adams participated in fighting for the rights of the people due to his puritan beliefs. This formed the basis of his rebellion. However, after 1767, Sam Adams became a spent force, and his popularity began to wane (Fowler 158). Although his popularity declined after US gained self-independence, Sam Adams laid the ground for American Revolution, which makes him one of the notable figures in the United States of America.
Sam Adams contribution to the persistent violent and non-violent protests in Boston during the 1760s cannot be gainsaid. The central force driving Sam Adams into radicalism was his strong puritan beliefs. Sam Adams, a devout Christian, began his days with a word of prayer and ended his days with a bible reading. Adams believed in freedom of religion, freedom to own property and political liberty. Adams also believed that the colonists had to rise against the British dictatorship using both violent and non-violent means.
Sensing the discontent within many people (around Boston), Adams opposed the policies established by the British rulers. This propelled him to the position of a demagogue in Boston. Soon, Adams started to organize opposition protests against the British government in Massachusetts. As the chief propagandist, Sam Adams was able to mobilize a large number of rowdy groups to participate in the protests. Because of their hooligan nature, people christened the groups the “bully boys”. The extent to which Sam Adams played a role in the formation of the “bully boys” is in dispute because he did not want to be associated with violence. The “bully boys” performed tasks such as intimidating tax collectors and threatening officials working with Britain (Bullock 102). This gave the masterminds the political power, which they could handle effectively to gain legitimacy.
As the distant leader of the “sons of liberty”, Adams commanded the mobs to protest against the Britons at his will. The “sons of liberty” was a group formed in 1765 by merchants and artisans crusading against the Stamp Act. The underground group had the blessings of Sam Adams, although the members did not want to be in the public limelight. However, Adams was smart enough to limit the riots to royalists and tax collectors. For instance, Adams organized the demolishing of the stamp commissioner’s home following the passage of the Stamp Act in 1765. This was sufficient to make the commissioner resign the following day. This turn of events significantly angered the royalists and soon, the British government could not bear the rampant riots which had gathered momentum enchanting support from hundreds of people. Silly mistakes on the part of the British government emboldened the supporters to continue with their protests.
For instance, the use of live fire against supporters reduced the legitimacy of the Royal Government beyond redemption. By the 1775, the quest for America’s self-independence had gathered enough momentum, and revolution was inevitable. Through the revolution, Adams and the “sons of liberty” proved that the use of violence and rioting were effective means of driving a revolution. Nonetheless, puritan beliefs remained the key power behind Sam Adams political thinking.
Sam Adams was pushed by some sort of covenant. He strongly believed that the people were bound together by their shared history and the awe of morality. Therefore, the people who shared this dream had the duty to uphold their society (Fowler xi). In this light, the Americans had the duty to preserve their society, which was now under threat from the king and the British parliament (Fowler xi). Therefore, the pursuit for moral virtues influenced the decisions Sam Adams made.
At the same time, Adams opposed the idea of imposing taxes on people without their consent. The notion of forming an assembly (in which the colonists were left out) did not give the British Parliament legitimacy to make crucial decisions over the colonists. The Stamp Act (1765) helped to convince many people that Sam Adams was right in opposing the British rule. Although the Stamp Act was a liberal tax system, it became synonymous with tyranny. Most people associated the taxations systems used by Britain with tyranny. Adam opposed the idea of taxation without representation, and helped to spread this campaign across the colonies of New England. After the Townshend Act of 1767, Adams rallied other colonies behind him in demanding adoption of nonimportation agreement. Sam Adams also opposed the Boston Massacre and Tea Act solely due to his puritan beliefs.
In 1768, the British government sent troops to occupy Boston. Sam Adams opposed the British occupation and wrote many letters opposing the British occupation. He sought the British government to reconsider the decision warning that independence would be inevitable if the government failed to reconsider the decision. Tension continued to rise between the troops and the civilians and in March 1770, the British soldiers killed five civilians in what many historians consider to be the Boston Massacre. After the Boston Massacre, Adams wanted the soldiers involved to have a fair trial, which would prove to the public that Boston was not a lawless society, rather a victim of unfair occupation. Although, Sam Adams opposed the Boston occupation, the fact that he wanted a fair trial for the soldiers affirms his believe for public and private virtue. The puritan beliefs would later come to play in opposing the Tea Act.
Adams opposed to the Tea Act because it would push the East Indian Company out of debts at the expense of many merchants acting as middlemen. The East Indian Company got into a shaky situation due to people smuggling tea from Netherlands. This denied the company a lot of revenue, and in an effort to save the company from solvency, the British government allowed East India Company to be the sole importer of Tea to the colonies. Under this plan, the royal government would collect enormous amounts of tax to raise their royalists’ salaries. On the other hand, many people trading as middlemen would be pushed out of business, and the colonists would not have much say about management of the taxes. Apart from his Puritan beliefs, Adams was pushed into activism by his own grief.
Sam Adams was driven to the edge by private grief, which may partly explain his confrontational behavior (Fowler 36). At some point, Adams lost his three sons, a daughter and wife. It is highly possible that these family problems had an insurmountable influence on the tattered sense of comfort. All in all, the puritan spirit formed a fundamental part in Adams consistent resistance of the British rule. However, his involvement in violent protests (such as the Boston Tea Party) raises unresolved questions about his character.
