Papers of John Adams, volume 2

101 To Joseph Hawley, 27 June 1774 JA Hawley, Joseph To Joseph Hawley, 27 June 1774 Adams, John Hawley, Joseph

To Joseph Hawley

Ipswich, 27 June 1774 1

to leys Co declining the lend your kind h I therefore by the Favour of n, before we undertake our Journey upon the Subject of our Commission.

What Measures are practicable, and expedient? The Sentiments of People are as various, as the Colour of their Cloaths. Some are for Petitions, to the King, the Lords the Commons; some for all some for none, Some for a Petition to the King Some are for bolder Councils. Some for Negociations, for building new Government, Empire and War—in for bold and Spirited Resolutions—others for Symplicity, and Frugality, Non Consumption and Nonimportation American Manufacturies. Companies for the Encouragement of Arts, Manufactures, and Commerce &c &c &c.

It Seems to me that the Ideas of Empire, and Negotiation, are prevalent. I wish they were less so. It should be a principal Objective of our Policy to avoid Extremities and Ruptures. The Division would cost too dear a Price, and would be more than hazardous, it would be attended with almost a Certainty of Ruin.

Measures to check and interrupt the Torrent of Luxury, if any such are feasible are most agreable to my sentiments at present.

selfish the hun an that this this of the few whose ry great and usefull Effect.

A Union of the Colonies, in Sentiment and Affection Heart and Hand is of indispensable Importance. Every Thought every Expedient for and cementing it, ought to be cherished.

Virginia and Rhode Island have recommended an annual Congress. Nothing can be better calculated to Strengthen and brighten the Chain, than Such an Institution. And the very Idea of it, will have an Influence in England, and all over Europe. The whole Policy and Force of the Ministry will be bent against it, no doubt. But I dont See how it is possible for them to prevent it, or to hinder its Effects.

It would be a Seminary of American Statesmen, a School of Politicians, perhaps at no great Distance of Time, equal to a british Parliament, in wiser as well as better Ages.

I have thrown these Thoughts upon Paper, without any Care, in the hurry of Circuit, but I beg your opinion, as a very great Favour.2

I am with great Esteem and Regard, your Freind and humble Servant, John Adams 102

RC (NN:Joseph Hawley Papers). This mutilated letter, almost all of whose first paragraph is missing and with it the paragraph on the verso, is one of a series discussing the functioning and purposes of the Continental Congress. It was believed to be lost until 1962, when it was presented to the New York Public Library. For an account of the finding of the document and the importance of the Adams-Hawley correspondence, see L. H. Butterfield, “John Adams' Correspondence with Hezekiah Niles: Some Notes and a Query,” Md. Hist. Mag. , 57:152–153, note (June 1962).

For the date of this letter, see Hawley to JA, 25 July 1774, below.

Although certainly considered for appointment to the Continental Congress, Hawley did not go, according to JA because he had not had the smallpox; facetiously, JA attributed his own appointment to the merit of having been inoculated (MHi:Warren-Adams Coll., JA to James Warren, 24 and 26 July 1776). An interesting account of how a secret committee, composed of all the members of a House committee on the state of the province except for the unknowing loyalist Daniel Leonard, met in separate session to agree upon the names for delegates to the proposed congress is given in a forthcoming article by Stephen T. Riley, “Robert Treat Paine and John Adams: A Colonial Rivalry.”

JA felt the absence of Hawley and with this letter began a correspondence that culminated in Hawley's “Broken Hints” (from Joseph Hawley Aug.? 1774 , below). Since 1766, Hawley had been one of the leading whigs in the province, a peer of Samuel Adams and James Otis, and a mentor to John Adams. His tragic hereditary mental illness, however, forced him to the sidelines in 1776 (E. Francis Brown, Joseph Hawley, Colonial Radical, N.Y., 1931).

From Jonathan Williams, 28 June 1774 Williams, Jonathan JA From Jonathan Williams, 28 June 1774 Williams, Jonathan Adams, John

From Jonathan Williams

Sir Boston June 28th 1774

We yesterday received your Letter directed to us, with those for Braintree,1 immediately on the Receipt of it, I went to Mr Cranch's to seek a Conveyance for them but no Opportunity offered there or at the Markets. After my return to the Office, I thought it probable that we might send them from Edes and Gill's Shop. Accordingly I run in, I very luckily met with Mr Allens Servant who promised to deliver them as soon as he got home.

