American History Hit - Founding Father: Who Was John Hancock?

Episode Date: April 22, 2024

An iconic signature on the Declaration of Independence - that is what John Hancock is best known for. But how did he come to be the first signatory? What was his role in the American Revolution?Brooke Barbier joins Don in this episode to take us through the life and works of John Hancock, and to explain how he got the nickname, 'King Hancock'.Brooke is the author of ‘Boston in the American Revolution’ and ‘King Hancock: The Radical Influence of a Moderate Founding Father’. She also founded 'Ye Old Tavern Tours', a private tour company in Boston.Produced by Sophie Gee. Edited by Aidan Lonergan. Senior Producer was Charlotte Long.Enjoy unlimited access to award-winning original documentaries that are released weekly and AD-FREE podcasts. Get a subscription for $1 per month for 3 months with code AMERICANHISTORY sign up at https://historyhit/subscription/ You can take part in our listener survey here. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Want to explore even more history? Sign up to History Hit, where you will discover history from around the world. From the American Revolution to prehistoric Scotland, there is plenty to discover. With your subscription, you'll unlock hundreds of hours of exclusive documentaries, with a brand new release every week, exploring everything from the ancient world to World War II. Just visit historyhit.com slash subscribe to bring the past alive. Welcome to the National Archives, here in Washington, D.C., right off the National Mall. You've come to see something very important. Follow me.

You are now standing in the Rotunda for the Charters of Freedom. Pretty grand, right? Look at the walls. The circular way they sweep upward to the dome. The octagonal patterns in the ceiling. All very classical, all referencing those ancient Greco-Roman spaces, back when the notion of a Democratic Republic was first born. A grandiose setting for our most sacred ideals scribbled on parchments.

Here, preserved. Hundreds of years old. On either side are the Faulkner murals, the two massive oil paintings depicting the signatories of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States. These documents here before us. Oh, plus the Bill of Rights. All encased in protective glass. Amazing, right? The founding documents.

They say every night they are lowered into hardened vaults below ground, secured from even a nuclear attack. Or so say the rumors. Now, look, central in that composition to the left is John Hancock, looming over the Declaration of Independence. His pale gray suit, standing out just so. The man was a founding father fashion plate. Hancock always knew how to distinguish himself, especially when it came to putting quill to parchment and inscribing his now legendary signature. Well, hello, American History Hit listeners.

Good of you to join us. We are covering on our episode today one of the signature moments of the American Revolutionary period in which a fundamental founding father inks his way into greatness with the feathered flourish of a quill pen. But that's only one action among so many

that made John Hancock, such a central figure in the creation of the United States of America. Lucky for us, a new biography of the man, recently published tells a fuller story. It is entitled, King Hancock, the radical influence of a moderate founding father. And the author who scribbled it all out on parchment paper is with us today.

Brooke Barbier, thanks for coming on the show. Most grateful to meet you. I loved that introduction. Hi, Dawn. So glad to be with you. I apologize for starting with the obvious, the iconic autograph, but it is inscribed on history,

so it's hard not to. I suppose this had as much to do with prompting this project as anything. Most Americans only see that when they think of John Hancock. He is most famous for his signature. Absolutely right. This is something that school children in the United States still learn that John Hancock signed big and bold on the Declaration of Independence. And Don, his signature is surely the biggest. And it's, while this isn't scientific, it is definitely, in my opinion, the most beautiful as well.

I agree. It's the envy of every person on it. earth. I mean, really, it's the most incredible signature. And as you get older, I'm finding your signature gets worse and worse, and you just keep comparing yourself to John Hancock thinking, how did he do it? It's amazing. All right, so we're going to detail Hancock's origins in a moment, but let me just remind listeners at the top of the show here about his resume. He is one of the early voices of resistance in Boston, along with colleagues like Sam Adams, big presence at the Boston Tea Party, First Continental Congress, 74,

