George Washington: Leadership, Slavery, and Legacy

Introduction

The first president of the United States and the commanding general of the Continental Army during the Revolutionary War, George Washington has been one of the most revered figures in American history. According to author Michael L. Cheatham, Washington attained "an almost divine status" as the first president. This paper explores Washington's experiences growing up and his service to government and the military.

Washington the Leader

The life and times of the first president of the United States have been well chronicled by numerous historians, scholars, journalists, and other writers. Author Mark McNeilly has added to that legacy with some particularly interesting material. McNeilly is likely the first to write an entire book about Washington's business acumen. In his book George Washington and the Art of Business, McNeilly focuses on Washington's leadership in business matters. McNeilly also provides solid biographical narrative about Washington, noting that the first president was born into an "upper echelon" family in Virginia society (McNeilly, 2008, p. 6). His family was not wealthy, but they were property owners — the basis of "wealth" in early eighteenth-century America.

The first role model for Washington was not his father, Augustine Washington, but rather his older brother Lawrence Washington. The elder Washington passed away when George was only eleven years old. Lawrence was fourteen years older than George and had made an impressive start to life, which clearly left a positive impression on his younger brother. Lawrence received an English education, served in the British Army, and had been a member of Virginia's legislature, the House of Burgesses.

While his father was of moderate means, his older brother had the good fortune to marry into wealth. Lawrence married into the Fairfaxes, "one of Virginia's elite families," as McNeilly points out. The Fairfaxes owned "millions of acres of land," and the family held high positions in Virginia's government. Those facts matter here because George spent a significant portion of his formative years learning "much about being a gentleman and leader," McNeilly explains. Washington discovered how men of influence act, and it made an enormous impression on him; he began "modeling himself for achievement at a very young age" (McNeilly, p. 7).

George Washington did not attend college and was "largely self-taught," McNeilly notes. Washington educated himself using a number of important conduct books of the era, including the Rules of Civility and Decent Behavior in Company and Conversation — 110 rules such as "Be no Flatterer" and "Shew not yourself glad at the Misfortune of another though he were your enemy" (McNeilly, p. 7). He also copied business letters and legal papers, and he "schooled himself in land surveying" because a great deal of land in the colonies was "unmapped" (McNeilly, p. 7).

By his late twenties, Washington had already served in the British military and learned lessons from poor resource management. During England's attempt to drive the French out of the Ohio River Valley — with Washington leading some of the forces — he suffered his first military defeat. He was shot through his coat several times and had his horse killed beneath him, yet he survived. He returned to civilian life, married Martha Custis in 1759, and took a seat in the Virginia House of Burgesses. As a property owner, Washington added thousands of acres to his estate, growing it from 2,300 to nearly 8,000 acres, and built a solid business on that land. He developed a gristmill, a blacksmith shop, a "small clothing factory, fisheries, and even a distillery" (McNeilly, p. 17). His innovations included switching from tobacco to wheat as a cash crop — prior to other farmers recognizing "the wisdom of doing so" — and breeding donkeys with horses to produce the mule. McNeilly notes that Washington was not only the "Father of Our Country" but also the "Father of the American Mule" (p. 17), having demonstrated that the mule was a far sturdier farm animal than either the horse or the donkey.

Historian Edward Countryman writes in Southwest Review that Washington switched from planting tobacco to planting wheat not only to earn greater profits, but also to define himself as a "farmer" rather than a "planter" (Countryman, 2009, p. 138). Washington was, in fact, taking his "first step on a lifelong trek that separated him from the Virginia way" (Countryman, p. 139). There were also other economic advantages to planting wheat. Tobacco is a fifteen-month cycle requiring "the sort of incessant labor and constant supervision that numb the worker," whereas wheat can be left to grow for long intervals "when nothing of any consequence need to be done" (Countryman, p. 139). In addition, wheat has a "multiplier effect on the local economy" — it needs to be milled, bolted, and baked — while tobacco needs only curing and packing (Countryman, p. 139).

