DOCSLIB.ORG

Adams's Presidency W

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Adams's Presidency W Binder Page 70 Name ___________________________________________________ Period _________ The Presidency of John Adams Date ________________ The second president of the United States was John Adams. He belonged to the Federalist party. He ran against Thomas Jefferson for President in 1796. PRO: CON: List some of the things that Adams had done List some of the things in Adams’s that made him seem qualified for the office of personality that made it difficult for him to be the president: president: ● Contributed to success of ● He wasn’t George Washington Revolution and had to follow him ● Member of Continental Congress ● Was erratic- Ups and downs ● Helped write (and signed) ● Self-doubt Declaration of Independence ● Pretentious ● Minister to France and England ● Opinionated ● Helped negotiate Treaty of Paris, ● Short temper 1783, that ended Revolution ● First vice-president of US The war between France and Britain was continuing. Federalists believed the United States should help Britain because of the close historical ties we had always had with that country. Democratic Republicans believed that the United States should be helping France because they had been there to help us during our Revolution. Like George Washington, Adams supported neutrality (neither side) in the war. When France began stopping American ships, Adams sent diplomats to France to try to find a peaceful solution. Instead of negotiating, three French officials demanded a bribe from the Americans. This controversial incident was known as the X,Y,Z Affair, and almost started a war between France and the United States. Instead of going to war, Adams tried to negotiate a treaty to keep the peace. In 1798, Congress passed laws known as the Alien and Sedition Acts. “Alien”means “a foreigner” The Alien Act allowed the President to expel any alien thought to be dangerous to the country. New arrivals to the country often supported the Democratic Republicans. “Sedition” means “stirring up rebellion against the government.” The Sedition Act said that a person could be fined or jailed for criticizing the government, and several newspaper editors were. Jefferson and the Democratic Republicans hated these laws because they violated the freedoms of speech and press found in the First Amendment. However, the laws were not challenged in the Supreme Court. Why would the Democratic Republicans not want the Supreme Court to decide on these laws? 1. The judges were mainly Federalists. 2. The Democratic Republicans wanted strong states to stand up to a powerful federal government. In the states of Kentucky and Virginia, the state legislatures voted to say they did not like these federal laws. These statements became known as the Kentucky & Virginia Resolutions. These statements were supposed to have been written by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison. They suggested that each state “had the right to judge for itself” whether a law is constitutional. They said that if a state decided that a law was unconstitutional, it could nullify the law, which means to cancel it within its borders. But do states have a right to decide anything about federal laws? That question was an important question about the Constitutional Principle of federalism that was not answered then and would come back again. John Adams was the first president to live in the White House. He is also the father of the United States Navy. "Two presidents signed the Declaration of Independence: John Adams and Thomas Jefferson. Both died on July 4, 1826, the 50th Anniversary of the Declaration of Independence.".
Load more

Recommended publications
  • John Adams, Alexander Hamilton, and the Quasi-War with France
    John Adams, Alexander Hamilton, and the Quasi-War with France David Loudon General University Honors Professor Robert Griffith, Faculty Advisor American University, Spring 2010 1 John Adams, Alexander Hamilton, and the Quasi-War with France Abstract This paper examines the split of the Federalist Party and subsequent election defeat in 1800 through the views of John Adams and Alexander Hamilton on the Quasi-War with France. More specifically, I will be focusing on what caused their split on the French issue. I argue that the main source of conflict between the two men was ideological differences on parties in contemporary American politics. While Adams believed that there were two parties in America and his job was to remain independent of both, Hamilton saw only one party (the Republicans), and believed that it was the goal of all “real” Americans to do whatever was needed to defeat that faction. This ideological difference between the two men resulted in their personal disdain for one another and eventually their split on the French issue. Introduction National politics in the early American republic was a very uncertain venture. The founding fathers had no historical precedents to rely upon. The kind of government created in the American constitution had never been attempted in the Western World; it was a piecemeal system designed in many ways more to gain individual state approval than for practical implementation. Furthermore, while the fathers knew they wanted opposition within their political system, they rejected political parties as evil and dangerous to the public good. This tension between the belief in opposition and the rejection of party sentiment led to confusion and high tensions during the early American republic.