75, he's the president of the Second Continental Congress. As we say, he signs the Declaration of Independence, sealing his fate in history. He is a financial force in funding the revolution, all in all, one of those guys who really lays the foundation of the nation. But as your book title suggests, rather an unexpected player in all of this, given his personality and outlook, what makes John Hancock such an unlikely character in this radical period? Well, you kind of said it there. The American Revolution, we typically think of. having it being comprised of radicals and rebels, but Hancock was neither. He was a moderate, and his, he comes from Boston, which was the epicenter of violent protests, mobbing and tarring and feathering. But Hancock is able to avoid such extremes, all while remaining popular with the masses and affecting political change. So we don't tend to think of someone being a revolutionary and being moderate, but that's precisely what John Hancock was. And in fact, that was his gift to the American Revolution, was he was able to temper radical's

ideas, make them palatable to the masses that he was so popular with. Okay. Let's go back to his beginnings. Born January 12th, 1737 in Braintree, Massachusetts, a village north of Boston, to this day, I suppose. Father, grandfather, are ministers. He's on track to follow the family trade, but his father dies early. And the rug is pulled out from under young John Hancock. What age was that? Seven. Okay. So this is really early on and suddenly his life gets dramatically different than what it was expected to be. He goes and lives with his grandparents and then at eight moves to Boston and moves into quite a fine household, the wealthy Uncle Thomas Hancock and his wife Lydia, big house, finer things in life, very rare place to grow up in the colonies. This is going to really

stamp Hancock for life, isn't it? Absolutely. Because not only is he now the sort of adopted son of this wealthy man and entitled to all of the privileges that came with wealth. But he also now is going to be when he gets older, he's going to become a partner in his uncle's business, this merchant trade. And that gives him contacts with London and relationships with London that most colonists never had in their lifetime. And it also exposes him to some of the best schooling. He goes from Boston Latin. He also had a calligraphy teacher just speaking about that signature, too. And then he goes on to graduate from Harvard and then taking over for his uncle's business. So he had a pretty set path there once he arrived to Boston.

He's a merchant. He's a trader in books, whale oil, retailing, land speculation, I mean, privateering also. And as you say, contracts with the British Empire, especially through the seven years war. The French and Indian War becomes the seven years war over in Europe. This is the 1740s and 50s. Many people do not recognize this time period as really the engine of what really causes the American Revolution. And John Hancock, by virtue of being in his uncle's business and being in Boston, would have been right there at the center of all of this. He sees it all laid out, you know, as it goes, from a very particular vantage point, that of a successful trader.

Absolutely. His uncle Thomas, in his lifetime, in Thomas's lifetime, a master. one of the largest fortunes in Massachusetts. That is unusual in the 18th century to rise so high above your station. And he does that by maintaining great relationships with the British Empire. So when we see Hancock be moderate later on, and we'll likely get to this, it comes from a perspective of knowing that it is financially lucrative to be a good partner with the British Empire. Thomas Hancock made so much of his money funding the troops supplying the troops during the seven years' war as they combated the French and the native peoples in the colonies.

So being a subject of the British Empire has been good to Thomas Hancock and therefore good to John Hancock. That is going to be the key. And I suppose it's central to your book as well. Where is this pivot point in John Hancock's life in his person, where he goes from being understanding the broader world through money, really, and relationships to understanding the purpose of this new nation. It's a really huge shift, and you don't have to answer it now. But that's the point, really, of figuring this out about Hancock, because he's really representative.

He's a tip of an iceberg of an enormous amount of people in the colonies at this time. We really don't recognize the fact that there's a big split in the population between those who want to stay with the mother country and those who are interested in this other way of life. and they're not all Sam Adams out there. That's right. We tend to think of the colonists as this monolithic group, all marching steadily towards independence and then creating a new United States. But that wasn't the case at all. Number one, people just wanted to keep living their lives. And number two, for some of them, it was nice to be a part of the British Empire. So what's interesting, the question about what's

