Visiting dignitaries and an officer of the Pittsburgh garrison by this time had confirmed the roadside report on Indian unrest down the Ohio. Washington’s common sense told him he must turn back. Still, however, the spirit of the adventurous surveyor asserted itself. He would ride southward to Cheat River, which then seemed the most accessible tributary of the Monongahela. After examining the Cheat, he would proceed eastward to the North Branch of the Potomac. It was an arduous enterprise but inconvenience and hard riding in an unknown country did not weigh against curiosity and a belief that discovery of an easy, safe route would unify and enrich America.
Washington concluded that the best passage to the west would be from the North Branch by portage to Dunkard’s Bottom and down the Cheat to the Ohio. Although he was worn by his ordeal to the extent that he had to allow himself a day’s rest after he reached Fort Pleasant September 27, he counted that as nothing. The puzzle had been solved, he thought. By way of the Cheat, batteaux from the Ohio could be brought within ten miles, as he computed the distance, of water that flowed into Chesapeake Bay. The last stage of his journey was over the Alleghenies to procure from Thomas Lewis, who resided near Staunton, documents to support action for ejectment of the men occupying his land on Miller’s Run.
Washington alighted at Mount Vernon October 4. If he had little to show in money for a journey of 680 miles and a month and four days of his time, he had a reward of enthusiastic interest he had not displayed in years. Peace brought a challenge to peaceful effort as absorbing as that of war. Said he: “The more the navigation of Potomac is investigated and duly considered, the greater the advantages arising from them appear.” Obstacles existed, the General admitted, but they must be overcome—and could be. If there still was doubt concerning the best route, let it be resolved by careful surveys made at the instance of the government of Virginia, or on order of Congress. Meantime, companies might be organized and made ready to develop the Potomac—and the James also, if this second enterprise was necessary to remove jealousies and was believed to be profitable. To enlarge that new empire of the Ohio Valley, Congress, in Washington’s opinion, should purchase from the Indians sufficient land for one or two States, “fully adequate to all our present purposes,” and should sell this land at figures low enough for settlers but too high for speculators. Severest penalties should be imposed on adventurers who surveyed or attempted to settle beyond the limits of the proposed States.
To marshal arguments for presentation to Congress and the affected States was long labor for a man who composed a good letter slowly. Time was scarce, too, because of the attention the host at Mount Vernon felt he should give his guests, but Washington unflinchingly paid the price in hours for the result he hoped to achieve. Circumstance favored him. Lafayette had visited Mount Vernon in August and had left at the time Washington set out for the West. An understanding had been reached then that the Marquis would return to the estate, whence they would proceed to Richmond, Virginia, which Lafayette desired to visit again. An invitation to Richmond had come also from Gov. Benjamin Harrison, for years a friend of the retired Commander-in-Chief. Washington decided to accept and reasoned that as the General Assembly was in session, he would have an excellent opportunity of discussing with public men the improvement of the Potomac and the James.
Lafayette decided to change his route to Richmond, but Washington set out on the designated date, reached the new capital of his Commonwealth November 15 and went through ceremonials of addresses and responses. He found the General Assembly divided in support of the James and Potomac routes but willing to approve either if the other was included. Washington soon had the promise of legislators that they would take action before they adjourned. Back at home with Lafayette by the afternoon of November 24, Washington had reasons for being satisfied with the start he had made but, at the moment, the host let other matters wait while he enjoyed his guest. When Lafayette started north on the twenty-eighth, to take ship from New York, Washington went with him to Annapolis and shared festivities there. He continued with the Marquis for some distance on the road to Baltimore before turning back. “I often asked myself,” he wrote later, “. . . whether that was the last sight I ever should have of you; and though I wished to say ’No,’ my fears answered ’Yes.’ ”
Washington pressed his plea for a survey by engineers Congress employed; he renewed his suggestion for a stock company, whose capital would supplement state appropriations; and, as the legislative sessions were approaching their end in both Maryland and the Old Dominion, he urged that committees be named to confer on the drafting of identical bills. On December 19 an express from Richmond brought him the resolutions the General Assembly had passed on the thirteenth. These set forth that acts passed by Virginia and Maryland without previous consultation might not be similar; wherefore Washington, Gen. Horatio Gates and Thomas Blackburn, or any two of them, be named to confer with Maryland authorities and report to the Assembly. Washington designated December 23 as the date of the meeting, sent the express on to Annapolis, and notified Blackburn what was contemplated. By the twenty-second he was in Annapolis with the responsibility of serving as Virginia’s sole active representative. It was impossible for Blackburn to attend, and Gates had fallen sick almost immediately on arrival.
