It was a general sentiment in America that Washington must retire. Why? What is implied in this necessity? . . . Does not this idea of the necessity of his retiring, imply an opinion of danger to the public, from his continuing in public, a jealousy that he might become ambitious? And does it not imply . . . a jealousy in the people of one another, a jealousy of one part of the people, that another part had grown too fond of him, and acquired habitually too much confidence in him, and that there would be a danger of setting him up for a king? Undoubtedly it does, and undoubtedly there were such suspicions; and grounds for them too. (See Works of John Adams, vol. 9, 541.)
Abigail shared John’s praise of Washington but did not, at least openly, share his jealousy. While John and Abigail agreed on their evaluations of most of John’s contemporaries, with regard to Washington one detects a disagreement. John’s praise of Washington was at times qualified and stinting. Abigail’s praise, starting with her initial description of Washington in a letter to her husband, was unqualified. “You had prepared me to entertain a favorable opinion of George Washington, but I thought the half was not told me. Dignity with ease and complacency, the gentleman and soldier, look agreeably blended in him.” Her later descriptions were equally unstinting: “A temple built by hands divine,” “the most amiable of men,” “a singular example of modesty and diffidence,” whose dignity and majesty far surpassed King George III, were all descriptions offered by Abigail of the General (Gore Vidal, Inventing a Nation, 72). Finally, upon Washington’s death, Abigail wrote in a private letter to her sister, “No man ever lived, more deservedly beloved and Respected . . . If we look through the whole tenor of his Life, History will not produce to us a Parallel” (Michael and Jana Novak, Washington’s God, 4, 5).
Adams’s recognition of his own envy, and Washington’s lack of it, showed through in his remarks at Washington’s funeral. “Malice could never blast his honor, and Envy made him a singular exception to her universal rule” (Barry Schwartz, George Washington: The Making of an American Symbol, 92).
Josiah shared Adams’s appreciation and envy of Washington’s acting ability. Adams attributed the General’s hold on public audiences to “Shakespearean and Garrickal Excellence in Dramatic Exhibitions” and later described Washington as the “best actor of Presidency we have ever had.”
PATRICK HENRY, PAGES 71-72
Patrick Henry praised the oratory at the 1774 Continental Congress, but “if you speak of solid information, and sound judgment, Colonel Washington is by far the greatest man on the floor” (Richard Norton Smith, Patriarch, 12). Henry, the archenemy of executive tyranny, made one exception: he supported appointing Washington as a “near dictator” during the war (Beeman, 115). Washington remained a supporter of Henry until the end of their lives (Ellis, His Excellency, 267).
Josiah states that Henry and several Founding Fathers opposed the adoption of the Constitution. The Constitution has become so revered over the years that we assume all our Founding Fathers supported its adoption. Not so. Some opposed it outright. Others opposed it without amendments. (Supporters had already pledged a bill of rights by amendment if it was adopted.) Others opposed it in favor of extending the Articles of Confederation. Henry, Mason, Governor George Clinton of New York, and John Hancock all at one time or another opposed its adoption. And Thomas Jefferson was a late and lukewarm supporter.
When a few of Jefferson’s republican allies in the news media and elsewhere criticized Washington during his second presidential term, Henry rose to Washington’s defense with phrases about such criticism inhibiting those seeking public service that have echoed down through the years: “If they slander General Washington, what must we expect when lesser men serve” and “If he whose character as our leader during the whole war . . . is so roughly handled in his old age, what may be expected of men of the common standard?” (Ron Chernow, Washington, 752).
THE MARQUIS DE LAFAYETTE, PAGES 73-78
Lafayette’s admiration for Washington was so great that we cannot read his words today without believing Lafayette was a rock star “groupie” instead of one of the ablest and most distinguished soldiers and diplomats of his time, and one who, we will see, challenged Washington on issues such as slavery.
To others, Lafayette spewed comments about the General such as: “Our general is a man formed, in truth, for this revolution which could not have been accomplished without him. I see him more intimately than any other man, and I see that he is worthy of the adoration of his country,” and “Every day, I learn to admire more his magnificent character and soul . . .”
It is fortunate that Lafayette evinced such opinions because he spent millions in today’s currency of his own money on the Revolution, became one of the Continental Army’s ablest commanders, more than anyone convinced the French government to support the rebels, and further changed Washington’s views on slavery.
Lafayette’s written comments on Washington to Washington were, if possible, even more glowing than his comments on the General to others:
Everything that is great, and everything that is good were not hitherto visited in one man. Never did a man live whom the soldier, statesman, patriot, and philosopher could equally admire, and never was a revolution brought about, that in its motives, its conduct, and its consequences could so well immortalize its glorious chief. I am so proud of you, my dear general, your glory makes me feel as if it were my own—and while the world is gaping at you, I am pleased to think, and to tell, the qualities of your heart do render you still more valuable than anything you have done.
While the words today may seem grandiloquent, Lafayette lived the life of a medieval knight whose cause was the American Revolution and whose hero was George Washington. He genuinely believed, as did thousands of others, that America’s advantage over Britain lay in “the superiority of George Washington.”
Not surprisingly, Lafayette named his son after the General.
Those interested in reading the above and other interactions of Lafayette and Washington may wish to consult Lafayette by Harlow Giles Unger. This delightful biography describes how Lafayette, living the life of a romantic fourteenth-century knight, changed the shape of America and France in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries.
SLAVERY, LAFAYETTE, THE BLACK POET, AND WASHINGTON’S LAST WILL, PAGES 74-77
Lafayette may have been an avid admirer of the General, but he was not timid about advancing his views to Washington on many issues, including slavery.