|
The Federalist Period, 1783-1803
Contents:
Show Summary
Hide Summary
General SummaryDespite their fundamental differences of political opinion—Jefferson being the pathfinder of Democratic principles, and Washington being, along with Hamilton, a Federalist fore-father of Republican principles—Jefferson profoundly admired and respected Washington. Both were Virginians, who had been tried and tested in the same Revolutionary fires. \n Jefferson, whom Washington had chosen to be his first Secretary of State, did not find the position congenial, and retired from the Cabinet into private life at the end of 1793. His temporary retirement was the signal for his radical adherents to attack Washington scurrilously, but there is no evidence that the sage of Monticello inspired or encouraged them. On the contrary, the accompanying eulogy, written in 1799, shortly after Washington’s death at Mount Vernon, is clear evidence of the esteem and admiration the author had for the Father of His Country.
Jefferson’s Estimate of Washington
I THINK I knew General Washington intimately and thoroughly; and were I called on to delineate his character, it should be in terms like these: His mind was great and powerful without being the very first order; his penetration strong, though not so acute as that of a Newton, Bacon or Locke; and, as far as he saw, no judgment was ever sounder. It was slow in operation, being little aided by imagination or invention, but sure in conclusion. Hence the common remark of his officers, of the advantage he derived from councils of war, where, hearing all suggestions, he selected whatever was best; and certainly, no general planned his battles more judiciously.
But if deranged during the course of the action, if any member of his plan was dislocated by sudden circumstances, he was slow in a readjustment. The consequence was that he often failed in the field, and rarely against an enemy in station, as at Boston and York. He was incapable of fear, meeting personal danger with the calmest unconcern.
Perhaps the strongest feature in his character was prudence, never acting until every circumstance, every consideration, was maturely weighed; refraining if he saw a doubt, but, when once decided, going through with his purpose, whether obstacles opposed. His integrity was most pure, his justice the most inflexible I have ever known, no motives of interest or consanguinity, of friendship or hatred, being able to bias his decision. He was, indeed, in every sense of the words, a wise, a good and a great man. His temper was naturally irritable and high-toned; but reflection and resolution had obtained a firm and habitual ascendancy over it. If ever, however, it broke its bonds, he was most tremendous in his wrath.
In his expenses he was honorable, but exact; liberal in contribution to whatever promised utility; but frowning and unyielding on all visionary projects, and all the unworthy calls on his charity. His heart was not warm in its affections; but he exactly calculated every man’s value, and gave him a solid esteem proportioned to it. His person was fine; his stature exactly what one would wish; his deportment easy, erect and noble; the best horseman of his age, and the most graceful figure that could be seen on horse-back. Although in the circle of his friends, where he might be unreserved with safety, he took a free share in conversation, his colloquial talents were not above mediocrity, possessing neither copiousness of ideas nor fluency of words. In public, when called on for a sudden opinion, he was unready, short and embarrassed. Yet he wrote readily, rather diffusely, in an easy and correct style. This he had acquired by conversation with the world, for his education was merely reading, writing and common arithmetic, to which he added surveying at a later day. His time was employed in action chiefly, reading little, and that only in agriculture and English history. His correspondence became necessarily extensive, and, with journalizing his agricultural proceedings, occupied most of his leisure hours within doors.
On the whole, his character was, in its mass, perfect; in nothing bad, in few points indifferent; and it may truly be said that never did Nature and fortune combine more perfectly to make a man great, and to place him in the same constellation with whatever worthies have merited from man an everlasting remembrance. For his was the singular destiny and merit of leading the armies of his country successfully through an arduous war, for the establishment of its independence; of conducting its councils through the birth of a Government new in its forms and principles, until it had settled down into a quiet and orderly train; and of scrupulously obeying the laws through the whole of his career, civil and military, of which the history of the world furnishes no other example….
He has often declared to me that he considered our new Constitution as an experiment on the practicability of republican government, and with what dose of liberty man could be trusted for his own good; that he was determined the experiment should have a fair trial, and would lose the last drop of his blood in support of it. I do believe that General Washington had a firm confidence in the durability of our government. I felt on his death, with my countrymen, that, "Verily a very great man hath fallen this day in Israel."
Contents:
Chicago: Thomas Jefferson, "Jefferson’s Estimate of Washington," The Federalist Period, 1783-1803 in America, Vol.4, Pp.262-265 Original Sources, accessed November 21, 2024, http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=L8HTFI7XGS424HU.
MLA: Jefferson, Thomas. "Jefferson’s Estimate of Washington." The Federalist Period, 1783-1803, in America, Vol.4, Pp.262-265, Original Sources. 21 Nov. 2024. http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=L8HTFI7XGS424HU.
Harvard: Jefferson, T, 'Jefferson’s Estimate of Washington' in The Federalist Period, 1783-1803. cited in , America, Vol.4, Pp.262-265. Original Sources, retrieved 21 November 2024, from http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=L8HTFI7XGS424HU.
|