The conference progressed without hitch or halt. Unanimous recommendation was made for the survey of the various suggested routes from the Potomac to the nearest navigable streams that flowed into the Ohio. Hope was expressed that the Potomac itself could be opened as far inland as the mouth of Stony Creek. It was suggested that Maryland and Virginia each purchase fifty shares of the stock of a private company organized to develop the river and that jointly they assume the responsibility of constructing the portage roads. An initial appropriation of $3333 was advocated for each State.
The result was better than fair. The Maryland Legislature promptly passed a bill that included almost verbatim the recommendations of the commissioners. This was hurried to Washington who forwarded it to Richmond, where Virginia lawmakers adopted a similar measure January 4, 1785. Washington’s popularity undoubtedly facilitated action, and his energy and his experience were almost as influential as his prestige; but the keen eye of James Madison saw something besides this in Washington’s exertions: “The earnestness with which he espouses the undertaking is hardly to be described, and shows that a mind like his, capable of grand views, and which has long been occupied with them, cannot bear a vacancy.”
The embarrassment of a great gift came to Washington early in January: Under an act of the General Assembly of Virginia, fifty shares of the stock of the Potomac Company and one hundred shares in the James River Company were to be purchased by the Treasurer and vested in Washington, “his heirs and assigns, forever, in as effectual a manner as if the subscriptions had been made by himself or by his attorney.” A graceful preamble expressed the hope that as the public improvements sponsored by Washington would be “durable monuments of his glory,” they should be made “monuments also of the gratitude of his country.” He no more was disposed in 1785 than in 1775 to have it said that he served America for monetary reward. His impulse was to decline the stock. After long hesitation, he wrote Gov. Patrick Henry a careful letter in which he asked that so far as the law “has for its object my personal emolument [it] may not have its effect; but if it should please the General Assembly to permit me to turn the destination of the fund vested in me, from my private emolument, to objects of a public nature, it will be my study in selecting these to prove the sincerity of my gratitude for the honor conferred on me, by preferring such as may appear most subservient to the enlightened and patriotic views of the Legislature”—an arrangement the General Assembly at once approved.
Where an auspicious prospect of Potomac development was opening through the efforts of Washington, it was natural for stockholders to look to him for continued leadership. He was named President of the Potomac Company and was one of the active directors who undertook to find a mana
ger. In August the retired Commander-in-Chief began periodic inspection tours of the Potomac from Harpers Ferry to the Great Falls above Georgetown. He always encountered some disappointment but usually he found encouragement. He made it plain, all the while, that development of waterways was no substitute for the maintenance and improvement of Virginia roads.
Still another enterprise that demanded a place in Washington’s mind during 1785 was the Dismal Swamp Company which never had been developed with vigor. Management was feeble; records were lost, scattered or forgotten. A meeting proposed for May 1784 at Richmond had not been held until October. At a further meeting in May 1785, with Washington in attendance, a small loan for a term of seven years was authorized, but neither this nor a proposal for contructing a large canal through Dismal Swamp to Albemarle Sound yielded immediate result. Washington continued to believe that the lands of that region would “in time become the most valuable property in this country,” and he declined with regret to participate in a plan Henry had in hand for extensive development of the southern end of the swamp. The reason for abstaining, the General wrote in full candor, was that “it would be most advisable for me, in my situation, not to add to my present expenditures.”
Almost to be termed a calamity was hostile weather. The long, wet winter of 1784-85 was followed by what Washington described as “the most unfavorable” spring he ever knew, and an unpropitious planting season gave place to a drought that continued until August 27. The mill on Dogue Run had no water; a new insect pest sapped the corn and ruined much of the grass.
