In 1776 the Founding Father John Adams stated that future commemorations of the United States’ independence ‘ought to be solemnized with pomp and parade, with shows, games, sports, guns, bells, bonfires, and illuminations, from one end of this continent to the other, and from this time forward, forevermore’. In proposing plans for the 1976 bicentennial celebrations, Boston’s Finance Commission was more fiscally minded: ‘In order to justify such expenditures – especially when a good portion of these expenditures must come from the public sector – the end result must be something more than a gigantic party.’
For northeastern cities such as Boston the late 1960s and 1970s were a time of strained budgets. Cities experienced a ‘white flight’ of urban professionals to the suburbs, surrounding towns, and states further west. The ensuing loss of affluent taxable revenue contributed to a self-perpetuating spiral: as services declined, more people left. As the bicentennial approached, Boston seemed caught in this spiral. Its population fell by almost 200,000 between 1920 and 1980, and by 1980 three-quarters of its homes were worth less than the cost of construction.
To counter this, Boston lobbied the American Revolution Bicentennial Commission, established by Congress on 4 July 1966 to identify a host city for the 1976 bicentennial. But Boston was not the only city vying for host status. Another city with growing budgetary issues also sought selection: Philadelphia. Both cities had strong revolutionary history to back their claims. Boston had the Tea Party, Paul Revere’s ‘midnight ride’, and Lexington and Concord (sites of the Revolutionary War’s first major battles) within commutable distance. Philadelphia was where the Declaration of Independence was signed, and had been the focal city of the 1876 centennial celebrations. On 10 March 1969 the Worcester Telegram & Gazettesummarised what was at stake: ‘More than a billion dollars for the economy of the area … 40,000 jobs … millions of dollars in additional property taxes … a legacy of social and economic improvements.’ Some Boston residents wrote supportive letters to the mayor, Kevin White, speaking contemptuously of Philadelphia’s bid and offering advice on how he might lobby the Commission. One suggested a historical argument:
The Philadelphians were extremely reluctant members of the American cause, they wanted more royal government in 1764 when everyone else was opposing it, they broke their agreements with other American leaders, their leadership was extremely conservative, and Philadelphia as a place served no great purpose … The Bostonians were far more consistent, important and American in every respect.