New recipes

Samuel Adams Releases Ad Omitting God Reference In The Declaration of Independence

Samuel Adams Releases Ad Omitting God Reference In The Declaration of Independence


We are searching data for your request:

Forums and discussions:
Manuals and reference books:
Data from registers:
Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.

The brewery came under controversy for its new ad that left out a religious reference in the Declaration of Independence.

While there are often arguments about the separation of church and state, now the argument is being taken to the separation of church and beer.

Hot after the Fourth of July, Boston Beer Co. and its signature brew, Samuel Adams, came under fire and praise this week after releasing a commercial that quotes the Declaration of Independence, but leaves out mentions of God, according to CBS.

The commercial, which was released for the Fourth of July, quoted a section of the document that reads “that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness,” but the actor left out “ by their Creator.”

Following the commercial’s release, both angry and supportive viewers alike took to the Youtube video and company’s Facebook Page to either pan or support the company’s omission, some even threatening to boycott the brand. Many also cited that Samuel Adams, founding father and brewer, was a deeply outspoken religious man.

The company released a statement stating their reason for the omission was a matter of industry guidelines, according to Fox News.

“The Beer Institute Advertising Code says, ‘Beer advertising and marketing materials should not include religion or religious themes.’ We agree with that and try to adhere to these guidelines,” the statement read. “While we understand your objection to the omission of the phrase ‘by our creator,’ in other circumstances (after all, they occur in the Declaration of independence which Samuel Adams signed and helped author) we believe it would be outside our industry guidelines to invoke those religious words in a beer commercial.”


Samuel Adams Ad Omits 'God' from Declaration of Independence Quote

A politically correct beer commercial is causing a war of words on Facebook.

An ad for the Boston-based Samuel Adams quotes the Declaration of Independence but leaves out the word “God.”

“All men are created equal, that they are endowed with certain unalienable rights: life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness,” the actor in the ad states.The actual document reads, “…that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

Beer drinkers are weighing in on both sides of the issue on the company’s Facebook page. One social media user wrote:

I’ll never buy another, nor will most I know and will tell about this. Good luck Sam Adams… You’ll need it.

The company in question doesn’t deny the omission was on purpose, saying it was simply complying with existing laws regarding the beer industry.

“The Beer Institute Advertising Code says, ‘Beer advertising and marketing materials should not include religion or religious themes.’ We agree with that and try to adhere to these guidelines. While we understand your objection to the omission of the phrase “by our creator” in other circumstances (after all, they occur in the Declaration of independence which Samuel Adams signed and helped author) we believe it would be outside our industry guidelines to invoke those religious words in a beer commercial,” the statement said.


Samuel Adams’ Background and Early Life

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.

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.

WATCH: How the Sons of Liberty Helped Ignite the Revolution


Samuel Adams was born on September 27, 1722, in Boston, Massachusetts. Adams graduated from Harvard College in 1740, and would soon be known as a Patriot and one of the United States&aposਏounding Fathers.

A strong opponent of British taxation, Adams helped organize resistance in Boston to Britain&aposs Stamp Act of 1765. He also played a vital role in organizing the Boston Tea Party — an act of opposition to the Tea Act of 1773 — among various other political efforts.

Adams served as a legislator of Massachusetts from 1765 to 1774. Among his accomplishments, he founded Boston&aposs Committee of Correspondence, which — like similar entities in other towns across the Colonies — proved a powerful tool for communication and coordination during the American Revolutionary War.


Samuel Adams Releases Ad Omitting God Reference In The Declaration of Independence - Recipes

Samuel Adams Advocates American Independence

Samuel Adams, one of the most ardent of the Founding Fathers in his desire for independence from England, delivered this speech to a numerous audience at the State House in Philadelphia on August 1, 1776. Adams, a signer of the Declaration of Independence, also served as Delegate to the First Continental Congress in 1774 and was elected Governor of Massachusetts in 1794.

Our forefathers, ’tis said, consented to be subject to the laws of Great Britain. I will not at the present time dispute it, nor mark out the limits and conditions of their submission but will it be denied that they contracted to pay obedience and to be under the control of Great Britain because it appeared to them most beneficial in their then present circumstances and situations? We, my countrymen, have the same right to consult and provide for our happiness which they had to promote theirs. If they had a view to posterity in their contracts, it must have been to advance the felicity of their descendants. If they erred in their expectations and prospects, we can never be condemned for a conduct which they would have recommended had they foreseen our present condition.

Ye darkeners of counsel, who would make the property, lives, and religion of millions depend on the evasive interpretations of musty parchments who would send us to antiquated charters of uncertain and contradictory meaning, to prove that the present generation are not bound to be victims to cruel and unforgiving despotism,–tell us whether our pious and generous ancestors bequeathed to us the miserable privilege of having the rewards of our honesty, industry, the fruits of those fields which they purchased and bled for, wrested from us at the will of men over whom we have no check. Did they contract for us that, with folded arms, we should expect that justice and mercy from brutal and inflamed invaders which have been denied to our supplications at the foot of the throne? Were we to hear our character as a people ridiculed with indifference? Did they promise for us that our meekness and patience should be insulted, our coasts harassed, our towns demolished and plundered, and our wives and offspring exposed to nakedness, hunger, and death, without our feeling the resentment of men, and exerting those powers of self-preservation which God has given us?