    [Show full text]
  • The Stamp Act Crisis (1765)
    Click Print on your browser to print the article. Close this window to return to the ANB Online. Adams, John (19 Oct. 1735-4 July 1826), second president of the United States, diplomat, and political theorist, was born in Braintree (now Quincy), Massachusetts, the son of John Adams (1691-1760), a shoemaker, selectman, and deacon, and Susanna Boylston. He claimed as a young man to have indulged in "a constant dissipation among amusements," such as swimming, fishing, and especially shooting, and wished to be a farmer. However, his father insisted that he follow in the footsteps of his uncle Joseph Adams, attend Harvard College, and become a clergyman. John consented, applied himself to his studies, and developed a passion for learning but refused to become a minister. He felt little love for "frigid John Calvin" and the rigid moral standards expected of New England Congregationalist ministers. John Adams. After a painting by Gilbert Stuart. Adams was also ambitious to make more of a figure than could Courtesy of the Library of Congress (LC- USZ62-13002 DLC). be expected in the local pulpits. So despite the disadvantages of becoming a lawyer, "fumbling and racking amidst the rubbish of writs . pleas, ejectments" and often fomenting "more quarrels than he composes," enriching "himself at the expense of impoverishing others more honest and deserving," Adams fixed on the law as an avenue to "glory" through obtaining "the more important offices of the State." Even in his youth, Adams was aware he possessed a "vanity," which he sought to sublimate in public service: "Reputation ought to be the perpetual subject of my thoughts, and the aim of my behaviour." Adams began reading law with attorney James Putnam in Worcester immediately after graduation from Harvard College in 1755.
    [Show full text]
  • John Adams and Jay's Treaty
    University of Montana ScholarWorks at University of Montana Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers Graduate School 1963 John Adams and Jay's Treaty Edgar Arthur Quimby The University of Montana Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Quimby, Edgar Arthur, "John Adams and Jay's Treaty" (1963). Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers. 2781. https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd/2781 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at ScholarWorks at University of Montana. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at University of Montana. For more information, please contact [email protected]. JOHN ADAMS AND JAT'S TREATT by EDQAE ARTHUR QDIMHr B.A. University of Mississippi, 1958 Presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY 1963 Approved by: Chairman, Board of Examiners V /iiC ^ c r. D e a n , Graduate School Date UMI Number; EP36209 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. UMT UMI EP36209 Published by ProQuest LLC (2012). Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC.
    [Show full text]
  • The First and the Second
    The First and the Second ____________________________ Kah Kin Ho APPROVED: ____________________________ Alin Fumurescu, Ph.D. Committee Chair ___________________________ Jeremy D. Bailey, Ph.D. __________________________ Jeffrey Church, Ph.D. ________________________________ Antonio D. Tillis, Ph.D. Dean, College of Liberal Arts and Social Sciences Department of Hispanic Studies The Second and the First, An Examination into the Formation of the First Official Political Parties Under John Adams Kah Kin Ho Current as of 1 May, 2020 2 Introduction A simple inquiry into the cannon of early American history would reveal that most of the scholarly work done on the presidency of John Adams has mostly been about two things. The first, are the problems associated with his “characteristic stubbornness” and his tendencies to be politically isolated (Mayville, 2016, pg. 128; Ryerson, 2016, pg. 350). The second, is more preoccupied with his handling of foreign relations, since Adams was seemingly more interested in those issues than the presidents before and after him (DeConde, 1966, pg. 7; Elkin and McKitrick, 1993, pg. 529). But very few have attempted to examine the correlation between the two, or even the consequences the two collectively considered would have domestically. In the following essay, I will attempt to do so. By linking the two, I will try to show that because of these two particularities, he ultimately will— however unintentionally— contribute substantially to the development of political parties and populism. In regard to his personality, it is often thought that he was much too ambitious and self- righteous to have been an ideal president in the first place.
