The Federalists wanted a strong central government that could correct the shortcomings of the Articles of Confederation. Men such as Alexander Hamilton sought a powerful central force that could control inter-state commerce and assert direct taxes, something that today’s Tea Party members would certainly have an issue with.

The states-rights, neo-secessionist, small-government ideologues who seem to have taken over the Republican Party might have a coherent political philosophy. But their views align less with the constitutional framers than with their opponents, the Antifederalists.

Those Tea Party members that understand our history, and in particular the Constitutional debate that followed the Convention, would undoubtedly be Antifederalists. Thomas Jefferson is more of a reflection of Today’s Conservatives and especially the Tea Party than is Alexander Hamilton.

My only concern is those who think that the Tea Party participants should be Federalists at heart. Seems they are the ones who are misconstruing history. Today’s Democratic/Left wants a stronger Federal government.

[Pauline Maier is the William R. Kenan, Jr. Professor of American History. She received her Ph.D. from Harvard University in 1968]

In 1997 Alfred A. Knopf published Maier’s American Scripture: Making the Declaration of Independence, which I did not read until a year and a half ago for my Constitutional History graduate class. American Scripture was well researched and well written. American Scripture was on the New York Times Book Review editors “Choice” list of the best 11 books of 1997 and a finalist in General Nonfiction for the National Book Critics’ Circle Award. Maier’s most recent work is a fantastic follow up. Her research is simply awesome with as daunting an index as you’ll see that makes Ratification far more impressive than American Script and a book that places Maier in elite company as a constitutional historian. What I love about the book is it nicely fills a void of sorts by not focusing on the Constitutional Convention, but instead ob the complicated and often intricate ratification process where the people did indeed debate and ultimately select the Constitution as the law of the land.

American Scripture: Making the Declaration of Independence
by Pauline Maier

As an AP US History teacher I find Maier’s work incredibly useful and frankly it will take me years to properly incorporate some of the chapters in the book. In particular I loved the sections about the Virginia and New York ratification process and the depth in which she goes. There is so much in this book that every time you pick it up you will undoubtedly pick up on something new.

From the Publisher:

When the delegates left the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia in September 1787, the new Constitution they had written was no more than a proposal. Elected conventions in at least nine of the thirteen states would have to ratify it before it could take effect. There was reason to doubt whether that would happen. The document we revere today as the foundation of our country’s laws, the cornerstone of our legal system, was hotly disputed at the time. Some Americans denounced the Constitution for threatening the liberty that Americans had won at great cost in the Revolutionary War. One group of fiercely patriotic opponents even burned the document in a raucous public demonstration on the Fourth of July.

In this splendid new history, Pauline Maier tells the dramatic story of the yearlong battle over ratification that brought such famous founders as Washington, Hamilton, Madison, Jay, and Henry together with less well-known Americans who sometimes eloquently and always passionately expressed their hopes and fears for their new country. Men argued in taverns and coffeehouses; women joined the debate in their parlors; broadsides and newspaper stories advocated various points of view and excoriated others. In small towns and counties across the country people read the document carefully and knew it well. Americans seized the opportunity to play a role in shaping the new nation. Then the ratifying conventions chosen by We the People scrutinized and debated the Constitution clause by clause.

A top notch book and one destined to pick up some awards down the road in my hopeful opinion.

Paul Revere’s ride is another one that has several myths. According to some: “Paul Revere stopped at taverns along the way and was so drunk he fell off his horse at a tavern in Lexington and was captured by the British.” In 1968 The Boston Globe published a story on Patriot’s Day that Revere was drinking the night of his ride. However, historians such as David Hackett Fischer (Paul Revere’s Ride) have successfully dispelled such myths.

“Listen my children, with attentive pause; To the midnight ride of William Dawes.”

Now, a good class discussion piece might be to ask the students why did William Dawes get short changed in history for his efforts that night? Some will say Revere was simply a better promoter. Maybe, but Dawes contributes to his own dimise. As Fischer notes, Dawes made various mistakes during his ride and failed to alert the correct people in numerous towns. However, this still does not explain why Dawes has been forgotten, afterall he did alert a lot of people and made good such time he caught Revere in Lexington just after midnight.

As early as 1789 Washington wanted Americans drinking only home grown spirits, so he presented his “buy American” policy indicating he will only drink porter made in America.