No man had once a greater veneration for Englishmen than I entertained. They were dear to me as branches of the same parental trunk, and partakers of the same religion and laws I still view with respect the remains of the Constitution as I would a lifeless body which had once been animated by a great and heroic soul. But when I am aroused by the din of arms when I behold legions of foreign assassins paid by Englishmen to imbrue their hands in our blood when I tread over the uncoffined bodies of my countrymen, neighbors, and friends when I see the locks of a venerable father torn by savage hands, and a feeble mother, clasping her infants to her bosom, and on her knees imploring their lives from her own slaves, whom Englishmen have allured to treachery and murder when I behold my country, once the seat of industry, peace, and plenty, changed by Englishmen to a theater of blood and misery, Heaven forgive me if I can not root out those passions which it has implanted in my bosom, and detest submission to a people who have either ceased to be human, or have not virtue enough to feel their own wretchedness and servitude!

Men who content themselves with the semblance of truth, and a display of words talk much of our obligations to Great Britain for protection. Had she a single eye to our advantage? A nation of shopkeepers are very seldom so interested. Let us not be so amused with words! the extension of her commerce was her object. When she defended our coasts, she fought for her customers, and convoyed ourships loaded with wealth, which we had acquired for her by our industry. She has treated us as beasts of burden, whom the lordly masters cherish that they may carry a greater load. Let us inquire also against whom she has protected us? Against her own enemies with whom we had no quarrel, or only on her account, and against whom we always readily exerted our wealth and strength when they were required. Were these Colonies backward in giving assistance to Great Britain, when they were called upon in 1739 to aid the expedition against Cartagena? They at that time sent three thousand men to join the British army, altho the war commenced without their consent.

But the last war, ’tis said, was purely American. This is a vulgar error, which, like many others, has gained credit by being confidently repeated. The dispute between the courts of Great Britain and France related to the limits of Canada and Nova Scotia. The controverted territory was not claimed by any in the Colonies, but by the crown of Great Britain. It was therefore their own quarrel. The infringement of a right which England had, by the treaty of Utrecht, of trading in the Indian country of Ohio, was another cause of the war. The French seized large quantities of British manufactures and took possession of a fort which a company of British merchants and factors had erected for the security of their commerce. The war was therefore waged in defense of lands claimed by the Crown, and for the protection of British property. The French at that time had no quarrel with America, and, as appears by letters sent from their commander-in-chief to some of the Colonies, wished to remain in peace with us.

The part, therefore, which we then took, and the miseries to which we exposed ourselves ought to be charged to our affection to Britain. These Colonies granted more than their proportion to the support of the war. They raised, clothed, and maintained nearly twenty-five thousand men, and so sensible were the people of England of our great exertions that a message was annually sent to the House of Commons purporting “that his majesty, being highly satisfied with the zeal and vigor with which his faithful subjects in North America had exerted themselves in defense of his majesty’s just rights and possessions, recommends it to the House to take the same into consideration and enable him to give them a proper compensation.”

But what purpose can arguments of this kind answer? Did the protection we received annul our rights as men, and lay us under an obligation of being miserable?

Who among you, my countrymen, that is a father, would claim authority to make your child a slave because you had nourished him in infancy?

‘Tis a strange species of generosity which requires a return infinitely more valuable than anything it could have bestowed that demands as a reward for a defense of our property a surrender of those inestimable privileges to the arbitrary will of vindictive tyrants, which alone give value to that very property.

Courage, then, my countrymen our contest is not only whether we ourselves shall be free, but whether there shall be left to mankind an asylum on earth for civil and religious liberty. Dismissing, therefore, the justice of our cause as incontestable, the only question is, What is best for us to pursue in our present circumstances?

The doctrine of dependence on Great Britain is, I believe, generally exploded but as I would attend to the honest weakness of the simplest of men, you will pardon me if I offer a few words on that subject.

We are now on this continent, to the astonishment of the world, three millions of souls united in one cause. We have large armies, well disciplined and appointed, with commanders inferior to none in military skill, and superior in activity and zeal. We are furnished with arsenals and stores beyond our most sanguine expectations, and foreign nations are waiting to crown our success by their alliances. There are instances of, I would say, an almost astonishing providence in our favor our success has staggered our enemies, and almost given faith to infidels so we may truly say it is not our own arm which has saved us.

The hand of Heaven appears to have led us on to be, perhaps, humble instruments and means in the great providential dispensation which is completing. We have fled from the political Sodom let us not look back lest we perish and become a monument of infamy and derision to the world. For can we ever expect more unanimity and a better preparation for defense more infatuation of counsel among our enemies, and more valor and zeal among ourselves? The same force and resistance which are sufficient to procure us our liberties will secure us a glorious independence and support us in the dignity of free imperial States. We can not suppose that our opposition has made a corrupt and dissipated nation more friendly to America, or created in them a greater respect for the rights of mankind. We can therefore expect a restoration and establishment of our privileges, and a compensation for the injuries we have received from their want of power, from their fears, and not from their virtues. The unanimity and valor which will effect an honorable peace can render a future contest for our liberties unnecessary. He who has strength to chain down the wolf is a madman if he let him loose without drawing his teeth and paring his nails.

From the day on which an accommodation takes place between England and America, on any other terms than as independent States, I shall date the ruin of this country. a politic minister will study to lull us into security by granting us the full extent of our petitions. The warm sunshine of influence would melt down the virtue which the violence of the storm rendered more firm and unyielding. In a state of tranquillity, wealth, and luxury, our descendants would forget the arts of war and the noble activity and zeal which made their ancestors invincible. Every art of corruption would be employed to loosen the bond of union which renders our resistance formidable. When the spirit of liberty, which now animates our hearts and gives success to our arms, is extinct, our numbers will accelerate our ruin and render us easier victims to tyranny. Ye abandoned minions of an infatuated ministry, if peradventure any should yet remain among us, remember that a Warren and Montgomery are numbered among the dead. Contemplate the mangled bodies of your countrymen, and then say, What should be the reward of such sacrifices? Bid us and our posterity bow the knee, supplicate the friendship, and plow, and sow, and reap, to glut the avarice of the men who have let loose on us the dogs of war to riot in our blood and hunt us from the face of the earth? If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquillity of servitude than the animating contest of freedom–go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen!