Between the backward spring and the beginning of the drought, a messenger arrived at Mount Vernon with the news that Martha’s brother, Bartholomew, and their mother, Mrs. Frances Jones Dandridge, had died within a few days of each other. Mrs. Dandridge was seventy-four and had finished her active life, but Judge Dandridge was forty-eight and had in his care the tangled estate of Jack Custis. The Judge, moreover, had served as guardian of some of Jack’s children and had a considerable debt to the General and Martha on his own account and because of a loan made in 1758 by Martha’s estate to William Dandridge. New financial distress would be involved in any arrangement of Judge Dandridge’s affairs.
The steady flow of guests to Mount Vernon was another reason for increasing financial distress. This imposition was becoming worse, not better. Some visitors came in reverence and departed in awe; an occasional guest felt disappointment because of the General’s reticence or weariness or both. Washington was especially cautious and ill at ease with men whose native speech he did not understand, but where he knew his words would not be passed on, he lost some of his military reserve. Of the succession of guests, some were interesting and distinguished, all expensive and time-consuming.
Elkanah Watson, merchant adventurer and enthusiastic advocate of canals, came to Mount Vernon in January to explain what he had seen of the waterways of the Low Countries. He was then twenty-seven and already had made a fortune that had been swept away in 1783. His impression of the General was:
He soon put me at ease, by unbending, in a free and affable conversation. The cautious reserve, which wisdom and policy dictated, whilst engaged in rearing the glorious fabric of our independence, was evidently the result of consummate prudence, and not characteristic of his nature. . . . I observed a peculiarity in his smile, which seemed to illuminate his eye: his whole countenance beamed with intelligence, while it commanded confidence and respect. . . . I found him kind and benignant in the domestic circle, revered and beloved by all around him; agreeably sociable, without ostentation; delighting in anecodote and adventures without assumption; his domestic arrangements harmonious and systematic.
The next conspicuous guest was Robert Edge Pine, whose sympathy with America had cost him a profitable business as a portraitist in England. An appealing letter of introduction by George William Fairfax was followed by one from Francis Hopkinson, a favorite of Washington’s. The Philadelphian wrote that he knew the General would rather fight a battle than sit for a portrait, but that Pine intended to make pictures of the Revolutionary War and could not do this without portraits of Washington. Washington replied, almost merrily:
In for a penny, in for a pound is an old adage. I am so hackneyed to the touches of the painters’ pencil that I am now altogether at their beck, and sit like patience on a monument while they are delineating the lines of my face. It is a proof among many others of what habit and custom can effect. At first I was as impatient at the request, and as restive under the operation as a colt is of the saddle. The next time I submitted very reluctantly, but with less flouncing. Now, no dray moves more readily to the thill than I to the painter’s chair. It may easily be conceived therefore that I yielded a ready obedience to your request and to the views of Mr. Pine.
The guest of 1785 who came on the most conspicuous mission was the French sculptor Jean Antoine Houdon. By a resolution of June 1784, the General Assembly of Virginia requested the Governor “to take measures for procuring a statue of General Washington.” Under this resolution, Thomas Jefferson, then in France, had been asked to engage an artist. Jefferson’s reply was: “There could be no question raised as to the sculptor who should be employed; the reputation of Monsieur Houdon of this city being unrivalled in Europe.” Negotiations were concluded readily, and Houdon, after a delay occasioned by illness, left for the United States in the company of Benjamin Franklin. In a letter Washington received about September 25, Doctor Franklin stated that Houdon was in Philadelphia. The General replied in a warm letter and sent a formal welcome to the sculptor.
On the night of October 2 Houdon arrived from Alexandria, with three assistants and with a French resident of the nearby town as interpreter. Several other guests already were occupying most of the spare beds, but room was made for the late comers. The next morning Houdon delivered letters from Lafayette, Jefferson and David Humphreys and began to prepare for modeling. The artist proceeded as if he did not intend to waste a day. Perhaps he saved time because he spoke no English and did not linger loquaciously over the Madeira or the tea. By the sixth, Houdon was ready to begin on the bust of Washington. That day and the next the General sat for him.