From the news article, it appears that ole’ Washington’s rye whiskey recipe is back in business!

“Mount Vernon recreates Washington’s rye whiskey recipe for public consumption.”

Just 213 years after George Washington started distilling his rye whiskey, it has once again hit the market. A nearly 15-year process of research and archeology allowed historians at Mount Vernon to recreate the first president’s whiskey recipe.

The distillery, just three miles from Mount Vernon outside of Alexandria, Va. opened for business after the Virginia General Assembly approved sales in small amounts, selling out all 471 bottles at $85 dollars a pop.

To read more…

As historian Ira Stoll notes, “History has not been kind to Samuel Adams,” and indeed one might ask why?

As an APUS History teacher I have to admit that I don’t do a lot on Samuel Adams. His name appears in and out of a narrative of pre-Revolutionary America and mainly with regard to the Sons of Liberty.

I am very late to the party here and after reading Ira Stoll’s Samuel Adams: A Life realize, rather embarrassed, how I have missed the boat with regards to the “most famous” Adams as the French saw it. I am happy to announce that I will be addressing this Mr. Adam with more respect and may even dedicate an entire lecture to him when I otherwise would have never considered such a thing. Mr. Stoll’s book was published by Simon & Schuster in 2008 and I didn’t even notice. Shame on me.

With the recommendation of a friend I purchased the book two weeks ago and just read it. I have read no other biographies of Mr. Adams, but nonetheless, cannot image a better one! Samuel Adams was more than a radical revolutionary as some biographers and historians have referred to him. I can even vaguely remember a college professor indicated that Samuel Adams was crazy. It’s interesting how Adams is/was in some regards referred to in much the same way as John Brown, and maybe in some ways the two are similar! Both served as the spark for a devastating fire. They were easy targets.

Samuel Adams was revered by the likes of John Adams and Thomas Jefferson as the spearhead of Revolution as the Founding Father. Too bad many of us contemporaries have neglected him… at least for the time being as I plan to rectify that.

I came across this and thought I would share:

“The Way to Wealth” (1758)

“Friends,” says he [Father Abraham], “and Neighbours, the Taxes are indeed very heavy, and if those laid on by the Government were the only Ones we had to pay, we might more easily discharge them; but we have many others, and much more grievous to some of us. We are taxed twice as much by our Idleness, three times as much by our Pride, and four times as much by our Folly; and from these Taxes the Commissioners cannot ease or deliver us by allowing an Abatement. However let us hearken to good Advice, and something may be done for us; God helps them that help themselves, as Poor Richard says, in his Almanack of 1733.

“It would be thought a hard Government that should tax its People one-tenth Part of their Time, to be employed in its Service. But Idleness taxes many of us much more, if we reckon all that is spent in absolute Sloth, or doing of nothing, with that which is spent in idle Employments or Amusements, that amount to nothing. Sloth, by bringing on Diseases, absolutely shortens Life. Sloth, like Rust, consumes faster than Labour wears; while the used Key is always bright, as Poor Richard says. But dost thou love Life, then do not squander Time, for that’s the stuff Life is made of, as Poor Richard says. How much more than is necessary do we spend in sleep, forgetting that The sleeping Fox catches no Poultry, and that There will be sleeping enough in the Grave, as Poor Richard says.

“Time be of all Things the most precious, wasting Time must be, as Poor Richard says, the greatest Prodigality; since, as he elsewhere tells us, Lost Time is never found again; and what we call Time enough, always proves little enough: Let us then up and be doing, and doing to the Purpose; so by Diligence shall we do more with less Perplexity. Sloth makes all Things difficult, but Industry all easy, as Poor Richard says; and He that riseth late must trot all Day, and shall scarce overtake his Business at Night; while Laziness travels so slowly, that Poverty soon overtakes him, as we read in Poor Richard, who adds, Drive thy Business, let not that drive thee; and Early to Bed, and early to rise, makes a Man healthy, wealthy, and wise.