To unite the supremacy of Great Britain and the liberty of America is utterly impossible. so vast a continent and of such a distance from the seat of empire will every day grow more unmanageable. The motion of so unwieldy a body can not be directed with any despatch and uniformity without committing to the Parliament of Great Britain powers inconsistent with our freedom. The authority and force which would be absolutely necessary for the preservation of the peace and good order of this continent would put all our valuable rights within the reach of that nation.

As the administration of government requires firmer and more numerous supports in proportion to its extent, the burdens imposed on us would be excessive, and we should have the melancholy prospect of their increasing on our posterity. The scale of officers, from the rapacious and needy commissioner to the haughty governor, and from the governor, with his hungry train, to perhaps a licentious and prodigal viceroy, must be upheld by you and your children. The fleets and armies which will be employed to silence your murmurs and complaints must be supported by the fruits of your industry.

Britain is now, I will suppose, the seat of liberty and virtue, and its legislature consists of a body of able and independent men who govern with wisdom and justice. The time may come when all will be reversed when its excellent constitution of government will be subverted when, pressed by debts and taxes, it will be greedy to draw to itself an increase of revenue from every distant province in order to ease its own burdens when the influence of the crown, strengthened by luxury and a universal profligacy of manners, will have tainted every heart, broken down every fence of liberty and rendered us a nation of tame and contented vassals when a general election will be nothing but a general auction of boroughs, and when the Parliament, the grand council of the nation, and once the faithful guardian of the State, and a terror to evil ministers, will be degenerated into a body if sycophants, dependent and venal, always ready to confirm any measures, and little more than a public court for registering royal edicts.

Such, it is possible, may some time or other be the state of Great Britain. What will, at that period, be the duty of the Colonies? Will they be still bound to unconditional submission? Must they always continue an appendage to our government and follow it implicitly through every change that can happen to it? Wretched condition, indeed, of millions of freemen as good as ourselves! Will you say that we now govern equitably, and that there is no danger of such revolution? Would to God that this were true! But you will not always say the same. Who shall judge whether we govern equitably or not? Can you give the Colonies any security that such a period will never come? No. The period, countrymen, is already come! The calamities were at our door. The rod of oppression was raised over us. We were roused from our slumbers, and may we never sink into repose until we can convey a clear and undisputed inheritance to our posterity! This day we are called upon to give a glorious example of what the wisest and best of men were rejoiced to view only in speculation. This day presents the world with the most august spectacle that its annals ever unfolded–millions of freemen, deliberately and voluntarily forming themselves into a society for their common defense and common happiness. Immortal spirits of Hampden, Locke, and Sidney, will it not add to your benevolent joys to behold your posterity rising to the dignity of men, and evincing to the world the reality and expediency of your systems, and in the actual enjoyment of that equal liberty, which you were happy when on earth in delineating and recommending to mankind?

Other nations have received their laws from conquerors some are indebted for a constitution to the suffering of their ancestors through revolving centuries. The people of this country, alone, have formally and deliberately chosen a government for themselves, and with open and uninfluenced consent bound themselves into a social compact. Here no man proclaims his birth or wealth as a title to honorable distinction, or to sanctify ignorance and vice with the name of hereditary authority. He who has most zeal and ability to promote public felicity, let him be the servant of the public. This is the only line of distinction drawn by nature. Leave the bird of night to the obscurity for which nature intended him, and expect only from the eagle to brush the clouds with his wings and look boldly in the face of the sun.

If there is any man so base or so weak as to prefer a dependence on Great Britain to the dignity and happiness of living a member of a free and independent nation, let me tell him that necessity now demands what the generous principle of patriotism should have dictated.

We have no other alternative than independence, or the most ignominious and galling servitude. The legions of our enemies thicken on our plains desolation and death mark their bloody career, while the mangled corpses of our countrymen seem to cry out to us as a voice from heaven.

Our Union is now complete our Constitution composed, established, and approved. You are now the guardians of your own liberties. We may justly address you as the decemviri did the Romans, and say: “Nothing that we propose can pass into a law without your consent. Be yourselves, O Americans, the authors of those laws on which your happiness depends.”

You have now in the field armies sufficient to repel the whole force of your enemies and their base and mercenary auxiliaries. The hearts of your soldiers beat high with the spirit of freedom they are animated with the justice of their cause, and while they grasp their swords can look up to Heaven for assistance. Your adversaries are composed of wretches who laugh at the rights of humanity, who turn religion into derision, and would, for higher wages, direct their swords against their leaders or their country. Go on, then, in your generous enterprise with gratitude to Heaven for past success, and confidence of it in the future. For my own part I ask no greater blessing than to share with you the common danger and common glory. If I have a wish dearer to my soul than that my ashes may be mingled with those of a Warren and Montgomery, it is that these American States may never cease to be free and independent.


Samuel Adams (1722-1803)

Samuel Adams was one of Boston’s most prominent revolutionary leaders. He was known for his ability to harness popular resentment against Parliament’s authority to tax the colonies in a productive manner. His role in the origins of the American War of Independence cannot be understated. His unique perspective and his ability to galvanize popular support were pivotal in the success of the Boston Tea Party.

Considered the leader of the protest movement against Parliament’s authority in Massachusetts, Samuel Adams was instrumental in convincing people to join the Sons of Liberty. As a British citizen, he often referenced the Magna Carta of 1215 which effectively ended arbitrary taxation of barons in England. In the eighteenth century, Boston’s struggle against Parliament’s Acts of taxation seemed all too familiar.