the pivot point for John Hancock, there are so many along the way. There's not one thing that turns him because it's only if we read history backwards and know the end result that we can say, oh, John Hancock was late on this or he should have flipped at this point. But he's living his life and he doesn't know what's going to happen next. So he's improvising. I'm trying to do that with my own life. I've been trying to live it backwards forever. It's not working. He is also involved with that inimitable Boston trade craft, I suppose, which is smuggling. A huge deal in Boston. I did a show in North End and literally in people's basements, you can find the sealed tunnels of that neighborhood because it was so close to the harbor. And it was just a way of life,

you know, and it was really the reason that this became such a crucible of resistance against taxation because people were lifting stuff off those boats forever. There was a mob that defended Hancock's right to smuggle wine. that was one of the most memorable mobs of the American Revolution. Hancock had learned from his uncle that smuggling was respectable and acceptable. And so he continued to smuggle to avoid paying any customs duties. And in 1768, he very publicly stands up to customs officials who are snooping around one of his ships thinking that they're going to catch him smuggling.

And ultimately, I can tell you more about the story, but ultimately what happens is customs officials seize one of his ships. Don, the ship is called Liberty. So that's funny in and of itself. They seize Hancock's liberty. And then a mob violently rebels against the customs officers. They assault them. They drag one of the customs officials' boats out of Boston Harbor, hauling it

through the streets of Boston, through up to Boston Common, the public park where they set this boat on fire. That's how much the people. liked John Hancock, and that's how little they cared for the customs officials. So smuggling to them, there are some accounts where Bostonians considered smuggling to be their right and even to be their duty. He's very well schooled. He goes to Boston Latin school, which is to this day a very premier place, and learns the classics. He was on track, as I said before, to being a minister, which also usually meant going to Harvard College, which he does go to. There's a note about him, which I found very particular or very peculiar. We don't know this, hear this much about kids' biographies,

but he was a melancholy child, wasn't it? He was a very sort of sad child in many ways. His dad dying at John Hancock's age of seven, I argue, shaped his life. Hancock never wrote that in a letter, never spoke that, but he is a man throughout his life since a young boy who was desperate for connection. He longed to feel like he belonged. And such a loss at an early age such a big loss, then resulting in a big change, would, of course, shift any child's perspective. But not only is he going from this small town of Braintree, but he's going to the third largest town in the colonies, Boston, and he's now living with this shrewd businessman, his uncle. And so Hancock tries to find his footing beginning at that time and then throughout his life.

Right. He graduates in 1750. It's a timeline you need to keep in mind. here, as you consider, you know, the central life to the revolution, because we're coming into the French and Indian War. All of this is happening as he really matures. And so he's forming his worldview at this time, assuming that this is the way the world is always going to be. It will change within 10 years, right? It will change within that decade that things start to become very oppressive to him. This is where I think we kind of locate the pivot point, right? What's so fascinating about the timeline is you're exactly right. He's being schooled and he learns his uncle's trade during the French and Indian War. His uncle dies, though, in 1764. And that is the

very same year that Parliament begins taxing the North American colonies to pay for the war that they had just won. 1764, we see the Sugar Act passed. That concerns Hancock, but not that much. Then the Stamp Act is passed in 1765. And initially Hancock says, yeah, we'll go along with it. We must submit, he said. And he probably in his mind had the idea that he would just find a way around this tax. But then other Bostonians don't want to submit to the Stamp Act. And they begin violently rebelling. The violent rebellion begins in Boston. It trickles to other colonies as well, but it begins in Boston. And that's an awakening for Hancock because he says, whoa, this is is quite a strong reaction to a tax, and we see him start to change his mind. He starts to make

financial arguments. He pleads with his partners in London. Please appeal to the members of parliament to repeal this tax. And Hancock's in a unique position because he has the name and recognition and business connections that other colonists don't. So they may be violently rebelling, but Hancock's doing his part by writing directly to the people in London. It's the thing to keep in mind, that this guy really has so much to lose by going into this revolutionary spirit. It's one thing to be a colonist who sees the potential of this great continent and, God damn, those Britons and all that sort of thing. But Hancock is one of the wealthiest people in the colonies.