    [Show full text]
  • John Ben Shepperd, Jr. Memorial Library Catalog
    John Ben Shepperd, Jr. Memorial Library Catalog Author Other Authors Title Call Letter Call number Volume Closed shelf Notes Donated By In Memory Of (unkown) (unknown) history of the presidents for children E 176.1 .Un4 Closed shelf 1977 Inaugural Committee A New Spirit, A New Commitment, A New America F 200 .A17 (1977) Ruth Goree and Jane Brown 1977 Inaugural Committee A New Spirit, A New Commitment, A New America F 200 .A17 (1977) Anonymous 1977 Inaugural Committee A New Spirit, A New Commitment, A New America F 200 .A17 (1977) Bobbie Meadows Beulah Hodges 1977 Inaugural Committee A New Spirit, A New Commitment, A New America F 200 .A17 (1977) 1977 Inaugural Committee A New Spirit, A New Commitment, A New America F 200 .A17 (1977) 1977 Inaugural Committee A New Spirit, A New Commitment, A New America F 200 .A17 (1977) 1977 Inaugural Committee A New Spirit, A New Commitment, A New America F 200 .A17 (1977) 1981 Presidential Inaugural Committee (U.S.) A Great New Beginning: the 1981 Inaugural Story E 877.2 .G73 A Citizen of Western New York Bancroft, George Memoirs of General Andrew Jackson, Seventh President of the United States E 382 .M53 Closed shelf John Ben Shepperd A.P.F., Inc. A Catalogue of Frames, Fifteenth Century to Present N 8550 .A2 (1973) A.P.F. Inc. Aaron, Ira E. Carter, Sylvia Take a Bow PZ 8.9 .A135 Abbott, David W. Political Parties: Leadership, Organization, Linkage JK 2265 .A6 Abbott, John S.C. Conwell, Russell H. Lives of the Presidents of the United States of America E 176.1 .A249 Closed shelf Ector County Library Abbott, John S.C.
    [Show full text]
  • Rethinking the Development of Legitimate Party Opposition in the United States, 1793–1828
    Rethinking the Development of Legitimate Party Opposition in the United States, 1793–1828 JEFFREY S. SELINGER Writing in 1813 to his old friend and political adversary Thomas Jefferson, John Adams vividly described the scene in Philadelphia when the French Revolutionary Wars broke out: “You certainly never felt the Ter- rorism excited by Genêt, in 1793, when ten thousand People in the Streets of Philadelphia, day after day threatened to drag Washington out of his House, and effect a Revolution in the Government, or compell it to declare War in favour of the French Revolution and against England.”1 Adams and Washington had witnessed firsthand this “terrorism” incited by Edmond Genêt, Foreign Minister from France, and it powerfully influenced their appraisal of the risks political parties and other extra-constitutional amalgamations posed to the young Republic. Just a few years after the Genêt Affair, President George Washington issued his often-quoted Farewell Address, in which he admonished the American people to avoid foreign entanglements and be wary of the “baneful effects of the spirit of party.”2 These two recommendations went hand-in-hand: political parties, in Washingtonʼsview,wouldonlycontinuetopolarizeapolitydivided by foreign war.3 The first President was particularly suspicious of the Jeffersonian Republican Party, which he believed had encouraged Francophile partisans to take up arms in support of the French revolutionary struggle against Britain and other powers. With limited resources at its disposal, his administration 1 “Adams to Thomas Jefferson, 30 June 1813” in Lester J. Cappon, ed., The Adams–Jefferson Letters. 2 vols. (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1959), 2: 346–347.