Early Life

Born on September 16, 1722, Samuel Adams was born to a family which was well versed in political protest. His father, Deacon Adams, was a brewer, and owned a brewery in Boston. During the 1730’s, Boston experienced a severe economic recession due to a lack of currency, or paper money, in circulation. As a result, in 1739 Deacon Adams helped found the Land Bank which offered paper money to borrowers who mortgaged their property. This Land Bank currency was very popular, especially with poor farmers. It allowed them the power to purchase goods from Boston merchants who were in desperate need of customers. The Land Bank seemed to solve all problems it gave farmers more purchasing power, and allowed Boston merchants to sell more goods.

Patrick Henry, John Hancock, George Washington, Sam Adams, James Madison, Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin. New York Public Library.

Distrust of the British Government Grows

Everyone did not fully support this new form of currency. The opposition was led by the Court Party, or aristocratic loyalists who sat primarily on the Governor’s Council. In 1741, the members of the Court Party used their status to pressure Parliament to outlaw the Land Bank, and the currency it produced. Those that had manufactured the currency, such as Deacon Adams, were now responsible for all of the paper money that was now circulating throughout Massachusetts Bay Colony. All of the farmers that borrowed the currency were now owed silver and gold, and this would come out of the pocket of Deacon Adams. This sent his family spiraling into bankruptcy, and even after Deacon Adams passed away, Samuel Adams would have to defend his estate from the members of the Court Party who wished to seize his land as payment for the debts Deacon Adams owed the government.

This debacle surrounding the land bank left a strong impression on Samuel Adams. This left him with a strong distrust of government. He viewed this decision by Parliament as an exercise of arbitrary power. Naturally he gravitated toward the Popular Party, which was led by James Otis Jr., a fiery orator who had personal grievances against many of the members of the aristocratic Court Party. Otis guided Adams in his young political career, and helped him develop the rhetoric, and methods of political resistance, which would be influential in the rise of the Sons of Liberty. By 1765, Samuel Adams was ready to take the lead.

The Loyal Nine

In 1765, the first direct tax was imposed on the colonies by way of the Stamp Act. Samuel Adams saw this as yet another example of arbitrary authority exercised by the British Parliament. The colonies had not been consulted on issues of taxation, and moreover, they had no representatives in Parliament to defend them. Samuel Adams and the Loyal Nine led the resistance through popular protests which culminated in the Stamp Act Riots of August 1765. These riots resonated with Parliament, but they continued to pass Acts of taxation without consulting the colonies.

British Regulars Land at Long Wharf

In 1767, the Townshend Acts were passed which taxed items such as lead, glass, paint, and tea. In response to the Townshend Acts, in February of 1768, Samuel Adams drafted the Massachusetts Circular Letter which advocated for a return to “salutary neglect” which had been enjoyed by the colonies prior to the revoking of the Massachusetts Charter in 1688. The Stamp Act Riots and the Massachusetts Circular Letter left a strong impression on Parliament, and after the riots that ensued as a result of the Liberty Affair in 1768, they were now convinced that soldiers had to be sent to Boston. On October 1, 1768, nearly two thousand British regulars landed at Long Wharf, paraded around town, and finally camped out on Boston Common.

Samuel Adams & the Sons of Liberty

Samuel Adams was agitated by the presence of regular soldiers in the town. He and the leading Sons of Liberty publicized accounts of the soldiers’ brutality toward the citizenry of Boston. On February 22, 1770 a dispute over non-importation boiled over into a riot. Ebenezer Richardson, a customs informer was under attack. He fired a warning shot into the crowd that had gathered outside of his home, and accidentally killed a young boy by the name of Christopher Sneider. Only a few weeks later, on March 5, 1770, a couple of brawls between rope makers on Gray’s ropewalk and a soldier looking for work, and a scuffle between an officer and a whig-maker’s apprentice, resulted in the Boston Massacre. In the years that followed, Adams did everything he could to keep the memory of the five Bostonians who were slain on King Street, and of the young boy, Christopher Sneider alive. He led an elaborate funeral procession to memorialize Sneider and the victims of the Boston Massacre. The memorials orchestrated by Samuel Adams, Dr. Joseph Warren, and Paul Revere reminded Bostonians of the unbridled authority which Parliament had exercised in the colonies. But more importantly, it kept the protest movement active at a time when Boston citizens were losing interest.

Sam Adams, from the original picture by Chappel, in the posession of the publishers, 1862. New York Public Library.

The Tea Act

By 1773, Samuel Adams was given a new crisis to latch on to. On May 10, 1773, Parliament passed the Tea Act which granted the East India Company a monopoly on the tea trade. Even with the three pence per pound tax, the tea would be cheaper than all other teas on the market in Boston. While this may have delighted some consumers, merchants that had been smuggling Dutch tea into the colonies were very upset over this new tea tax. Since the East India product would be cheaper, its arrival in Boston would undercut all of the patriot merchants who had been peddling their previously less expensive Dutch tea. To make matters worse, seven loyal merchants had been hand- picked by the East India Company tea to sell the tea in Boston. They were called the consignees, and two of them were the sons of Royal Governor Thomas Hutchinson.

The Boston Committee of Correspondence

In the summer of 1773, news arrived in Boston of the passage of the Tea Act. Preparations for resistance were now well underway in the colonies. Samuel Adams did everything in his power to garner support from colonial merchants who would be hurt by the Tea Act. Samuel Adams started by forming the Boston Committee of Correspondence. The object of the committee was to communicate with other British North American colonies in order to share methods of resistance to taxation without representation. On October 21, 1773, Adams drafted a letter to the other colonies stating that all of the colonies would be united in their resistance to Parliament’s efforts to vend the tea in America.