Never mind, Boston, right? I mean, he has everything to lose and everything to gain by being a loyalist. And a lot of loyalists are very wealthy. And there's a reason for that, because they made their money under Crown rule. I point this out at certain points in the book when, for example, Samuel Adams, the firebrand Samuel Adams, who saw threats everywhere, when he would get upset that John Hancock didn't go along with whatever Adams was scheming shows that the difference between the two is that Adams had so much less to lose. Throughout his lifetime, he was poor. He very rarely had felt any sort of wealth. He grew up wealthy. but then as an adult, he lacked that privilege. And so he has a lot less to lose. And we see this throughout in independence, Samuel Adams getting upset with John Hancock for not wanting to declare independence. The thing I've always, I've wondered is that Hancock, of all people, would have seen the purpose of British taxation.

I mean, they had spent a lot of money and treasure and so forth fighting this war out there in the frontier of the colonies. He would have been one of those people who would have said, yeah, I kind of get it. You know, you guys got a, it's just a balancing out here for a few years. But he doesn't. And that's so telling of how unfair the taxation really was. He's my beacon. I'm following John Hancock into some sense about this time. because, again, if anybody had it to lose, it was him.

You wouldn't be the only one following him. You'd be in fantastic company because he becomes one of the most popular men, not just in Massachusetts, but in the colonies. People in other colonies had heard about the sacrifices that Hancock had to make. During the non-importation agreement, when everyone decided to boycott British goods, they knew that Hancock could lose more than anyone. When the coercive acts shut down Boston Harbor,

There's these farmers in the countryside of Massachusetts who said, if they could take Hancock's wharf, they could take ours. So he was this very, as you said, visible beacon of the consequences of rebelling against the crown. Very cool. He was also kind of a dandy, wasn't he? I mean, he liked his clothes. He liked his gold carriage keeps getting mentioned everywhere I look. I mean, the guy was really showing it off. He was.

And that's what I love about it, John, is that he is so visibly above everybody else. Everyone knows he's wealthy, but he's showing you his wealth. And clothing can often be considered feminine or insignificant. It's often dismissed as irrelevant to life, much less politics, but it's not. And Hancock understood the power of looking the part. He exuded his authority by what he wore. He was known for wearing embroidered clothing, gilded clothing at a time when people usually wore pretty drab clothing. And yet, that draws people to him, not away from him. They look at him and they see a leader. The untold part of this, just to backtrack a little bit as Thomas Hancock, I don't want to go into it, but he, you know, to grow up in a household where you see

wallpaper in those days, where you see whale oil lamps, you know, the finer things are so hard to get. You can only get these things back in London. You know, it's really a rare kind of environment to grow up in and shape yourself. And I think Thomas Hancock has ever been. everything to do with us as a result of that. Where does the King Hancock title come from in your book? This is my favorite, Don. So after the Boston Tea Party, Parliament passes the course of acts to punish Boston, and they send in British troops to occupy Boston. And some of those officers held captive a Bostonian, and they demanded to know from him who ordered the destruction of the tea. That was what they called the Boston Tea Party at this time. And the guy says, nobody. And the officer

shouts, you're a damned liar. It was King Hancock and the damned Sons of Liberty. This nickname is so clever. Make no mistake, it is an insult, but it's a clever insult because they understand the officers understand Hancock's enormous popularity in town. But it's an insult because they're saying the best that you all can do here for your king is this guy John Hancock. Well, we have the real King George III. The most fascinating thing happens. On the day the Revolutionary War break, out on April 19th, 1775. So less than a year after we hear the King Hancock used in the historical record for the first time, the British troops are retreating out of Concord 20 miles back to Boston. And as they're retreating, they're being fired on. And then it gets worse for them. Because as they're

being fired on, the British troops, they could hear colonists crying out, King Hancock forever. Wow. So what had been an insult became quite literally a rallying cry on the day the Revolutionary War began. And the title of a bestselling book. Yes, John. Yes. I'll be back with more American history after this short break. He had staff both enslaved and paid.

