Was George Washington a Flawed Man?

With the 250^th anniversary of the birth of the United States approaching, there are numerous lectures, documentaries, films, and books about the year 1776 and the Founding Fathers. George Washington is foremost among the subjects discussed. He is called The Indispensable Man by the author and historian James Thomas Flexner, a title that is still reiterated in many documentaries and lectures. He is also called by some a flawed man, deeply flawed, in fact. 

While we are all human and we all have flaws, General Washington does not seem to be, upon closer examination, excessively flawed. In studying his life, he actually appears to be exemplary, in spite of the accusations of some today.

The following are some of the criticisms lobbed at the long-passed-away first President, and some facts that show that they might be unfounded, at least in part. Here are a few of them:

1. George Washington was an evil slave owner. He did own slaves, but did not want to. He was the only one of the slave-owning Founding Fathers who freed his slaves, too. Washington grew up as the eldest son of his father’s second marriage, and his father, Augustine, died when Washington was still a child. He grew up without money and without property or slaves – as a result, he never saw slaves as property, but as the humans they were. His father’s entire estate went to the son from Augustine's first marriage, George’s half-brother, Lawrence. When Lawrence died, the estate went to Lawrence’s wife and daughter. Then they died (a rather common and unfortunate occurrence in the 18^th century), and George then inherited Mount Vernon, and slaves. When he married Martha Custis, even more slaves came with her. And he always felt uncomfortable about that institution. He once confided to his estate manager, “I every day long to get clear of my slaves.” As commander of the Continental Army who fought for their own freedom from servitude to England’s King George III, he saw the hypocrisy of owning slaves. As a result, though he felt by law he could not free them yet as he wished, he encouraged his slaves to marry and rear families, promising them that he would never sell them unless they requested it, and that he would free them upon his death.¹

It is important to understand that in the 18^th century, an owner of slaves in Virginia was not allowed by law to simply free them at will. The laws were stringent and even harsh – for the slaves as well as for their masters. A man could only free his slaves at his passing, and a woman had no power at all. Her estate (like Martha Washington’s estate from her first husband), including any slaves, went to the woman’s closest male heir. Slave owners could also free one from servitude if the slave was able to procure his freedom by earning money to purchase his liberty. The slaveowner could also free a slave for meritorious service after many years – usually when the slave became too old or infirm to work. The law also stipulated that a slave had to be able to support himself (or herself) when granted freedom. Were Washington to abruptly free all of his slaves without any of the above stipulations, he would have broken the law – something the law-abiding Washington would never do. The documentation for these laws can be easily verified by searching the Internet.² 

Washington managed to help at least two slaves acquire freedom while he was in New York as President. One young man quickly left his servitude as Washington deliberately turned his back to allow him to escape. Another, a woman who had been a cook at Mount Vernon, was not only freed in New York, but Washington helped set her up in business as a baker and owner of a grocery store in Manhattan.³

It is true that one young woman, a personal slave to Mrs. Washington, had escaped with a man with whom she fell in love. Martha was upset by her escape, since the slave was just seventeen years old, and insisted that her husband do whatever he could to retrieve her. Washington published the account in the newspaper to satisfy his wife. The escaped slave was never found. This leads us to our next issue.

2. George Washington only married Martha Custis for her money, because he was in love with another woman, Sally Fairfax. George Washington did love Sally Fairfax. He also greatly esteemed, even loved, her husband, Lord Fairfax.

George had a decidedly difficult childhood after the death of his father. He was just eleven years old when Augustine died. Without any funds set aside for him, he received no formal education. Washington’s mother, Mary Ball Washington, was a difficult woman. She depended on George for money and continually badgered him to earn a living for her. George worked as a surveyor for a time, and then joined the British army during the French and Indian War. No matter what he accomplished, however, his mother always wanted more, and never stopped harping on him.⁴

The British aristocrat Lord Fairfax and his beautiful wife, Sally, took a liking to George when he was in his teens, and took him into their confidence. Washington’s half-brother Lawrence had married into the Fairfax family. Sally taught George how to behave among the people in society, and Lord Fairfax often invited him to their home, Belvoir.

It was not a surprise that George would become devoted to both of them. Sally apparently knew George had a crush on her – the first woman to pay him any positive attention – and she enjoyed it immensely. She was, however, ten years older and married. Always fastidious of proper etiquette and obedience to law – moral as well as temporal – George never acted inappropriately toward her. When he married Martha, the Fairfaxes took her into their circle as well. It is important to note, too, that when the Revolutionary War began, the Fairfaxes left for England, never to return. Washington kept up a correspondence with them for the rest of his life.⁵

Martha Dandridge Custis was a lovely, vivacious woman, who married George when she was 27 and he was a month away from that same age. She had been married before, and by all accounts had deeply loved her husband, who was nearly twenty years older than she was. Her husband, Daniel Parke Custis, had died after a brief illness. She had married him at age 17, and by age 25 was a sought-after, wealthy widow who was expected to marry again.⁶ 

When she and George Washington met at the home of a friend in the spring of 1758, the attraction was instant and mutual. They were engaged within a few months and the marriage took place on New Year’s Day in 1759.