The Boston Tea Party Ships Arrive in Griffin’s Wharf

By November 28, the crisis was now on the doorstep of Boston. The first tea ship to arrive was the Dartmouth owned by the Rotch family. The ship arrived with 114 crates of East India Company tea. Samuel Adams and the Sons of Liberty now had a deadline. According to customs law, the ship had only twenty days to unload its cargo. The twentieth day would be December 17, 1773. Still two more ships arrived. On December 2, the Eleanor arrived with 114 crates, and on December 15, the Beaver had joined the other two ships at Griffin’s Wharf.

Samuel Adams took the lead in negotiating with ship owners, and the customs officials for the port of Boston. On December 3, Adams ordered John Rowe, the owner of the Eleanor to unload his other cargo, but not the tea. On December 11, Adams and the Boston Committee of Correspondence ordered Francis Rotch, the owner of the Dartmouth and Beaver, to set sail for London with the East India Company tea onboard. Rotch refused to because his ships would be broadsided by two British warships, the Somerset and Boyne that were out in the harbor. Adams told Rotch that his ship must sail back to London. Adams exclaimed to Rotch “the people of Boston and the neighboring towns absolutely require and expect it.”

Now there were only a few days before the cargo of tea had to be unloaded according to customs law. On December 14, Samuel Adams brought Francis Rotch to the customs collector to ask for clearance for his ships to leave the port of Boston. The customs collector stubbornly insisted that no law would allow the ship to leave before unloading the tea. Two days later, on December 16, Rotch appeared at Old South Meeting House before thousands of angry Bostonians. Samuel Adams advised him to appeal to Royal Governor Thomas Hutchinson for permission to send his ships back to London. Francis Rotch reluctantly straddled his horse, and made his way to Milton where the Royal Governor was staying at his summer estate.

“This Meeting Can Do Nothing More to Save the Country!”

After hours of uncertainty, and anxious waiting at Old South Meeting House, Francis Rotch finally reappeared with the Governor’s decision. Rotch nervously announced that Hutchinson had refused his request that the tea had to be brought into Boston before his ships could depart. If Rotch attempted to leave, the two British warships and the canons from Castle William would blow his ships out of the water. After all of these attempts, Rotch now refused to take action. Samuel Adams rose from his pew, and announced, “This meeting can do nothing more to save the country!”

Historians cannot be certain, but many believe that this statement by Adams was a signal to the Sons of Liberty waiting outside to destroy the tea. While Adams did not participate in the destruction of the tea, he stayed behind at Old South Meeting House along with other patriot leaders to provide a distraction to the British Army stationed in Boston. Although he did not wield a hatchet, or don a Mohawk disguise, he was instrumental in securing support and sympathy from other British North American colonies. The very next day, on December 17, Adams wrote letters to the Sons of Liberty in New York and Philadelphia proudly announcing how peaceful the destruction of the tea was.

Legacy & Leadership

Samuel Adams’ role in resisting taxation without representation culminated with the destruction of the tea. In his efforts to see the tea sent back to London, Adams made every effort to appear as though he, and the Sons of Liberty, were lawfully opposing the landing of the cargo. In a letter to Arthur Lee, Adams laid the blame on the consignees. “The consignees, together with the customs collector, and the governor of this province [Hutchinson],” were responsible for the loss of the tea because of their refusal to negotiate with the people of Boston.

His skillfulness to use the weakness of customs law to his advantage, and his ability to galvanize popular support for the cause which he believed in, solidified his place as a leader among leaders in the cause for liberty.


Samuel Adams Releases Ad Omitting God Reference In The Declaration of Independence - Recipes

As the nation observes the 400th anniversary of slavery, a Chicago documentary filmmaker tweeted about the painting Declaration of Independence, which hangs in the rotunda of the U.S. Capitol.

The painting depicts a moment in 1776 showing 47 men, including Thomas Jefferson, John Hancock and Ben Franklin, most of whom were signers of the declaration.

"This is one of the most famous paintings in American history: Declaration of Independence," Arlen Parsa wrote above an image of the 1818 oil by John Trumbull. "I decided to put red dots on all the men who held slaves. Next time someone puts them on a pedestal and says we can't question their judgement on guns or whatever, show them this image."

So, Parsa claims that 34 of the 47 founding fathers shown in the painting were slaveholders.

With the caveat that there is no one definitive source on this question, we also counted 34.

We contacted more than a dozen historians and historical organizations. None knew of a list that identified how many of the men in the painting were slaveholders.

"I would have assumed that it would be easy to find out how many owned slaves, but it is surprisingly elusive," Baylor University history professor Thomas Kidd told us.

Starting with evidence Parsa provided to back up his claim, we did our own research on each of the 47. (This chart identifies all 47.)

"Most of the quantification is best-guess and based on available records," said historian Terry Bouton at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County. "The problem is that property records are pretty spotty for the more obscure founders and even some of the bigger names."

But, using books, historical organizations, research articles and other sources, we found there is strong evidence to back Parsa’s claim. The slaveholders tended to be men of means, including landowners, doctors, lawyers and local government officials.


