Algernon Sidney influenced the U. S. Declaration of Independence

“This book contains all the malice, and revenge, and treason, that mankind can be guilty of: It fixes the sole power in the parliament and the people … The king, it says, is responsible to them, the king is but their trustee; that he had betrayed his trust, he had misgoverned, and now he is to give it up, that they may be all kings themselves. Gentlemen, I must tell you, I think I ought more than ordinarily to press this upon you, because I know, the misfortune of the late unhappy rebellion, and the bringing the late blessed king to the scaffold, was first begun by such kind of principles …”

– Lord Chief Justice Jeffreys, in the trial of Algernon Sidney (1683) – explaining the reasons for his decision to have Sidney executed for high treason at that time

Algernon Sidney

Algernon Sidney was executed by the English government in 1683 for writing a book

Algernon Sidney was executed by the English government in 1683 for writing a book. Lord Chief Justice Jeffreys convicted him of high treason for writing these “Discourses Concerning Government.” (See the quotation at the beginning of this blog post, to hear Justice Jeffreys’ account of why he did so.) But others would later sing the praises of this book. One writer would call it “the textbook of the American Revolution.” Some referred to Algernon Sidney as “Sidney the Martyr,” because he paid for that book with his life. And, most prominently, John Adams and Thomas Jefferson were both fans of this book. Thomas Jefferson said that it was “probably the best elementary book of the principles of government, as founded in natural right, which has ever been published in any language.” (See the citation for this praise later on in this post.) I have not yet read this book, but I might like to do so at some point, after hearing the praise from these two men. In this post, I will examine Sidney’s influence upon John Adams and Thomas Jefferson. I will also try to show Sidney’s influence upon the Declaration of Independence.

Lord Chief Justice George Jeffreys, who had Algernon Sidney executed for treason

The Constitution of Massachusetts influenced the national Constitution

“We, therefore, the people of Massachusetts, acknowledging, with grateful hearts, the goodness of the great Legislator of the universe, in affording us, in the course of His providence, an opportunity, deliberately and peaceably, without fraud, violence or surprise, of entering into an original, explicit, and solemn compact with each other; and of forming a new constitution of civil government, for ourselves and posterity; and devoutly imploring His direction in so interesting a design, do agree upon, ordain and establish the following Declaration of Rights, and Frame of Government, as the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.”

– Preamble to the original Constitution of Massachusetts (ratified 1780), as written by John Adams

The Constitution of Massachusetts was originally written by John Adams …

In 1787, John Adams was serving as the American ambassador to Britain. Thus, he was not present at the (federal) Constitutional Convention, which was held that year. But he had more influence upon the federal Constitution than one might be tempted to conclude from this. This is because, eight years earlier, he had attended the Massachusetts Constitutional Convention held in 1779. Thus, he was the principal author of the Constitution of Massachusetts. This is among the oldest written constitutions to remain in effect today. It was also the first constitution anywhere in the world to be “created by a convention called for that purpose, rather than by a legislative body” (as one source puts it).

John Adams, the principal author of the Constitution of Massachusetts

… and remained unchanged until the 1820s, long after the founding era

This constitution remained unchanged until the Second Massachusetts Constitutional Convention. This latter convention was held from 1820 to 1821. At this time, the first nine amendments to the Massachusetts Constitution were all passed simultaneously. Thus, all of the amendments to that constitution were well after the founding era. I will be focusing here on how the Massachusetts Constitution influenced the federal Constitution. Thus, all of the amendments to the Massachusetts Constitution (even the very first one) are too late to be relevant to our present subject. Thus, I will be focusing here on the original text of the Massachusetts Constitution – as drafted in 1779, and presented and ratified in 1780. This will showcase the ideas of John Adams, and how they influenced our federal Constitution.

The title page of the first published edition of the original 1780 Massachusetts Constitution

The Constitution of Massachusetts influenced the Bill of Rights

“All men are born free and equal, and have certain natural, essential, and unalienable rights; among which may be reckoned the right of enjoying and defending their lives and liberties; that of acquiring, possessing, and protecting property; in fine, that of seeking and obtaining their safety and happiness.”

– The original Constitution of Massachusetts (ratified 1780), Part 1, Article 1 – as written by John Adams

“A Declaration of the Rights of the Inhabitants … of Massachusetts”

The United States Constitution shows the influence of several American state constitutions. But the one that influenced it the most was undoubtedly the Massachusetts Constitution. The original text of the Massachusetts Constitution was principally written by John Adams. It influenced many of the provisions in the original United States Constitution, as I show in a previous post. In this post, I will instead show how it influenced the amendments in the United States Bill of Rights. It has a lengthy section entitled “A Declaration of the Rights of the Inhabitants of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts” (Source: Part the First). This section makes for very interesting reading.