“So what signifies wishing and hoping for better Times. We may make these Times better, if we bestir ourselves. Industry need not wish, as Poor Richard says, and he that lives upon Hope will die fasting. There are no Gains without Pains; then Help Hands, for I have no Lands, or if I have, they are smartly taxed. And, as Poor Richard likewise observes, He that hath a Trade hath an Estate; and he that hath a Calling, hath an Office of Profit and Honour; but then the Trade must be worked at, and the Calling well followed, or neither the Estate nor the Office will enable us to pay our Taxes. If we are industrious, we shall never starve; for, as Poor Richard says, At the working Man’s House Hunger looks in, but dares not enter. Nor will the Bailiff or the Constable enter, for Industry pays Debts, while Despair encreaseth them, says Poor Richard. What though you have found no Treasure, nor has any rich Relation left you a Legacy, Diligence is the Mother of Good-luck as Poor Richard says and God gives all Things to Industry. Then plough deep, while Sluggards sleep, and you shall have Corn to sell and to keep, says Poor Dick. Work while it is called To-day, for you know not how much you may be hindered To-morrow, which makes Poor Richard say, One to-day is worth two To-morrows, and farther, Have you somewhat to do To-morrow, do it To-day. If you were a Servant, would you not be ashamed that a good Master should catch you idle? Are you then your own Master, be ashamed to catch yourself idle, as Poor Dick says. When there is so much to be done for yourself, your Family, your Country, and your gracious King, be up by Peep of Day; Let not the Sun look down and say, Inglorious here he lies. Handle your Tools without Mittens; remember that The Cat in Gloves catches no Mice, as Poor Richard says. ’Tis true there is much to be done, and perhaps you are weak-handed, but stick to it steadily; and you will see great Effects, for Constant Dropping wears away Stones, and by Diligence and Patience the Mouse ate in two the Cable; and Little Strokes fell great Oaks, as Poor Richard says in his Almanack, the Year I cannot just now remember.”

This is a summary view of that religious slavery, under which a people have been willing to remain, who have lavished their lives and fortunes for the establishment of their civil freedom. The error seems not sufficiently eradicated, that the operations of the mind, as well as the acts of the body, are subject to the coercion of the laws. [pp. 169-171, Jefferson]

After discussing the objectionable laws that some states already used that persecuted some religions and allowed for imprisonment and even death, Jefferson makes the point about how these “coercions” of law are to be avoided. Jefferson continues to make it very clear he does not care what particular religion a person has:

But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty Gods, or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg. If it be said his testimony in a court of justice cannot be relied on, reject it then, and be the stigma on him. Constraint may make him worse by making him a hypocrite, but it will never make him a truer man.

Then I found the following quote where Jefferson made, what he thought, was an absurd comparison of government regulation:

Was the government to prescribe to us our medicine and diet, our bodies would be in such keeping as our souls are now.

Jefferson thought that to to have Government mandate one’s religion or to be involved in regulating religion would have been as absurd as the government doing so with our HEALTH CARE and DIET. Gee, wonder what he would say today!

Food for thought on this beautiful Saturday afternoon!

Chris

The discovery of a previously unknown personal letter by Thomas Jefferson this past December, written sometime in 1808 towards the end of his presidency, was the impetuous for such a question.

The “faded, stained piece of paper” apparently covered in Jefferson’s own scribbling has received more attention recently with calls for its authenticity to be confirmed.

From the article:

Its real value, rather, is bolstered by the existence of a “free frank” — a clear version of Jefferson’s signature that once doubled as postage — on the document, Eyler said. “So to a postal history collector that is worth as much as the letter is.”

According to the Legion’s January newsletter, the uncovering of the manuscript is part of a broader effort to put the post’s historically significant items on display “for everyone to enjoy” — a history that could be quite substantial.

After the Washington Post published a story on the letter last month, Eyler received a call from a person who worked with the Legion in the ’60s and ’70s. The caller, whose name Eyler didn’t record, said at that time “other Jefferson letters and materials were found on the second floor” and donated to historical outlets around the state.

And while the recently discovered document could very easily have been tossed aside at some point in the last 200 years, records exist that show it was indeed sent from Jefferson’s own desk but lost in the shuffle of time.

“It’s just the fate of the recipient keeping the manuscript,” Eyler said, noting that it was habit at the time to hold on to and keep track of correspondence. The end result is an intimate relationship between generations.

“To me, manuscripts are like the window to someone’s thinking,” Eyler said. “It’s primary-source [material] — you have a letter written by Thomas Jefferson and you know just what he was doing at that moment in time.”