Samuel Adams Releases Ad Omitting God Reference In The Declaration of Independence - Recipes

Declaration of Independence

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.— That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.— Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.
He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.
He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.
He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.
He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:
For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences
For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:
For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy of the Head of a civilized nation.
He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our Brittish brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

[The 56 signatures on the Declaration were arranged in six columns:]

[Column 1]
Georgia:
Button Gwinnett
Lyman Hall
George Walton

[Column 2]
North Carolina:
William Hooper
Joseph Hewes
John Penn
South Carolina:
Edward Rutledge
Thomas Heyward, Jr.
Thomas Lynch, Jr.
Arthur Middleton

[Column 3]
Massachusetts:
John Hancock
Maryland:
Samuel Chase
William Paca
Thomas Stone
Charles Carroll of Carrollton
Virginia:
George Wythe
Richard Henry Lee
Thomas Jefferson
Benjamin Harrison
Thomas Nelson, Jr.
Francis Lightfoot Lee
Carter Braxton

[Column 4]
Pennsylvania:
Robert Morris
Benjamin Rush
Benjamin Franklin
John Morton
George Clymer
James Smith
George Taylor
James Wilson
George Ross
Delaware:
Caesar Rodney
George Read
Thomas McKean

[Column 5]
New York:
William Floyd
Philip Livingston
Francis Lewis
Lewis Morris
New Jersey:
Richard Stockton
John Witherspoon
Francis Hopkinson
John Hart
Abraham Clark

[Column 6]
New Hampshire:
Josiah Bartlett
William Whipple
Massachusetts:
Samuel Adams
John Adams
Robert Treat Paine
Elbridge Gerry
Rhode Island:
Stephen Hopkins
William Ellery
Connecticut:
Roger Sherman
Samuel Huntington
William Williams
Oliver Wolcott
New Hampshire:
Matthew Thornton


Samuel Adams Advocates American Independence

Samuel Adams, one of the most ardent of the Founding Fathers in his desire for independence from England, delivered this speech to a numerous audience at the State House in Philadelphia on August 1, 1776. Adams, a signer of the Declaration of Independence, also served as Delegate to the First Continental Congress in 1774 and was elected Governor of Massachusetts in 1794.

Our forefathers, 'tis said, consented to be subject to the laws of Great Britain. I will not at the present time dispute it, nor mark out the limits and conditions of their submission but will it be denied that they contracted to pay obedience and to be under the control of Great Britain because it appeared to them most beneficial in their then present circumstances and situations? We, my countrymen, have the same right to consult and provide for our happiness which they had to promote theirs. If they had a view to posterity in their contracts, it must have been to advance the felicity of their descendants. If they erred in their expectations and prospects, we can never be condemned for a conduct which they would have recommended had they foreseen our present condition.

Ye darkeners of counsel, who would make the property, lives, and religion of millions depend on the evasive interpretations of musty parchments who would send us to antiquated charters of uncertain and contradictory meaning, to prove that the present generation are not bound to be victims to cruel and unforgiving despotism,--tell us whether our pious and generous ancestors bequeathed to us the miserable privilege of having the rewards of our honesty, industry, the fruits of those fields which they purchased and bled for, wrested from us at the will of men over whom we have no check. Did they contract for us that, with folded arms, we should expect that justice and mercy from brutal and inflamed invaders which have been denied to our supplications at the foot of the throne? Were we to hear our character as a people ridiculed with indifference? Did they promise for us that our meekness and patience should be insulted, our coasts harassed, our towns demolished and plundered, and our wives and offspring exposed to nakedness, hunger, and death, without our feeling the resentment of men, and exerting those powers of self-preservation which God has given us?

No man had once a greater veneration for Englishmen than I entertained. They were dear to me as branches of the same parental trunk, and partakers of the same religion and laws I still view with respect the remains of the Constitution as I would a lifeless body which had once been animated by a great and heroic soul. But when I am aroused by the din of arms when I behold legions of foreign assassins paid by Englishmen to imbrue their hands in our blood when I tread over the uncoffined bodies of my countrymen, neighbors, and friends when I see the locks of a venerable father torn by savage hands, and a feeble mother, clasping her infants to her bosom, and on her knees imploring their lives from her own slaves, whom Englishmen have allured to treachery and murder when I behold my country, once the seat of industry, peace, and plenty, changed by Englishmen to a theater of blood and misery, Heaven forgive me if I can not root out those passions which it has implanted in my bosom, and detest submission to a people who have either ceased to be human, or have not virtue enough to feel their own wretchedness and servitude!

Men who content themselves with the semblance of truth, and a display of words talk much of our obligations to Great Britain for protection. Had she a single eye to our advantage? A nation of shopkeepers are very seldom so interested. Let us not be so amused with words! the extension of her commerce was her object. When she defended our coasts, she fought for her customers, and convoyed ourships loaded with wealth, which we had acquired for her by our industry. She has treated us as beasts of burden, whom the lordly masters cherish that they may carry a greater load. Let us inquire also against whom she has protected us? Against her own enemies with whom we had no quarrel, or only on her account, and against whom we always readily exerted our wealth and strength when they were required. Were these Colonies backward in giving assistance to Great Britain, when they were called upon in 1739 to aid the expedition against Cartagena? They at that time sent three thousand men to join the British army, altho the war commenced without their consent.

But the last war, 'tis said, was purely American. This is a vulgar error, which, like many others, has gained credit by being confidently repeated. The dispute between the courts of Great Britain and France related to the limits of Canada and Nova Scotia. The controverted territory was not claimed by any in the Colonies, but by the crown of Great Britain. It was therefore their own quarrel. The infringement of a right which England had, by the treaty of Utrecht, of trading in the Indian country of Ohio, was another cause of the war. The French seized large quantities of British manufactures and took possession of a fort which a company of British merchants and factors had erected for the security of their commerce. The war was therefore waged in defense of lands claimed by the Crown, and for the protection of British property. The French at that time had no quarrel with America, and, as appears by letters sent from their commander-in-chief to some of the Colonies, wished to remain in peace with us.

The part, therefore, which we then took, and the miseries to which we exposed ourselves ought to be charged to our affection to Britain. These Colonies granted more than their proportion to the support of the war. They raised, clothed, and maintained nearly twenty-five thousand men, and so sensible were the people of England of our great exertions that a message was annually sent to the House of Commons purporting "that his majesty, being highly satisfied with the zeal and vigor with which his faithful subjects in North America had exerted themselves in defense of his majesty's just rights and possessions, recommends it to the House to take the same into consideration and enable him to give them a proper compensation."