John Adams, the principal author of the Constitution of Massachusetts

The Founding Fathers strongly criticized Plato’s “Republic” (and for good reason)

“Socrates had reason indeed to complain of the misrepresentations of Plato; for in truth his dialogues are libels on Socrates.”

– Thomas Jefferson, in a letter to John Adams (5 July 1814)

I recently finished reading Plato’s “Republic” in the original Greek …

I recently finished reading Plato’s “Republic” in the original Greek. But I’m still not convinced by its arguments. Why? Among other things, because Plato advocated having a philosopher-king with absolute power. (But I’m getting ahead of myself here.) I have given my own response to these ideas in another post, so I will not spend much time giving my ideas here. Rather, I will here focus on some of the responses from our Founding Fathers. Specifically, John Adams and Thomas Jefferson both criticized Plato’s “Republic,” and so did one of the authors of the Federalist Papers. But in order to understand why they did so, I must first examine some of the arguments from “The Republic” itself – namely, the parts that the Founding Fathers most objected to. If you’ve already read my main post about Plato’s arguments, please feel free to skip this next paragraph.

Plato

… but I’m still not convinced by its arguments (which I briefly summarize here)

The Greek title of Plato’s “Republic” is ΠΟΛΙΤΕΙΑ (“Politeia”). It has many translations, including “constitution.” Nonetheless, it might be best translated as “political entity.” In English, the work is ironically known as “The Republic” – but by modern standards, this is something of a misnomer. His “political entity” is far different from what we would today consider a “republic.” James Madison defined a “republic” as “a government in which the scheme of representation takes place” (Source: Federalist No. 10). But this does not describe the “ideal” state of Plato. Rather (as mentioned earlier), Plato’s “ideal state” is led by a philosopher-king with absolute power. The philosopher-king is to rule for life. Plato reassures his readers that the philosopher-king will refrain from “abusing” his power, but does not provide any convincing reasons that his scheme will indeed prevent this from happening (something that a good system should be expected to do, in my opinion). The philosopher-king has power to determine the occupations that his individual subjects enter into, and also has power to censor any idea (political or otherwise) that he deems to be “dangerous” or “undesirable.” He also has absolute control over education for both the young and the old, and has power to arrange marriages between his subjects to promote “good breeding” – an idea now known as “eugenics.” These things have a tendency to make “The Republic” into something far less than an ideal state.

Plato

John Adams praised James Harrington’s “The Commonwealth of Oceana”

“These are what are called revolution-principles. They are the principles of Aristotle and Plato, of Livy and Cicero, of Sydney, Harrington and Lock[e].—The principles of nature and eternal reason.—The principles on which the whole government over us, now stands.”

– John Adams (writing under the pen name of “Novanglus”), in a letter “To the Inhabitants of the Colony of Massachusetts-Bay, 23 January 1775”

John Adams was a great fan of the English political writer James Harrington

In 1656, the English political writer James Harrington wrote a book called “The Commonwealth of Oceana.” In this work, James Harrington advocated a republic, calling it the “ideal” form of government (or words to that effect). I should give a disclaimer that I have not read Harrington’s “Oceana,” and I don’t yet know how much I would agree with it. But it is clear that John Adams was a great fan of it. John Adams would later give great praise of both this book and its author. In 1775, Adams wrote a series of letters under the pen name of “Novanglus.” In one of these letters (the one quoted above), Adams credited Harrington with “revolution-principles.” But Adams also wrote another letter addressed “To the Inhabitants of the Colony of Massachusetts-Bay” (among others). One of them contains some more of his praise of James Harrington. Thus, I would like to quote from what John Adams said, to show how Harrington had an influence on the young John Adams.

James Harrington

Actually, Rousseau did NOT influence the Founding Fathers (sorry Wikipedia)

Wikipedia argues that Rousseau influenced the Founding Fathers …

I have often heard people claim that Rousseau “influenced” the Founding Fathers. One of my high school history teachers said this, and so have some websites. Most prominently, Wikipedia is among those who claim this. But absolutely none of these sources ever offered any convincing evidence that this is actually the case. Moreover, most of the Founding Father quotes about Rousseau are negative, casting doubt upon the idea that he “influenced” them to any significant degree (or at all, for that matter).

Statue of Rousseau on the Île Rousseau, Geneva

A review of “The Declaration of Independence” (audiobook)

“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.”

– The Declaration of Independence (July 4th, 1776)

A new country was created on July 4th, 1776. This is the aspect of the day that people remember most, of course. But people seldom quote the part of the document that actually declares our independence. Rather, they are more likely to quote from the famous second paragraph. This paragraph reads in part: “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” (Source: text of the document). I will not endeavor to quote the rest of these words in this post. But suffice it to say that they are filled with ideas and philosophy. People remember these ideas better than the legal phrases that separated us from the mother country. That’s how important these ideas are.