Although Historians dispute his precise involvement in the Boston Tea Party, Sam Adams took charge of the events that eventually led to the Boston Tea Party in 1773. It all began with a tax dispute. The tax dispute highlighted the diverging interpretations of the Constitution, especially on the authority of the parliament over its colonies (Fowler 51). Adams reasoned that the colonists should not pay taxes because they were not represented in the parliament (Fowler 52). Adams also argued that colonial assemblies were legitimate because they had the people’s backing. Therefore, the colonial assemblies were the ones that should levy tax (Fowler 52). The events at the Tea party revealed deep-seated mistrust of the British government.
The Tea Act, enacted in 1773 by the British parliament allowed East India Company to export tea directly to Britain colonies. The move would be a threat to the merchants who initially acted as middlemen. Consequently, the American economy would be in jeopardy. The colonies were not concerned about high taxes, but the level of Parliament’s authority in the colonies. By allowing the entry (of cheap tea) into United States, the colonies would be admitting that they had no authority to tax the tea company.
Adams led the committees in opposing the Tea Act. Consignees set to receive the first batch of Tea were either forced to resign or return the Tea. In Boston, Adams organized a meeting on 29th November, 1773 which passed a resolution requiring the captain of the Dartmouth to steer the ship back without paying import duty. Other ships, Eleanor and William, arrived at the Boston Harbor later. Hutchison, Boston’s Governor, refused to let the ships leave the port without paying import duty. Hutchison was a firm believer in the authority of the British government. Earlier, Hutchison had argued that although the colonies were independent, the British Parliament still held unquestionable authority over the colonies (Fowler 90).
The Tea party was set forth by Sam Adams speech indicating that people could do nothing to save the country. These words instigated the people to mount the ships and offload vast amounts of the tea into the water. If it were not for those furious words, the tea party events may not have taken place. Adams publicized the event and defended the people who took part in the destruction. Adams reasoned that the people were in a principled protest defending their constitutional rights (Fowler 124). The British government responded in the following year by setting the Coercive Acts. Later, Adams coordinated resistance against the Coercive Acts and went as far as planning inter-colonial congress meeting (Irvin 115). The events that followed the first inter-colonial congress meeting gave birth to the American Revolution. However, after independence Sam Adams played a minimal role in the new political framework.
After the Boston massacre and the Boston Tea party, the British government could not bear Sam Adams opposition. The British government wanted to arrest and hang him for playing a leading role in the Boston Massacre and the Boston Tea Party. This led to the issue of a warrant of arrest, which forced Adams to go into hiding outside Boston. After (attaining) independence, the founding fathers saw no need to use an instigator of Sam Adams caliber. Therefore, Adams became a spent-force and could not play a key role in forming the new government and creating a united nation. In fact, Adams opposed the new constitution and rallied against its adoption. This was evident during the Philadelphia meetings.
Sam Adams went Philadelphia, as a representative of Massachusetts, but in Fowler’s words he “lived two political worlds - Philadelphia and Boston”. The scenario at Philadelphia was quite different from the one in Boston. Adams felt that, to a great extent, the representatives in Philadelphia wanted to have power, wealth and trade in their hands. A large number of the representatives opposed Sam Adams idea of town meetings as the model for governance. This led Adams to believe that power was in the wrong hands, and this would lead to a situation whereby the states had no rights. Also, Adams was not flexible and had a fixed mentality which made it hard to fit into the new political dispensation. While serving the second term in congress at Philadelphia, Adams was sick of the contemporary political events and wanted to get back to Boston. In Boston, the duties he served seemed unexciting to him. Nonetheless, Sam Adams played a significant role in writing the Massachusetts State Constitution.
Together with John Adams and James Bowdoin, Sam Adams participated in drafting the Massachusetts State Constitution during the Massachusetts convention (1779). The three men were tasked with writing the new constitution by delegates in the Massachusetts Convention. However, Sam Adams and James Bowdoin left John Adams to do the writing. Earlier, the public had rejected the constitution prepared by the Massachusetts General Court because the public was not involved. The Massachusetts Constitution had a higher degree of complexity compared to previous documents. In its structure, the constitution contained articles, chapters as well as sections. This structure was replicated in writing the US Constitution. Although Sam Adams played a role in writing the Massachusetts State Constitution, his star was quite dim after the independence.
All in all, Sam Adams remains an important figure in American history because of the role played in the Boston Tea Party and in writing the Massachusetts State Constitution. In addition to that, Sam Adams personality is relevant to the present day society, which requires regimes to safeguard their interests instead of protecting the interests of a few individuals in power. From his opposition of the Stamp Act, it is evident that Adams visualized a government which pursues the concerns of its people. In a fashion similar to the present day society, Adams envisioned a legally constituted government backed by the people it rules; Adams is on record for opposing the British regime because it did not have the support of the colonists. Like the present day society, Adams was also concerned about government impunity. After the Boston Massacre, Sam Adams was quite vocal in faulting the government for killing Boston civilians. From these events, it is clear that Sam Adams is not only an influential person in the American history, but also someone who the present day society can associate with in terms of advocating for the same type of governance.
Works Cited
Bullock, Steve C. "The American Revolution: A History in Documents." 2003. Questia. 26 November 2012
Fowler, William. Samuel Adams: Radical Puritan. New York, NY: Longman , 1997. Print.
Irvin, Benjamin H. "Samuel Adams: Son of Liberty, Father of Revolution." 2002. Questia. 26 November 2012