    [Show full text]
  • The Election of 1800: a Study in the Logic of Political Change
    The Election of 1800: A Study in the Logic of Political Change Joanne B. Freemant To an extraordinary degree, early national politics operated in a climate of crisis. The spirit of political experimentation that fueled the nascent American republic was as disquieting as it was invigorating; keenly aware that they were creating the first polity of its kind in the modem world, politicians believed that anything could happen. This crisis mentality is essential to understanding the logic of political change in the early republic, yet the detachment of hindsight makes it difficult to recapture. Aware of the eventual emergence of an institutionalized two-party system, we search for its roots in this period, projecting our sense of political order onto a politics with its own distinct logic and integrity. In We the People: Transfornations, Bruce Ackerman discusses the broader implications of this present-mindedness, suggesting that it has blinded us to the true nature of American constitutional governance. As he explains at the opening of his argument, "the professional narrative" propounded by judges and lawyers-a story of declining constitutional creativity-has cut Americans off from "the truth about the revolutionary character of their higher lawmaking effort."' By using the present as a standard of measurement, Ackerman suggests, this storyline depicts constitutional change as a downslide from the creative to the familiar, the entrenched, the now, obscuring the spirit of "unconventional adaptation" at its core.' The same insight holds true for the early republic. By using our present two-party system as a standard of measurement, we have obscured the distinctive and often unexpected features of early national politics, thereby blinding ourselves to the logic of political change.
    [Show full text]
  • Meet John Adams – a Lively and Revolutionary Conversation with America's Second President
    MEET JOHN ADAMS – A LIVELY AND REVOLUTIONARY CONVERSATION WITH AMERICA'S SECOND PRESIDENT CLE Credit: 1.0 Friday, May 13, 2016 12:30 p.m. - 1:30 p.m. Cascade Ballroom B Kentucky International Convention Center Louisville, Kentucky A NOTE CONCERNING THE PROGRAM MATERIALS The materials included in this Kentucky Bar Association Continuing Legal Education handbook are intended to provide current and accurate information about the subject matter covered. No representation or warranty is made concerning the application of the legal or other principles discussed by the instructors to any specific fact situation, nor is any prediction made concerning how any particular judge or jury will interpret or apply such principles. The proper interpretation or application of the principles discussed is a matter for the considered judgment of the individual legal practitioner. The faculty and staff of this Kentucky Bar Association CLE program disclaim liability therefore. Attorneys using these materials, or information otherwise conveyed during the program, in dealing with a specific legal matter have a duty to research original and current sources of authority. Printed by: Evolution Creative Solutions 7107 Shona Drive Cincinnati, Ohio 45237 Kentucky Bar Association TABLE OF CONTENTS The Presenter .................................................................................................................. i John Adams .................................................................................................................... 1 Interesting
    [Show full text]
  • John Adams, the XYZ Affair, and the 18Th-Century American Presidency Christopher J
    Serenading the President: John Adams, the XYZ Affair, and the 18th-Century American Presidency Christopher J. Young Behold the chief who now commands, Once more to serve his country stands. The rock on which the storm will beat, But arm’d in virtue, firm, and true, His hopes are fix’d on Heav’n and you. — Joseph Hopkinson, “Hail Columbia,” 1798 he XYZ Affair became a public Tissue when Congress ordered that the diplomatic dispatches from France be published. News of the treatment of the American envoys and the seemingly preposterous French demands created a sea change in American public opinion toward the French Republic. Enjoying near unanimous American public support since its onset in 1789, the French Revolu- tion was heralded as the next great step in an anti-monarchical epoch that had begun with America’s own Revolution. However, when news of Louis XVI’s execution hit President John Adams responded personally American shores, a schism in public sup- to the many addresses of support that he port for events in France began to emerge, received from people and organizations throughout the United States in the aftermath a split that closely corresponded with of the XYZ Affair. domestic political dispositions. From the beginning of Washington’s second term and into Adams’s presidency, opinion regarding the French Republic closely mirrored domestic political tastes. Christopher J. Young is associate professor of History and director of the Center for Innovation and Scholarship in Teaching and Learning at Indiana University Northwest. The author wishes to thank the editor, Benjamin Guterman, for his insightful suggestions as well as to acknowledge that the Office of Academic Affairs at Indiana University Northwest provided funding for this project in the form of a Grant-in-Aid of Research.