Houdon went with Washington and other guests to attend a funeral in the neighborhood on the ninth, and to the wedding of George Augustine Washington and Frances Bassett on the evening of October 15. The ceremony doubtless was sufficiently beautiful to have pleased an artist. Washington himself must have shared the romance of a union between Mrs. Washington’s niece and his nephew. After Houdon completed his work and left on October 17 the General wrote Humphreys, “I feel great obligations [to Mr. Houdon] for quitting France and the pressing calls of the Great Ones to make a bust of me from the life.” Doubtless he said as much to Houdon; doubtless the answer of the artist was urbane; but there was no au revoir, no letter of thanks from Philadelphia or from Paris, not even “I hope you like it” when the statue was finished and shipped. Houdon let the marble speak for itself. It did.
Houdon was exceptional. Other visitors were more exacting. Washington remained the generous host, and he was learning now to entrust to various persons at Mount Vernon part of the entertainment of his guests. Some relief came after July, when Washington employed William Shaw as his secretary. Even with this assistance, breakfast at seven o’clock, and the dedication of his mornings to work, Washington often left his guests for two hours between tea and supper and sometimes did not appear at the evening meal. Dinner was at 2 P.M.; nine remained his bedtime unless a visitor brought news in which he had special interest.
Washington made the best of his difficult role as national host and undoubtedly took pride in having his lands, house and table impress visitors. Improvements gave added beauty to the entire plantation. “It is impossible,” wrote Joseph Hadfield, a young Manchester merchant, “to do justice to the order and management of the General’s affairs.” The guest continued: “His large estates, cultivated in the best manner, furnish him with all the necessaries o
f life, and his revenues enabled him, as well as the presents he received from all parts, to have all the luxuries of every clime. His gardens and pleasure grounds . . . were very extensive. . . . He is allowed to be one of the best informed as well as successful planters in America.” More than one visitor got the same impression that Washington’s style of living represented great wealth. In reality, before the end of 1785 the General confessed, “to be plain, my coffers are not overflowing with money.” He never explained why it was that he scarcely ever curtailed any expenditures when income was reduced or cash depleted. His well-fed guests, drinking toasts in his champagne, would have been aghast had they known that the cash with which he was to begin 1786 was no more than £86.
Besides concern over money, Washington had in 1785 continuing and rising anxiety with respect to public affairs from which he could not divorce himself in his “retirement.” The Society of the Cincinnati remained one of these cares. Washington suspected that opposition to the Society was slumbering, not dead; the State Societies should promptly approve the revised Institution and remove all reasonable objection. He confided to Hamilton that only the involvement of foreign officers and the charitable features of the organization kept him from advocating that it be abolished. He had not a single degree of enthusiasm for the Society.
Washington’s deepest anxiety was for the Union of the States. The appeal of Congress in 1781 for the right to levy a 5 per cent tax on imports had been answered favorably by all the States except Rhode Island, but refusal of that State to say “Aye” and action of Virginia in repealing her statute of acquiescence had put an end to all hope of deriving from that measure money required for paying the interest on the Federal debt. In desperation, Congress in 1783 had submitted to the States the amendment of the Articles of Confederation to authorize the levy of specific taxes on certain imported luxuries and a 5 per cent ad valorem tax on all other goods brought into the United States. This was to be imposed for twenty-five years only and proceeds used exclusively for the payment on the war debt. A million and a half dollars for the support of government were to be supplied by the States annually, in specified amounts based on population. This measure was crowded with every sort of concession to pridefully asserted sovereignty, but Rhode Island, New York, Maryland and Georgia were in opposition. To persuade them to ratify the amendment was the task of those who believed the Union would perish unless it had assured revenue. Another measure presented to the States for approval authorized Congress for a period to prohibit imports from or exports to countries that had no commercial treaties with the United States—a plea for weapons with which to inflict reprisals on Britain for her discrimination against American ships and cargoes. Here again the compliance of the States was slow and hedged with so many provisos that Congress remained powerless in dealing with Britain. Other proposals were being made for amending the Articles, but the best of these, largely the work of James Monroe, were never passed and transmitted to the States.
Washington Page 90