Is John
Adams an often overlooked figure in American history? When compared to men like
George Washington and Thomas Jefferson, even Benjamin Franklin, it can
certainly appear that way. The problem with that question is that John Adams
was not like some of the other Founders. His contributions were often more
subtle. While he was outspoken about his philosophies on government, his most
important contributions were behind the scenes. For example, it was his
recommendation that led to George Washington becoming the Commander-in-Chief of
the Continental Army, and it was at his urging that Thomas Jefferson authored
the Declaration of Independence. I would argue that Adams’s personality did not
lend itself to the same sort of greatness with which we often remember
Washington and Jefferson.
Adams was an ambitious man, seeking
greatness his entire life, which led to his decision to study law, as opposed
to following in the footsteps of his father, who was a farmer that also worked
as a shoemaker, a fact not lost on his in-laws (Ferling 26; Gelles 24). As a
New Englander, his worldview was shaped in a large part by the Puritan
traditions. He was hard-working and believed that morality was central to any
good government. This attitude was in sharp contrast to those of the Middle and
Southern colonies, such as Virginia, whose heritage was far more commercial (Peterson
6). Unlike Washington or Jefferson, Adams was not a large landowner. He and his
wife, Abigail, lived on a more meager 40 acres that they tended. This had an
impact on Adams both in his mind, and in a more practical way. He did not enjoy
the benefits of 18th century plantation ownership, especially the
income. His income and success largely hinged upon his own hard work,
particularly when we look at the source of Washington’s and Jefferson’s
landholdings. Adams was successful as a lawyer, and a highly respected member
of Massachusetts society, but that was not enough for the ambitious Adams.
In a letter to his wife Abigail from
June 1775, following the Battle of Bunker Hill, he lamented that he “must leave
others to wear the Lawrells [sic]
which I have sown; others, to eat the Bread which I have earned. -- A Common
Case” (masshistory.org). Adams was one of the most outspoken proponents of
Independence from Great Britain, and was instrumental in uniting the Colonies
in their struggle. Before his recommendation that Washington should command the
Continental Army, the conflict was confined to New England, particularly
Massachusetts. Adams knew that with Washington, a Virginian already renowned
for his service in the French and Indian War, as the Commander-in-Chief, the
Colonies would be more unified in a move toward separation. Unfortunately for
Adams, Washington’s reputation and personality overshadowed his work to unite
the Colonies. In fact, years after Adams’s presidency, he wrote to his friend
Benjamin Rush, commenting sarcastically on Washington’s “talents” (gilderlehrman.org).
 |
| George Washington, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson |
Washington was not the only
Virginian with whom Adams had a turbulent relationship. Thomas Jefferson and
John Adams certainly had one of the most interesting relationships between any
of the Founders. Although they started off as good friends, united by their
intellect (both were lawyers as well), their relationship quickly became
strained following the adoption of the Constitution (Peterson 5). It is no
wonder that their relationship should be difficult, especially given their
conflicting political ideologies and backgrounds. As stated above, Adams was
from New England, a region that was profoundly influenced by the Puritan
traditions, whereas Jefferson was a Virginia planter, with a much more commercial
history (Peterson 6). Of course, Adams was a Federalist while Jefferson
essentially created the opposition party, the Democratic-Republicans.
Unfortunately, Adams’s desire for greatness ultimately led to his downfall. As
President, Adams became truly popular in his own right, something he had not
experienced throughout his life (Miller 8). The Federalist-controlled Congress,
in the face of the perceived threat of the French Revolution, passed the Alien
& Sedition Acts, which Adams signed. While the laws were supposedly aimed
at protecting the United States from foreign threats, the reality is that the
Federalists were essentially trying to eliminate the threat they faced from the
Democrats. This was Adams’s downfall. The Presidential election of 1800 saw
Adams defeated by his old friend from Virginia.
What was the cause of Adams’s
bitterness toward his fellow revolutionaries? According to many of them in their
personal letters, it was his vanity (history.wisc.edu/). Adams was absolutely
dedicated to the American cause, and while this was praised by his
contemporaries, it was also seen by them as a double-edged sword, often making
is impossible for him to succeed in his capacity as an ambassador, particularly
concerning the French. Why? Why was Adams so difficult to work with? Aside from
his heritage as discussed above, I think Andrea Wulf provides some insight into
his personality that certainly bears discussing.
As I mentioned above, Adams did not
have the means of an 18th century American plantation owner. As Wulf
discusses, though he considered himself first and foremost a farmer, he did not
approach farming the same way that his more wealthy colleagues did (43).
Whereas Washington and Jefferson sought to create vast, grand estates, Adams
was forced to garden on the small scale that his land and his means allowed.
That is not to say that he did enjoy it, but he did not have the option to do
otherwise until much later in his life.
In conclusion, Adams was in some
ways the black sheep among the Founders. While he and Jefferson were
intellectuals, their political ideologies drove them apart. Though he was a
Federalist, his upbringing and means distanced him from the “great” men that
sought to build a powerful nation, such as Washington and Hamilton. And unlike
many of his peers, Adams was not rich for much of his life, nor was he
incredibly popular, though that is what he sought. Washington and Jefferson did
not seek the fame and greatness that they achieved, while Adams did, but was
not rewarded in that way. I would argue that that is justified. Adams
accomplished a great deal behind the scenes, which is where he seemed to excel.
When he was given an opportunity to achieve the greatness he sought, as
President of the United States he signed into law four of the most notorious bills
ever passed by Conges, the Alien & Sedition Acts. John Adams was
instrumental to the success of the American colonies in their struggle for independence,
as well as contributing heavily to political thought in the United States. We
owe a great deal of thanks to John Adams, but his own actions made it
impossible for him to achieve the same sort of greatness which we attribute to
George Washington and Thomas Jefferson. Adams is not less important than
Washington and Jefferson, but his greatness is more subtle, and is marred by mistakes
resulting from his personal faults.
References
Ferling,
John. Adams vs. Jefferson: The Tumultuous
Election of 1800. New York: Oxford
University Press, 2004. Print.
Gelles,
Edith. Portia: The World of Abigail Adams.
Bloomington: Indiana University Press,
1992. Print.
Miller,
John. Crisis in Freedom: The Alien and
Sedition Acts. Boston: Little, Brown and
Company, 1951, Print.
Peterson,
Merrill. Adams and Jefferson: A
Revolutionary Dialogue. Athens: The University
of Georgia Press, 1976. Print.
Wulf,
Andrea. Founding Gardeners: The
Revolutionary Generation, Nature, and the Shaping of
the
American Nation.
New York: Vintage Books, 2011. Print.
Letter
from John Adams to Abigail Adams, 23 - 27 June 1775 [electronic edition]. Adams
Family Papers: An Electronic
Archive. Massachusetts Historical Society.
Letter
from John Adams to Benjamin Rush, 11 November 1807 [electronic edition].
The Gilder Lehrman Institute of
American History.
“John
Adams.” Department of History, University of Wisconsin-Madison Center for the
Study of