    [Show full text]
  • The Education of John Adams R. B. Bernstein
    Part II The Education of John Adams R. B. Bernstein "Drawn & Engraved by H. Houston / His Excellency John Adams President of the United States / Respectfully Dedicated to the Lovers of their Country and Firm Supporters of its Constitution / Published by D. Kennedy 228 Market St. Philad". (ca. 1797) Please do not cite or quote without permission of author. Book scheduled to be published on 4 July 2020 by Oxford University Press Chapter Six “every phenomenon that occurs in the history of government”: American Minster and Constitutional Commentator (1784-1788) John Adams was ambivalent about what to do after the peace treaty had established American independence. He wanted to return to America; he had even submitted his resignation as a diplomat to the Confederation Congress on 4 December 1782.1 He could not leave Europe, however, without Congress’s authorization, and while he stayed, he let himself speculate about whether Congress would show that it valued his past services by entrusting him with another mission. Against that background, he and Abigail engaged in a loving war of wills and desires, conducted across the Atlantic. She begged him to return home, and with equal ardor he pleaded with her to join him in London. Though she yielded at last to his entreaties, Abigail at first insisted that it was unwise for her to attempt the journey and far better for John to return to America.2 Beyond her concerns about the voyage, she cited a new set of worries: What figure would she cut in London by John’s side? Theory and practise are two very different things; and the object magnifies, as I approach Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.5", First line: 0", Space After: 0 nearer to it.
    [Show full text]
  • The Presidency of John Adams
    Section 4 Step-by-Step Instruction Make Haste to Wage War SECTION SECTION “We must make haste to wage war, or we shall be lost. Something energetic and decisive must be Review and Preview 4 done soon. Congress fiddles while our Rome is Students have read about the course set burning. America . can interdict [prohibit] France for the nation by President Washington. the ocean.” They will now read how foreign pres- sures affected President John Adams’s —Fisher Ames, urging war with France, 1798 administration. ᮤ French ship attacking an American ship Section Focus Question The Presidency of John Adams How did problems with France Objectives Why It Matters John Adams succeeded Washington as intensify the split between the •Discuss the reasons for tensionbetween the President. He struggled to reduce the country’s divisions Federalists and Republicans? United States and France. and to steer a neutral course in foreign policy. Before you begin the lesson for the day, • Describe the main provisions of the Alien and Section Focus Question: How did problems with France write the Section Focus Question on the Sedition acts. intensify the split between the Federalists and Republicans? board. (Lesson focus: Political divisions grew • Explain how controversy arose over states’ bitter during the presidency of John Adams, as rights. Troubles With France he struggled to keep peace with France.) Adams immediately faced a crisis over relations with Reading Skill France. The French were angered by U.S. neutrality in the war between France and Britain. France had hoped for U.S. Prepare to Read Identify Analogies In an analogy, two pairs support.
    [Show full text]
  • ADAMS and JEFFERSON: Personal Politics in the Early Republic
    d ADAMS AND JEFFERSON: Personal Politics in the Early Republic Robert Conner1 The deterioration of the friendship between John Adams and Thomas Jefferson remains a controversial subject among his­ torians. The two men were once the best of friends, spending personal time with each other’s family, and enjoying a pro­ fessional collaboration that would become famous—drafting the Declaration of Independence. Furthermore, they freely acknowledged their mutual fondness. In 1784, Adams wrote that his colleague Thomas Jefferson was “an old friend with whom I have often had occasion to labor at many a knotty problem and in whose ability and steadiness I always found great cause to confide.”2 Jefferson wrote similar words of praise to his friend James Madison: “[Adams] is profound in his views, and accurate in his judgments. He is so amiable, that I pronounce you will love him if ever you become ac­ quainted with him.”3 But despite this initial close friendship, by the 1790s Adams called Jefferson “weak, confused, unin­ formed, and ignorant.”4 At the same time, Jefferson called 1 Editor’s Note: This essay originally appeared under the name “John Connor” in The Oakland Journal 21 (Fall 2011). It is reprinted in full here with correct attribution to Robert Conner. 2 Merrill D. Peterson, Adams and Jefferson: A Revolutionary Dialogue (Athens: University of Georgia Press, 1976), 32. 3 Ibid, 32. 4 John Adams, The John Adams Paper. Selected, ed., and interpreted by Frank Donovan (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1965), 258. 80 Adams actions as
    [Show full text]