Regarding Washington's broader business acumen, McNeilly cites numerous examples that go beyond military leadership, including what he calls "situational leadership" (p. 165). Washington had no rigid rules for applying leadership; rather, he adapted his style to the situation. When asked to lead the Constitutional Convention, instead of issuing directives and asserting power, Washington treated all the delegates from the states "as equals." He facilitated the conversation and "helped shepherd it to a successful conclusion" by encouraging "full debate" and "fostering compromise" (McNeilly, p. 165).

Further evidence of the skills Washington perfected — listening to all sides before taking a firm position and avoiding cronyism — can be found in James Thomas Flexner's George Washington and the New Nation: 1783–1793. Shortly after Washington assumed the presidency, when many details of executive and legislative conduct remained unresolved, John Adams said of him: "He seeks information from all quarters and judges more independently than any man I ever knew" (Flexner, 1969, p. 223). This observation is particularly telling given that Adams was known to be jealous of Washington's rise to the highest office in the new nation. Washington also made "practically no appointments that were based on friendship or family connection" (Flexner, p. 223). Acutely aware that as the first president his actions would set a standard for executive behavior, Washington himself said: "I walk on untrodden ground. There is scarcely any part of my conduct which may not hereafter be drawn into precedent" (Flexner, p. 221).

Washington and Slavery

At the age of forty-three, Washington left his estate at Mount Vernon in 1775 to assume command of the Continental Army. At that time he had shown "few visible qualms about the institution of slavery," according to author Fritz Hirschfeld (Hirschfeld, 1997, p. 1). A lifelong slaveholder, Washington bought and sold enslaved people to work on his plantation and accepted slave labor as an economic reality of the era. When organizing the Continental Army in Cambridge, Massachusetts, he was confronted with racial questions and was obliged to make pragmatic decisions about slavery.

Before his arrival in Cambridge, authorities had decided to allow black volunteers — both free and enslaved — into the army, but General Washington opposed this. After extensive debate with his subordinate commanders, it was decided that African Americans would not be admitted into the Continental Army. Washington's strongest objection was that if Black men served in the army, they would be free after the war and "eligible for rights and privileges equivalent to those enjoyed by whites" (Hirschfeld, p. 2). He was not prepared to go that far with a race "he had always deemed inferior," as Hirschfeld explained.

However, when Washington learned that Lord Dunmore, the last royal governor of Virginia, would free all enslaved people who "took up arms against their former masters," he had a change of heart (Hirschfeld, p. 2). With five hundred thousand enslaved people in the colonies, Washington recognized that in sheer numbers it would be foolish not to draw on the strength of thousands of Black soldiers for his army.

What Washington accomplished — unwittingly — was to set in motion "a momentous and irreversible progression of events: African-American soldiers — carrying weapons, trained in the art of war, and seasoned in combat — would no longer be considered meek and submissive slaves," as Hirschfeld asserted. The enslaved men Washington agreed to bring into the army were freed upon the conclusion of the war. Washington, driven by military necessity, thereby opened the door to emancipation after one hundred and fifty years of slavery in the young nation.

On page 124 of his book, Hirschfeld reproduces a post-war letter from Washington to the Marquis de Lafayette, a French officer of African ethnicity who had served the general with distinction during the Revolutionary War. Lafayette had written to Washington on February 5, 1783, congratulating him on winning the war. Lafayette referred to Washington as "…my dear General, my father, my best friend who I love with an affection and respect…" (Hirschfeld, p. 123). Clearly, Washington had come to know and respect Black men through the war, and the esteem was mutual. Lafayette also suggested that now that the war was over it would be a good idea to "free the Negroes." Washington responded on April 5, 1783, saying he would be "happy to join you in so laudable a work…" (Hirschfeld, p. 124).

Conclusion

There are many important facets of George Washington's service to his country that are not widely known. Too often, a student's knowledge of Washington amounts to little more than the legend of his chopping down a cherry tree and refusing to lie to his father. The real story of the nation's first president, however, is one of remarkable military leadership — overcoming British forces that far outnumbered his own — and of principled, dignified patriotism in the executive office. Today's elected officials could learn a great deal from Washington about the art of fairness, the rejection of cronyism, and the discipline of listening to all sides before acting.