This is part of his life that he grows up with, but it doesn't become part of his adult life, is it? It's certainly part of his adult life. But by the late 1770s, Hancock had emancipated any of the enslaved persons that had been bequeathed to him. So Uncle Thomas enslaved both men and women. And when he died, those passed to Lydia, his wife. And when Lydia died, they passed to John. Lydia died in 1776. So we don't know exactly when they were emancipated, but they were within a few years.

Hancock's family undoubtedly benefited from enslavement for decades. financially, but we see Hancock change his mind. He doesn't write about his change, but we see him change his mind. And we can talk or not, but much later in his life, we see that his mind has really shifted. Let's talk about the Sons of Liberty, his involvement with the Boston Tea Party. He is at that meeting at the Old South Meeting House overseeing it, I suppose. There's a lot of other people involved. I don't want to be one of these people who just puts it all on John Hancock. You got Savage there. You got all kinds of important people who are in Boston at the moment. But it becomes his, that's the presence that he

creates, this moderating force, not so moderate that night, because he basically greenlights the thing, right? So he does not participate in the Boston Tea Party. He destroys no tea. But he and Samuel Adams and other radicals, like you said, are at that pivotal meeting right before everyone went down to the harbor, either watch or dump the tea in. This is a shift for Hancock. Hancock, for the previous three years, the Tea Act has passed in 73, and for the previous three years, he'd been taking vacations, he'd been working on his business, trying to find a wife. And when the Tea Act is passed, this is going to cut into his business. He'd been an enthusiastic supporter of tea, and now he wouldn't be able to sell tea under the Tea Act. So we see him shift with, if not, participating in the Boston Tea Party, which he did not, his support for.

And certainly the public perception of him as well. that would have been a huge story in Boston. Absolutely. And this is what the British officers are referring to when they held that Bostonian captive and said, who ordered the destruction of the tea? The British officers clearly thought that it was King Hancock and the Sons of Liberty. How did Samuel Adams and him come together? I mean, this deserves to be a Broadway play, right?

I mean, it's a really important relationship. They come together and then they go apart. There's a modern term that I would use to describe them their frenemies because they're both friends and enemies, and they come together at certain points, and then they move away. And in fact, if we just look at the Boston Tea Party, they both supported the destruction of the tea.

But just a few months later, Adams is upset with Hancock again because Hancock attends the funeral of a royal official in Boston. And Adams said, why would you do that? And Adams actually sent some people over to sort of troll this guy during the funeral. But Hancock is there to honor

the man. This happens throughout where they come together and then they move apart and they come together and they move apart. With the Declaration of Independence, John Adams, Samuel Adams' cousin, said that Samuel was getting, quote, very bitter against Hancock because he wasn't lending his weight behind independence. So just when Adams would have thought, oh, Hancock's all in, here he goes. Hancock would say, I'm not ready yet or this isn't working for me. Yes, there's a prepossession of the guy that I really like in that regard. I mean, he doesn't get carried away with the rabble, and he's always trying to look for the wider view. Adams, Samuel Adams, and Hancock are central to the major moment of the beginning of it all. On their way to the Second Continental Congress, which is the spring of 1775, take me through the events that lead up to the shot hurdle around the world. There was rumors that the British Army was going to kidnap Samuel Adams and John Han.

Hancock. And that right there should tell you something, that those two were considered the most dangerous men in Massachusetts. And Hancock and Adams were staying in Lexington, Massachusetts, about 15 miles from Boston. There was another rumor that the red coats would march to Lexington and then march to Concord to steal colonial ammunition. This is where Paul Revere, by the way, rides into the history books with his famous midnight ride. His goal is to warn Hancock and Adams that they're in danger that night. By the way, he does not say the British are coming. He does not say the red coats are coming. What we know he says is the regulars are coming. He gets to the house where Hancock and Adams are staying, pounding on the door saying the regulars are coming out. Hancock and

Adams flee eventually. Revere wished they moved a little bit faster, but Hancock had taken out his sword, thinking that he was going to take on the British himself. But they eventually flee. And then at dawn, about 700 British troops arrived to Lexington Green, and Hancock and Adams were gone. And by the way, the Redcoats were never actually intending to kidnap Hancock and Adams. That was bad information. But the men from Lexington were standing at Lexington Green, about 70 of them, and then the shot heard around the world rings out. And we don't know who fired that first shot, but that is the decisive shot that begins the Revolutionary War. that Hancock becomes the president of the Continental Congress. It's always confused me.

