Last week we waved goodbye to the presidency of George Washington with a deep sigh and a recognition that he had molded the office to his greatest strengths and had somehow avoided accentuating his shortcomings. His Farewell Address, published in newspapers across the young nation, reminded citizens that the young republic faced threats from sectionalism, political divisions, and foreign alliances and entanglements. He remained apart from the election to choose his successor, returned to Mount Vernon, and settled into life as the senior sage of the nation. (Have you noticed that I greatly admire our first president?)

The election of 1796 was one for the history books!

John Adams, who had served eight years as Washington’s vice president, certainly felt he was entitled to his turn in the office. After all, the vice presidency was an obscure position for a man who had emerged as a political and philosophical leader at an early age. Adams had entered Harvard at age 15, excelled in his studies, and graduated in 1755, having abandoned his idea of a ministerial calling. He instead chose to “read” law.

John Adams

Within 15 years, Great Britain’s heavy hand on its long-ignored colonies began to create tension, and Boston’s most prominent attorney, John Adams, became a strong voice for colonial freedom but held closely to his principles. He would choose to defend the British soldiers charged with the Boston Massacre in their very public trial. Adams justified his representation by proclaiming that justice was only justice if both prosecution and defense teams were evenly matched — an admirable position.

However, he continued his involvement in the Patriot cause, initially as a moderate since he was somewhat fearful of the radical spokesmen who had emerged as leaders. Adams authored anonymous newspaper articles, designed propaganda fliers, and by 1774 was elected to the First Continental Congress as one of the four Massachusetts delegates.

The rest of the story we know well: He assisted in the creation of the Declaration of Independence; nominated Washington to be commander-in-chief of the continental forces; served as an emissary on countless foreign missions for the colonies; and then later was awarded with his election to serve as Washington’s vice president — only to disappear from sight. After all, the VP has only one constitutional duty — to serve as president of the Senate — and one implied duty — to wait in the wings in the event of the president’s death.

Obviously, being VP did not compare to the level of excitement and intrigue Adams had experienced for more than 20 years.

So, back to the election of 1796. What a mess…

Thomas Jefferson

The Congressional Federalists met and nominated John Adams and Thomas Pickney for the presidency. The Democratic-Republicans in Congress caucused and chose Thomas Jefferson and Aaron Burr as their nominees. Why two nominees from each party? Each member of the electoral college would cast two votes; the candidate with the highest number would become president, and the second-highest would be sworn in as the vice president.

According to the Constitution, if no candidate received a clear majority or in the event of a tie, the decision would be thrown to the House of Representatives, with each state having ONE vote. The assumption was that the delegates understood how to cast their votes so that one candidate from their preferred party would become president and the other would become vice president.

But the plan failed, and the election of 1796 became a predictor of the future of presidential politics. Adams and Jefferson would probably not be shocked by the state of current political campaigns being waged.

First, only Burr openly campaigned for the office. The other candidates — Adams, Pickney, and Jefferson — felt it was inappropriate to talk publicly about their own talents and aspirations, choosing instead to wage “war” by proxy. Newspaper stories, ads, innuendo, and untraceable rumors … sound familiar?

Alexander Hamilton

And it was a brutal campaign. Jefferson was portrayed as an atheist, an emotional Francophile, and someone who had avoided fighting during the revolution. Adams was depicted as a monarchist, an Anglophile who might favor a reunion with Great Britain, and a man who wanted to create a family dynasty with his own son, John Quincy Adams, as a future president. Adams also had to deal with Alexander Hamilton, who “might have made a deal” with Pickney to support him with an agreement that Hamilton would become his primary advisor.

Gracious goodness; it all sounds so 2024!

When all the smoke had settled, Adams had bested Jefferson by three votes and, in an unexpected turn of events, Adams became president and Jefferson was confirmed as vice president. That’s a Federalist president working closely with a Democratic-Republican vice president! Forget their former partnership in the Second Continental Congress. Forget that they both were patriots who loved their country. They were now opponents who disagreed about the future of the country and how success would be defined — and they were bound together.

With conflict as a part of the foundation, what would be the legacy of the second administration? Would the Adams presidency rival Washington’s?

Written by Linda Moss Mines for The Patriot Post ~ October 4, 2023

~ the Author ~
Linda Moss Mines is a historian dedicated to reminding the public of the blessings of Liberty and our commitment to work toward the promises of the American Dream. She is not a political commentator, although reflecting on the history of the Republic requires recounting the stories of political figures and the institutions of our political system. Linda relishes telling the stories of our country’s founding and its journey from the earliest settlers as a “noble experiment in self-government.” She believes that recounting history reminds citizens that decisions and actions have consequences and that we as a people are impacted every day by decisions made during the course of that journey.

“It is important that a nation know and understand the pivotal moments of its history,” she says. “Too often, our images of the past are a composite of classroom memories, popular culture images crafted by media productions and a smattering of editorial musings often grounded only in personal opinion and experience. As a historian, I, of course, offer some interpretation of those moments, but I am far more interested in the role of the public figures and the ‘common people’ and what motivated them than in the role of politics for political gain. Revisiting the past offers us a chance to understand today and shape tomorrow.”

As an educator, Mines notes: “I have been privileged to touch hearts and hopefully inspire my former students to become lifelong lovers of learning. Knowledge coupled with a dedication to service can truly change the world and I’m blessed to be a small part of that change.”