Yesterday a town meeting was held in the Morng at the Hall, but it being a very warm day, and many People just idle enough to attend, the Room was much crowded; those People at the farther End of the Room were continually crying out a little louder, and the Speakers finding themselves fatigued by heat, and obliged to exert themselves to be heard, thought best to adjourn, and a Motion was made for an adjournment to the Old South, which after a faint opposition was carried. J Quincy moved to adjourn to one o clock and then observed, in his flourishing way, that Some might think this wou'd interfear with their Dinners, but he thought the present alarming 103state was of too great importance, to think of dinners, however they cou'd not be perswaded to adjourn to one notwithstanding the importance of the day. At three in the Afternoon there was a very respectable Meeting. There was nigh as many torys I believe as Wigs, Lechmere, Irving Erving, the Amorys Greens Hubards and all that sett attended.2 Amory had a long speech in writing in which he concluded with a Motion to remove Censure and annihilate the Committee of Correspondence. This was seconded by many Voices and occasion'd a debate for the whole Afternoon and is not yet finish'd. The Meeting stands adjourned to nine this Morning.3 There was a liberal flow of Sentiments and much Severity from the Tories upon the Committee without any ill treatment. Mr. Francis Green in the morning was hiss'd for descenting to a motion for reading some public Letters but they were silenced. I am told there were several other Speeches in Writing; but I return'd to the Office and Mr. Tudor who attended all the Afternoon promises to give you a particular account of the whole.4 Mr. Hill went to Braintree on Saturday to attend your Business there. Mrs Adams and Family were then well. There is very little Business to be done. Every body seems engaged in the Politicks of the day—the Bells are now ringing for the meeting and a very full one is expected. I should not send this off till the result is known if it was not likely a letter wrote by this opportunity will reach you one or two days sooner than one sent tomorrow. I am with the greatest Respect Sir your Most Obedient,

Jona. Williams5

I am sensible this ought to be transcribed, but I expect your Client will call immediately.

RC (Adams Papers).

The letter to his law clerks has not been found, but one to AA of 23 June is in Adams Family Correspondence , 1:108–109.

Richard Lechmere (1727–1814), John (1727–1816) or George (1738–1806) Erving, Thomas (1722–1784) and John (1728–1805) Amory, Francis (1742–1809) and Joseph (1706–1780) Green, and probably Daniel Hubbard, who signed the protest against the Solemn League and Covenant (Sabine, Loyalists , 1:162–163, 2:8; Sibley-Shipton, Harvard Graduates , 8:42–53, 11:4–7, 12:152–156, 14:151–157, 610–617; MHS, Procs. , 1st ser., 11 [1869–1870]: 394–395)

The two-day town meeting climaxed the intense controversy over the actions taken and proposed by the Boston Committee of Correspondence in regard to the Port Act, the Massachusetts Government Act, and the Administration of Justice Act. In reacting to the first, the committee had proposed, after seeking support from the committees of other towns, a cutting off of trade with Great Britain; but the town meeting favored such action only if supported by similar action in other colonies. When the news arrived in June of the other acts passed by Parliament, the Committee of Correspondence felt Boston had to take the leadership and declare not only non-104importation, but nonconsumption and a boycott of those who continued importation and purchasing of any British goods. The furthest the town had been willing to go was nonconsumption of such British goods as could be “obtained among Ourselves.” In advocating unilateral action, the Committee had moved faster than the town wished, and opposition was particularly strong among merchants, whether loyalist or whig in sympathy. Thus, the stage was set for the meetings of 27 and 28 June. Although in his letter Williams shows some doubt about the outcome and the future of the Committee of Correspondence in the face of a motion of “censure and annihilation,” he need not have worried: the committee won an overwhelming vote of confidence. Nevertheless, the town did refuse to approve the Solemn League and Covenant. Clearly, for the moment, the Committee had gone too far. (See Boston Record Commissioners, 18th Report , p. 177–178, and Brown, Revolutionary Politics , p. 185–199.)

Although JA wrote him the next day (see next document), no known record of William Tudor's account of the meeting of 28 June is extant.

Williams (1754?–1780) was JA's law clerk from Sept. 1772 to Oct. 1774. He died in Boston on 1 May 1780, soon after returning from France, where he had gone for his health. See JA, Diary and Autobiography , 2:228, note.