It would have been so much more sensible that some Virginia planter would have stepped into this rule. Don, you're right. It started with Peyton Randolph. He was from Virginia. He had been president of the first continental Congress and then was named president of the second Continental Congress. But he got called home to Virginia to legislate there. And so how did Hancock get the presidency? Shear luck, really. But it's because the delegate. wanted to look to northern colonies for their new leader, and Hancock had great credentials. One, he was wealthy. And so that assuaged conservatives' concerns about someone just being too radical because he might want to protect his wealth. But he was from Massachusetts, and he

smuggled Madeira wine, which inspired that big mob in 1768. And he had supported the destruction of the tea in 1773. So he had these revolutionary credentials. too. So he's that perfect blend. What's the year between the Second Continental Congress? That's May of 1775 after Lexington Concord. And then it's a long ways until the Declaration of Independence. Where is Hancock in that year? He's very busy. He is working a lot as president. He is in charge of communicating with other colonies. When George Washington becomes general of the Continental Army, he's communicating with him. So he is quite busy. He is. he's also meeting in taverns with other delegates.

He finds some friends that are not usually from Massachusetts. They are other moderates or conservatives from Virginia, especially. His friend and fellow moderate Thomas Cushing at this time had been replaced as a delegate of the Second Continental Congress because Samuel Adams and John Adams were mad because Cushing wasn't supportive of independence yet. When Cushing gets replaced, Hancock is writing to him. also saying keep an eye on what's happening in Massachusetts because we know that there are some men who are scheming against both of us. So he's also keeping an eye on his fellow

delegates from Massachusetts. The key moment or a key moment in this year we're talking about is when Thomas Payne's pamphlet, common sense comes out, January 1776. This kind of sharpens the rhetoric about what this whole moment means in history. Is Hancock on board with that kind of thinking, is he the one that takes this up and says, hey, we got to do something more, we got to eventually do this Declaration of Independence? Is he central to the Declaration? Not at all. Interestingly, most delegates aren't swayed by Thomas Payne and very few write about common sense, but Hancock does. He sends the pamphlet with a letter saying, this is making much talk in Philadelphia, and it might amuse you. And by the way, I should just say, common sense move the dial for many

Americans who might have been reticent, many ordinary people because he spoke to them. He used language that would make sense for the lower orders or the middling orders. So one thing that might move Hancock more than Thomas Payne is the occupation of Boston by British soldiers and the eventual liberation of the town by George Washington. But Hancock suffered enormous property damage because of the British occupation. in Boston. Again, this is sort of the bummer about being a historian. You want sources that tell you exactly what someone was thinking at the time. And we don't have that. But we have letters and invoices that were sent to Hancock saying there was a lot of damage done to your

property, thousands of pounds worth of damage. And so I would think that might turn him against the British Empire. How interesting. History is told by business tabulations, aren't they? Isn't it? Certainly for Hancock, we can see that his financials. interests are, if not top of mind, they are on his mind always. The key moment for this man in our history, you know, in the popular history, is the Declaration of Independence, obviously. How much is he the voice behind getting that document written? He doesn't play a role in the language of the Declaration of Independence. That's done by Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, John Adams. What he plays the key moment in is as president,

he moderates the discussions of the Second Continental Congress. And then every now and again, he would jump in to the discussion that was called the meeting of the whole. And then someone else would replace him as president. So he's really more moderating these conversations, which is the right role for him. So when this moment happens that this in July of 1776 happens, the signing of this document is a cloudy issue for many Americans. We assume that everybody kind of and lined up as they do in the great painting and all signed at the same time, that's not at all the case, right? Not at all the case.