John Quincy Adams: A great statesman in his own right

Note: John Quincy Adams was the last of four presidents from the "Democratic-Republican Party." Not to be confused with modern Democrats or Republicans, it dissolved during Adams' first term. When Mr. Adams was later defeated by Andrew Jackson in the 1820s, John Quincy Adams instead became part of the "National Republican Party," a party that has since dissolved. Specifically, it dissolved back in 1834.

He was the first son of a president to be elected president himself, and the only one until George W. Bush - more than a century later. Out of the first twelve presidents, he was one of only two who never owned a slave (the other being his father). And like his father, he negotiated a peace treaty with Britain that ended a major war - with his father's treaty ending the Revolutionary War, and his own treaty ending the War of 1812, nearly thirty years later.

Growing up in his father's shadow

The man was John Quincy Adams; and although he grew up in the shadow of his father, he had an accomplished life in his own right. One might think that he was only elected president because of his father being president, or because he had a similar name to his father John Adams; but this is only a part of the story. He also had great experience as a diplomat, fluency in several languages (ancient and modern), and a native intelligence not unlike his father's. He was underestimated by his political enemies, much as George W. Bush was; and was a much better president than he's often given credit for.

A review of “Founding Brothers” (History Channel)

"[The Congress shall have the power] To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such district (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of particular states, and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the government of the United States ... "

- Constitution of the United States, Article 1, Section 8, Heading and Paragraph 17

What happened to the Founding Fathers after the Revolution was over?

Most people have some cursory knowledge of what happened during the American Revolution, and what the Founding Fathers did during this period. But what happened to them after the Revolution? What did the Founding Fathers do when the war was over, and the Constitution was ratified? These are the questions that a documentary by the History Channel attempts to address. They follow in the footsteps of a Pulitzer-Prize-winning book by Joseph Ellis - a book called "Founding Brothers," the same title as this History Channel program. The results of it are more surprising, more interesting, and more moving than what you 'd think possible.

What did the Founding Fathers disagree with one another about?

If you're interested in what happened to the Founding Fathers - in the issues they disagreed over, the quarrels between them, and their postwar accomplishments - then this is the best documentary to see. It covers the administrations of our first three presidents - George Washington, John Adams, and Thomas Jefferson - and does not shy away from depicting Benjamin Franklin, Alexander Hamilton, and James Madison as well. These guys are much more interesting than the paintings we have of them, with the powdered wigs and the dated clothing. Moreover, the way that they handled the early days of the Republic set the precedents for all of the democratic dialogue that we've had since then. The government had been created, but it had not yet been given a trial run, and no one was quite sure how it would work in practice.

John Adams movies

What's the best movie about John Adams?

Young John Adams

My answer would be that it depends on what you're looking for. All the ones I've seen have things that they do better than the other ones. Thus, I'll compare and contrast the ones I've seen, to show where each one is strongest. The ones I've seen are a two-hour PBS documentary (which also talks about Abigail), an eight-hour HBO miniseries (with Paul Giamatti), and an old thirteen-hour miniseries called "The Adams Chronicles."

Why John Adams is fascinating

"Posterity! You will never know, how much it cost the present generation, to preserve your freedom! I hope you will make a good use of it. If you do not, I shall repent in heaven, that I ever took half the pains to preserve it."

- John Adams, in a letter to his wife Abigail Adams (26 April 1777)

He was a powerful leader, who stood only five feet six inches tall. He was popular enough to be elected president, but considered himself an obnoxious man, with a brashness that could alienate even his friends. And he was one of our greatest presidents, but was only elected to one term, passed over in favor of an old friend.

Young John Adams

His name was John Adams, and he was one of this country's Founding Fathers. He had many significant accomplishments in his life, but the greatest of them was his central role in the Declaration of Independence. Even his presidency was not as important as this. He was on the Committee of Five assigned to write the Declaration of Independence, but he did not want to write the document, preferring that it instead be written by Thomas Jefferson. Why, then, is he remembered as such a central figure in the document's history? Mainly, it is two things. One is that he was the one who convinced Thomas Jefferson to write the Declaration, and the other is that he was the principal force behind getting it passed. Jefferson was the one who wrote it, but Adams was the one who convinced the Continental Congress to sign it; thus risking their own lives in an act of revolution punishable by death. We could easily have lost that war, and every signer of that document could have been hanged as a traitor. But despite their knowing the risks, they all took the risk (save John Dickinson), largely due to the powerful leadership of John Adams.

John Trumbull's Declaration of Independence