But what purpose can arguments of this kind answer? Did the protection we received annul our rights as men, and lay us under an obligation of being miserable?

Who among you, my countrymen, that is a father, would claim authority to make your child a slave because you had nourished him in infancy?

'Tis a strange species of generosity which requires a return infinitely more valuable than anything it could have bestowed that demands as a reward for a defense of our property a surrender of those inestimable privileges to the arbitrary will of vindictive tyrants, which alone give value to that very property.

Courage, then, my countrymen our contest is not only whether we ourselves shall be free, but whether there shall be left to mankind an asylum on earth for civil and religious liberty. Dismissing, therefore, the justice of our cause as incontestable, the only question is, What is best for us to pursue in our present circumstances?

The doctrine of dependence on Great Britain is, I believe, generally exploded but as I would attend to the honest weakness of the simplest of men, you will pardon me if I offer a few words on that subject.

We are now on this continent, to the astonishment of the world, three millions of souls united in one cause. We have large armies, well disciplined and appointed, with commanders inferior to none in military skill, and superior in activity and zeal. We are furnished with arsenals and stores beyond our most sanguine expectations, and foreign nations are waiting to crown our success by their alliances. There are instances of, I would say, an almost astonishing providence in our favor our success has staggered our enemies, and almost given faith to infidels so we may truly say it is not our own arm which has saved us.

The hand of Heaven appears to have led us on to be, perhaps, humble instruments and means in the great providential dispensation which is completing. We have fled from the political Sodom let us not look back lest we perish and become a monument of infamy and derision to the world. For can we ever expect more unanimity and a better preparation for defense more infatuation of counsel among our enemies, and more valor and zeal among ourselves? The same force and resistance which are sufficient to procure us our liberties will secure us a glorious independence and support us in the dignity of free imperial States. We can not suppose that our opposition has made a corrupt and dissipated nation more friendly to America, or created in them a greater respect for the rights of mankind. We can therefore expect a restoration and establishment of our privileges, and a compensation for the injuries we have received from their want of power, from their fears, and not from their virtues. The unanimity and valor which will effect an honorable peace can render a future contest for our liberties unnecessary. He who has strength to chain down the wolf is a madman if he let him loose without drawing his teeth and paring his nails.

From the day on which an accommodation takes place between England and America, on any other terms than as independent States, I shall date the ruin of this country. a politic minister will study to lull us into security by granting us the full extent of our petitions. The warm sunshine of influence would melt down the virtue which the violence of the storm rendered more firm and unyielding. In a state of tranquillity, wealth, and luxury, our descendants would forget the arts of war and the noble activity and zeal which made their ancestors invincible. Every art of corruption would be employed to loosen the bond of union which renders our resistance formidable. When the spirit of liberty, which now animates our hearts and gives success to our arms, is extinct, our numbers will accelerate our ruin and render us easier victims to tyranny. Ye abandoned minions of an infatuated ministry, if peradventure any should yet remain among us, remember that a Warren and Montgomery are numbered among the dead. Contemplate the mangled bodies of your countrymen, and then say, What should be the reward of such sacrifices? Bid us and our posterity bow the knee, supplicate the friendship, and plow, and sow, and reap, to glut the avarice of the men who have let loose on us the dogs of war to riot in our blood and hunt us from the face of the earth? If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquillity of servitude than the animating contest of freedom--go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen!

To unite the supremacy of Great Britain and the liberty of America is utterly impossible. so vast a continent and of such a distance from the seat of empire will every day grow more unmanageable. The motion of so unwieldy a body can not be directed with any despatch and uniformity without committing to the Parliament of Great Britain powers inconsistent with our freedom. The authority and force which would be absolutely necessary for the preservation of the peace and good order of this continent would put all our valuable rights within the reach of that nation.

As the administration of government requires firmer and more numerous supports in proportion to its extent, the burdens imposed on us would be excessive, and we should have the melancholy prospect of their increasing on our posterity. The scale of officers, from the rapacious and needy commissioner to the haughty governor, and from the governor, with his hungry train, to perhaps a licentious and prodigal viceroy, must be upheld by you and your children. The fleets and armies which will be employed to silence your murmurs and complaints must be supported by the fruits of your industry.

Britain is now, I will suppose, the seat of liberty and virtue, and its legislature consists of a body of able and independent men who govern with wisdom and justice. The time may come when all will be reversed when its excellent constitution of government will be subverted when, pressed by debts and taxes, it will be greedy to draw to itself an increase of revenue from every distant province in order to ease its own burdens when the influence of the crown, strengthened by luxury and a universal profligacy of manners, will have tainted every heart, broken down every fence of liberty and rendered us a nation of tame and contented vassals when a general election will be nothing but a general auction of boroughs, and when the Parliament, the grand council of the nation, and once the faithful guardian of the State, and a terror to evil ministers, will be degenerated into a body if sycophants, dependent and venal, always ready to confirm any measures, and little more than a public court for registering royal edicts.

Such, it is possible, may some time or other be the state of Great Britain. What will, at that period, be the duty of the Colonies? Will they be still bound to unconditional submission? Must they always continue an appendage to our government and follow it implicitly through every change that can happen to it? Wretched condition, indeed, of millions of freemen as good as ourselves! Will you say that we now govern equitably, and that there is no danger of such revolution? Would to God that this were true! But you will not always say the same. Who shall judge whether we govern equitably or not? Can you give the Colonies any security that such a period will never come? No. The period, countrymen, is already come! The calamities were at our door. The rod of oppression was raised over us. We were roused from our slumbers, and may we never sink into repose until we can convey a clear and undisputed inheritance to our posterity! This day we are called upon to give a glorious example of what the wisest and best of men were rejoiced to view only in speculation. This day presents the world with the most august spectacle that its annals ever unfolded--millions of freemen, deliberately and voluntarily forming themselves into a society for their common defense and common happiness. Immortal spirits of Hampden, Locke, and Sidney, will it not add to your benevolent joys tobehold your posterity rising to the dignity of men, and evincing to the world the reality and expediency of your systems, and in the actual enjoyment of that equal liberty, which you were happy when on earth in delineating and recommending to mankind?