In fact, this is one of the things that is really central, I think, to show that John Hancock's risk. Because when the Declaration of Independence is authorized, it only requires one name, that of the president of the Second Continental Congress. And that's John Hancock. So when news was distributed at home and abroad of the Declaration of Independence, Americans saw not the handwritten copy that we think of today, but a typeset copy. And it only had one name on it. It had Charles Thompson's named the secretary down below, but clearly authorizing it said, John Hancock,

comma, president. And that's what every, that's what every American saw. That's what people across the pond saw as well, was that it was only John Hancock who put his name on the Declaration of independence. Not Samuel Adams, the one who was gung-ho about independence. He didn't have to put his name down. And so you can see why this would take Hancock some time to come to such a big decision. The document that we think of with the 56 signatures, including Hancock's big one, that was signed the following month in August. And not everyone signed at the same time. Some people signed months later. But that document wasn't visible to Americans until 40 years had passed. Wow.

Yeah. So the idea of people seeing Hancock's signature just wasn't true. They didn't see it the very first time until 1818. And by the way, Don, not a coincidence that that's when that myth of John Hancock saying he signed so big so King George III could see his signature without his spectacles, that's when that myth comes up. And it is a myth. So no evidence that Hancock said that. Clear this up for me. So obviously they didn't all sign it at the same time.

This had to sort of make the rounds, right? That's how the signing happened. Most of them signed in Philadelphia. Okay. There's a few delegates who signed much later. But then the document, if you've ever seen it, if any of the listeners have ever seen it in Washington, D.C., the one copy is beyond battered. It is faded and there's a handprint on it. And the writing is pretty illegible.

And that's because it had been shifted around from location to location. It was barely protected during the war of 1812. And then in 1818, they decided to make a copy of it. And that's what we think of today. And that copy further deteriorated the original. But luckily, they did have the foresight to at least make a copy of that one and only copy with all of the signatures. And why is a signature so much bigger? Okay.

So he is president of the Second Continental Congress. So he signs right in the middle, and he signs biggest. And then all of the other delegates sign below, usually in clumpings from their own colony. And I liken this. I don't say this in the book, but I'll tell you this, Don, that I liken it to an office birthday card where you don't know how many people are going to sign or how big they might sign or what their wishes will say. So you sign kind of small in the corner.

And I think that's what some of these delegates were doing, was leaving space for other people. We're laughing, and it's a very funny subject, but it's a dead serious thing they're doing because essentially by signing this document, they've signed their death certificate as far as with the British Empire. If this war is lost, they're hanging for this thing. Well, that's what's so interesting is that it's only Hancock who authorized the Declaration of Independence. It's only his name that was put out there. Now, of course, the Crown knew who the other leaders were. They would have known who the delegates were. But the Crown never saw that signed document. So this is, again, it is only Hancock, this moderate, who took the most

radical act by authorizing the Declaration of Independence and putting his name on it. He leaves the Continental Congress in 1777, right in the middle of the war. But I have to ask you so much, you know, Hamilton, the rest of what we hear about George Washington's complaints to Hamilton in that, about how the Continental Congress is not forthcoming with the funds, et cetera, etc. How much was that Hancock's doing? I mean, how badly was he running the Congress through those years, or that year, I suppose? He wasn't running it badly. In fact, he is the longest serving president of the Second Continental Congress. It was hiresome work, exhaustive work. And what he was really proud of was what he considered his overseeing the Articles of Confederation.

