John Adams

The Writs of Assistance Case (1761)

Among the most profound influences on the young John Adams was his witnessing attorney James Otis arguing the Writs of Assistance case in 1761.This case would influence Adams years later when, in drafting the Massachusetts Constitution, he included a strong prohibition against unreasonable searches and seizures. That provision ensures that articulated and established rules are followed before private property may be searched or seized by government officials.

The Writs of Assistance case originated in 1760. Soon after George III ascended to the English throne, customs officials began aggressively to inspect ships, businesses, and homes for evidence of goods smuggled into Massachusetts by merchants seeking to avoid taxes. To conduct a search, customs officials needed only to obtain a "writ of assistance," a general search warrant that allowed them to search within any identified premises. The government was not required to make any showing of cause before obtaining a writ.

In February 1761, Otis represented a group of Massachusetts merchants who challenged the legality of the writs in a case brought before the Superior Court of Judicature. For five hours, Otis argued that the writs violated the inalienable rights of the colonists as British subjects: "A man's house is his castle; and whilst he is quiet, he is as well guarded as a prince in his castle. This writ, if it should be declared legal, would totally annihilate this privilege."

Chief Justice Hutchinson delayed the Court's decision, likely hoping that public sentiment against the writs would subside. Though the Court did eventually uphold the writs, Adams believed that customs officials never "dared" to execute them. Otis's argument against arbitrary and excessive power influenced many, including 25-year-old John Adams, who later recalled, "Every man of an immense crowded audience appeared to me to go away as I did, ready to take arms against writs of assistance. Then and there was the first scene of the first act of opposition to the arbitrary claims of Great Britain. Then and there, the child Independence was born."

The Boston Massacre Case

The Boston Massacre case demonstrates John Adams's deep and abiding respect for a legal system based on the rule of law. For in this case, John Adams was requested to - and did - defend British soldiers who had fired into a mob of unruly colonists.

Events began on March 5, 1770, when tensions were high between the colonists and the armed British soldiers stationed in Boston. That evening, a dispute between a British sentry and a colonist led to the gathering of a disorderly crowd of colonists which, eventually, confronted Captain Thomas Preston and eight British soldiers.

When the volatile crowd refused orders to disperse and threw objects at the soldiers, the soldiers shot into the crowd, killing five colonists, including Crispus Attucks. Captain Preston and the soldiers were arrested.

The following day, John Adams was asked to defend Captain Preston and the soldiers from anticipated indictments. Adams agreed. Though committed to freedom from British tyranny, he believed that those accused deserved a proper defense. Adams's decision to defend the accused was particular noteworthy as other patriots, including his cousin Samuel Adams and Paul Revere, who invoked what they now named the "Boston Massacre" to inflame anti-British sentiments.

Captain Preston's trial was held first, from October 24-30, 1770. Adams's strategy was to challenge the prosecution's claim that Preston had ordered his soldiers to fire. Adams succeeded, and the jury acquitted Preston.

The subsequent trial of the eight soldiers was transcribed and published. After calling over forty witnesses, Adams gave an "electrifying" closing argument in which he argued that the soldiers had acted in self-defense when facing a mob. He further contended that because the evidence was unclear as to which soldiers had fired, it was better for the jury to acquit all eight defendants than mistakenly to convict one innocent man. "The reason is, because it's of more importance to community, that innocence should be protected, than it is, that guilt should be punished."

The jury acquitted six soldiers and found two guilty of manslaughter; those two had been clearly proved to have fired shots.

For his role in the trials, Adams received serious public criticism and lost a substantial portion of his law practice. Later, he would write:

The part I took in defense of Cptn. Preston and the Soldiers, procured me anxiety, and obloquy enough. It was, however, one of the most gallant, generous, manly and disinterested actions of my whole life, and one of the best pieces of service I ever rendered my country. Judgement of death against those soldiers would have been as foul a stain upon this country as the executions of the Quakers or Witches, anciently. As the evidence was, the verdict of the jury was exactly right.

As reflected in observations of the Writs of Assistance case and his own role in the Boston Massacre trials, Adams had a passionate commitment to the rule of law and the right of all to fair proceedings. These passions would guide Adams as he developed and articulated his philosophy of a government based on laws not men.