The Republicans responded on August 21st with an editorial published in the Aurora penned under the pseudonym “Hancock”. It claimed the nation’s “idolatry” of Washington had continued for too long and American’s “should have no other God than one.” Such religious language marked the beginning of Washington’s fall from infallibility. These criticisms provide important context for the pamphlet campaigns of 1796 because it expanded the growing divide between the proto parties, and set a precedent for openly criticizing the highest elected officials in the public platform of print.
John Adams and Thomas Jefferson were both the subject of scathing attacks on their character and governing ability after the election officially began in the Fall of 1795. A brief review of these Founding Fathers political careers provides a necessary context for the …show more content…
A Federalist resolves to address the issue himself, citing Adam’s remarks on the Ancient Lacedemonian republic – who’s Kings and Senators were chosen hereditarily.
[The Lacedemonian republic] had three essential parts of the best possible government; it was a mixture of monarchy, aristocracy, and democracy.” Mr. Adams does not merely say, that this mixed monarchy is not bad—not merely, that it is good[…] but Mr. Adams, without any, the least, qualification or reserve whatsoever, expressly says, that this Lacedemonian mixture of monarchy—aristocracy—and democracy, had "the three essential parts of the best possible government."* To frame a declaration of monarchical and aristocratic faith more unequivocal and explicit, all the words of our language, nay, all the ideas of the human mind, would be vainly
John Adams and Thomas Jefferson were both the subject of scathing attacks on their character and governing ability after the election officially began in the Fall of 1795. A brief review of these Founding Fathers political careers provides a necessary context for the …show more content…
A Federalist resolves to address the issue himself, citing Adam’s remarks on the Ancient Lacedemonian republic – who’s Kings and Senators were chosen hereditarily.
[The Lacedemonian republic] had three essential parts of the best possible government; it was a mixture of monarchy, aristocracy, and democracy.” Mr. Adams does not merely say, that this mixed monarchy is not bad—not merely, that it is good[…] but Mr. Adams, without any, the least, qualification or reserve whatsoever, expressly says, that this Lacedemonian mixture of monarchy—aristocracy—and democracy, had "the three essential parts of the best possible government."* To frame a declaration of monarchical and aristocratic faith more unequivocal and explicit, all the words of our language, nay, all the ideas of the human mind, would be vainly