They didn't get ratified for some time after he left. But he was proud. of sitting through those discussions and moderating those discussions. Congress was broke. I mean, they started this war unintentionally. The battles of Lexington and Concord weren't a deliberate strategy to attack the British or the British to attack the colonists. I mean, it was completely unplanned the beginning of the Revolutionary War and that, frankly, the colonies weren't prepared and they needed help and they knew who to look for because the enemy of my enemy is my friend. And that's France. It's another conversation about funding the American Revolution, having to do with Robert Morris and all of it. But how much of that was on Hancock because he was so

wealthy? There's some idea that Hancock personally funded parts of the revolution. And there's no evidence for that at all. Certainly, he does his part financially with specifically the French. And he doesn't do that by paying for any of their provisions necessarily as soldiers. But the French Navy stays in Boston for several months, and Hancock spends a lot of money to entertain them and make sure that they feel welcome and depreciated. So it wasn't direct payments to anybody in the colonies, but he did his part usually by treating people to food and alcohol. Hancock loved to throw a party that he was able to either secure support in the Continental Congress or, in this instance with the French Navy. You can only imagine those guys standing around talking about each other's

clothes, the French. That's exactly right. When the French Navy comes, Hancock is the closest thing to an aristocrat. So there's really only one person who can entertain them. After his time in Congress, he heads back to Boston, resumes his life as a businessman. He doesn't actually have much to do with the U.S. Constitution until it's ratification, right? He's not part of the convention or anything. That's right. He is busy being governor of Massachusetts. And while we tend to think today of being a governor as lesser than being a part of the federal government, in fact, there were only 13 governors in the colonies and there was a very weak federal government at the time. So Hancock was running Massachusetts the way he wanted. You're right that he doesn't attend the Constitutional Convention. And it's only when there's discussions about ratification in Massachusetts. and the convention that we see Hancock really step up and again take a leadership role. Right. It's the lack of a bill of rights.

It's this problem with it, right? His concern is more that the Constitution could take away the rights from Massachusetts, from what he thought would be sovereign states. And ultimately, the federalists make a deal with Hancock because they know that Massachusetts is an important state. And if it doesn't ratify, then it might not ratify with any other, with enough states. And so they propose a bargain to Hancock. They say you can propose changes to this Constitution.

No one else had been allowed to do that, no other state. In fact, the instruction said you either thumbs up it or thumbs down the Constitution. And Hancock proposes changes mostly around the control that Congress would have versus the control that a state would have. And that support for the Constitution is what leads Massachusetts to ratify. And then, Don, every state thereafter that does ratify goes on to also propose. proposed changes. And those changes then become what we know as the Bill of Rights today. He dies in 1793, age of 56, a young man, but a huge state funeral is held in his honor, indicative of people's feelings for him and their graciousness. Yeah, as would befit a king.

He had humongous funeral in Boston with thousands of people turning out the shops closed for the day. There was no traffic on the streets except for this procession. And he's buried. the procession ends with him being buried in the granary bearing ground in Boston, where people can still visit today. In the end, John Hancock is way more than just his own John Hancock. Pivotal figure, in all matters, radically revolutionary, while somehow managing to hold the center together. There's always going to be a right and a left, but without that center, they'll just break away and you're left with nothing. In that regard, I think Hancock is finally getting his due, thanks to your book and others. he was a guy who had a lot to lose, was indispensable to America's founding. And that speaks to the courageous character of the man.

Quite a legacy. Quite a signature, but quite a legacy. Absolutely. And I say if he's remembered for nothing else but a signature, he would be happy with that. But it's good that we're talking about his contributions, especially as a moderate, because we don't often hear that in stories of the American Revolution. Brooke Barbier is a public historian, which is an important term to know about. Most people don't. It's an extraordinarily important part of the history telling in this nation and anywhere. She received her Ph.D. in American history from Boston College. She is the founder of a business in Boston called Ye Old Tavern Tours and author of several books, Boston in the American Revolution. And most recently, as we've been discussing, King Hancock, the radical influence of a moderate founding father. Boy, you're a good storyteller. Thank you so much, Brooke. Really a pleasure to talk to you. You as well done. I loved this conversation. Thanks for having me.

Hey, thanks for listening to American History Hit. You know, every week we release new episodes, two new episodes dropping Mondays and Thursdays, all kinds of content from mysterious missing colonies to powerful political movements to some of the biggest battles across the centuries. Don't miss an episode. By hitting like and follow, you help us out, which is great.

But you'll also be reminded when our shows are on. And while you're at it, share it with a friend. American History Hit with me, Don Wildman. so grateful for your support.