Other nations have received their laws from conquerors some are indebted for a constitution to the suffering of their ancestors through revolving centuries. The people of this country, alone, have formally and deliberately chosen a government for themselves, and with open and uninfluenced consent bound themselves into a social compact. Here no man proclaims his birth or wealth as a title to honorable distinction, or to sanctify ignorance and vice with the name of hereditary authority. He who has most zeal and ability to promote public felicity, let him be the servant of the public. This is the only line of distinction drawn by nature. Leave the bird of night to the obscurity for which nature intended him, and expect only from the eagle to brush the clouds with his wings and look boldly in the face of the sun.

If there is any man so base or so weak as to prefer a dependence on Great Britain to the dignity and happiness of living a member of a free and independent nation, let me tell him that necessity now demands what the generous principle of patriotism should have dictated.

We have no other alternative than independence, or the most ignominious and galling servitude. The legions of our enemies thicken on our plains desolation and death mark their bloody career, while the mangled corpses of our countrymen seem to cry out to us as a voice from heaven.

Our Union is now complete our Constitution composed, established, and approved. You are now the guardians of your own liberties. We may justly address you as the decemviri did the Romans, and say: "Nothing that we propose can pass into a law without your consent. Be yourselves, O Americans, the authors of those laws on which your happiness depends."

You have now in the field armies sufficient to repel the whole force of your enemies and their base and mercenary auxiliaries. The hearts of your soldiers beat high with the spirit of freedom they are animated with the justice of their cause, and while they grasp their swords can look up to Heaven for assistance. Your adversaries are composed of wretches who laugh at the rights of humanity, who turn religion into derision, and would, for higher wages, direct their swords against their leaders or their country. Go on, then, in your generous enterprise with gratitude to Heaven for past success, and confidence of it in the future. For my own part I ask no greater blessing than to share with you the common danger and common glory. If I have a wish dearer to my soul than that my ashes may be mingled with those of a Warren and Montgomery, it is that these American States may never cease to be free and independent.


Samuel Adams

Samuel Adams was born on September 27, 1722 in Massachusetts. He was one of 3 surviving children out of the 12 born to Samuel and Mary Adams. He was second cousin to President John Adams. Samuel attended Boston Latin School and then studied at Harvard in 1736. His parents urged him to go into ministry, but he shifted to politics. He graduated from Harvard in 1743 with a master’s degree in politics.

After Harvard, Adams was not certain where to go. He started a job at a counting house, but that did not last too long because his boss thought that he was too easily sidetracked with politics to ever be good at that trade. His father then loaned him a substantial amount of money to start his own business, but Samuel, being terrible with money, lent half of it to a friend and was never repaid and the other half he nickeled and dimed away. This confirmed that he was never going to be a business man.

After his failure at business, his father gave him a job at a family owned malthouse, where he worked as a maltster. In 1748, Samuel and some friends, angered by the British impositions, launched their own newspaper. There they wrote political essays for the public to read. He urged people to resist any encroachments on their personal lives or liberties.

Samuel inherited the responsibility of the family’s affairs upon the death of Samuel Adams, Sr. later that same year. Shortly after, he married his pastor’s daughter, Elizabeth Checkley. She died after giving birth to their sixth child in 1757, however only two of their children lived to be adults. Heartbroken, he did not remarry until 1764, when he took Elizabeth Wells to be his wife.

Portrait of Governor Samuel Adams (1722-1803). Undated engraving. — Image by © Bettmann/CORBIS

Samuel Adams, painted by Major John Johnston in 1795 while Adams was Governor. Public domain image.

In 1747, Samuel Adams was elected to his first political office as a clerk to the Boston market. He became a tax collector in 1756, he often did not collect taxes from people, and while this made him very popular among the town’s citizens, he shorted his own income a lot. Later, after the Seven Years’ War, Samuel had become a prominent figurehead in his political group for the struggle against Great Britain.

When Britain started taxing America, Samuel Adams was one of the leading public opposers. Samuel, as one of the <a href=”sons-of-liberty.html”>Sons of Liberty, took a leading role in starting the Boston Tea Party of 1773, although his exact involvement is still disputed. Upon the ship’s arrival in the Boston harbor, he passed a circular note to invite the townspeople to a secret gathering. Hundreds of people showed, and Samuel fired up the room with a spirit of revolution, urging the people to send the ship back without paying. This spirit of revolution led only to the Boston Tea Party, causing the British great monetary loss.

During the Revolutionary War, Adams was a member of the first and second Continental Congress. Samuel fought indefatigably to sway congress toward independence. In 1776, Samuel Adams was a proud signer of the United States Declaration of Independence. After the signing of the Declaration, he worked in the military committees and even joined the war briefly in 1777.

Massachusetts Senate

He continued helping in political aspects of war through the Revolution, and upon reaching the end of the war he returned to his home in Massachusetts. He was elected to the state senate in Massachusetts, and served as that body’s president. Later, he took part in the promotion of Massachusetts providing free education for children, even women. Adams spent the remainder of his life fighting political battles for the better of the people in his country, until he died on October 2, 1803.

Samuel Adams is proof that a man who disregards money but seeks the welfare and common good of the people can go down in the history books as a great man.