There are only a few letters that survive of their correspondence, but each one from George to Martha begins with “My Dearest”. Contrarily, letters to his mother begin with “Esteemed Madam”. During the war, George always invited his wife to join him in winter camp. 

To consider the notorious Valley Forge in the winter of 1777-1778 as unpleasant is an understatement, yet Martha came, and George relished her presence. People who saw them together in the camp commented on how happy they seemed together. Some of these witness letters are published in a series of books found at the U.S. Army War College.⁷

He loved her. They were happily married for forty years. We shouldn’t allow likenesses of her as an elderly woman to influence us as to what she looked like in her younger years.

3. George Washington was so arrogant that he wore his military uniform so he could command the Continental Army. Washington was a military man. He was already known for his bravery and ability to lead troops during the French and Indian War. Because he was American, the British refused to promote him as a general officer – only native Britons could hold that rank. When the Continental Congress met in Philadelphia on May 10, 1775, relations with Great Britain were at an abominably low point. The Intolerable Acts had rendered the colonists burdened and resentful, the Boston Massacre and the Boston Tea Party were still fresh in their minds, and the Battle of Lexington and Concord had recently taken place. The people were incensed and ready to fight. The delegates named Washington on that day as the man they wanted to lead the American army. He wore his militia uniform to the meeting, as he was almost assuredly told that they were considering him. Likely some of the delegates persuaded Washington to wear his uniform to the meeting, as he was already well known for his capability. He would not disappoint them in the coming years with his military prowess.

During the war, Washington wrote to James Warren, and proclaimed, “Our cause is noble. It is the cause of Mankind! And the danger to it springs from ourselves – Shall we slumber & sleep then while we should be punishing those miscreants who have brought these troubles upon us & who are aiming to continue us in them?”⁸

Like the rest of the Founders, and including the signers of the Declaration of Independence, Washington knew that by fighting the British, he was potentially signing his own death sentence. Yet, he felt the cause for which he fought was worth the risk. Rather than arrogance, his willingness to lead the untried and unready Continental Army sounds instead like great courage.

When, after the war, the new Constitutional Republic was put in place, George Washington was chosen to preside over the Constitutional proceedings in Philadelphia in 1787. The choice of Washington was unanimous. And, when enough colonies ratified the Constitution, and a President was needed, the choice for Washington to take that office was also unanimous. And he reluctantly took it. After two terms he willingly left the office and went home. He could have reigned as a king, but instead went home and retired to farm life – the antithesis of arrogance or a quest for power. 

When during the war, his men were suffering, intrigues abounded, and some tried to remove him from power, yet Washington kept silent. He had amazing fortitude to watch his tongue. No greatly flawed man would be able to keep up that reticence.

4. Washington had a terrible temper. Most great military leaders have tempers. Washington at times exploded with anger, but those moments were rare. Robert E. Lee had a temper, though he, like Washington, did his best to control it. So did George Meade. His men called him the goggle-eyed old snapping turtle for good reason. But look what they accomplished. Dwight D. Eisenhower had quite a temper too. But he defeated Hitler, and was a tremendous world leader.

With the terrible trials Washington endured, including watching his soldiers suffer unspeakable privations, as civilians sold their goods and cozied up to the British, it was something difficult to endure. When his men, who were yet untried, ran away from the British in New York in September 1776, he was seen throwing down his hat and exclaiming, “Are these the men with whom I am to defend America?”⁹

Washington believed in the prospect of America so greatly that he had no room in his heart for cowardice. He instilled bravery in those he led, and he led them eventually to victory.

Thomas Jefferson, Washington’s Secretary of State, described him in a letter that is found in the Library of Congress: “His mind was great and powerful…and as far as he saw, no judgment was ever sounder. It was slow in operation, being little aided by invention or imagination, but sure in conclusion…and certainly no General ever planned his battles more acutely. His temper was naturally 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. 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 horseback. 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.”¹⁰

We need to be careful how we judge who lived in the past, where laws were different, where documentation has holes, and where the person vilified cannot defend.

In studying George Washington in depth, one finds that he was not flawed, but instead quite an amazing human being. We have a country still functioning 250 years later largely because of him. And that should suffice to be grateful instead of criticize someone who did so much for so many generations.

Please pass the word.

Sources: Boyle, Joseph Lee. Writings from the Valley Forge Encampment of the Continental Army, Dec. 19, 1777-June 19, 1778. Vol. 1, Bowie, MD: Heritage Books, Inc. 2000. Brady, Patricia. Martha Washington: An American Life. New York: Penguin Books, 2005. Flexner, James Thomas. George Washington: The Indispensable Man. New York: Penguin Books, 1984 (reprint, first published in 1969). The George Washington Society, founders.archives.gov. Jefferson, Thomas. “A Description of George Washington.” Library of Congress, loc.gov. Marshall, John. The Life of George Washington. Indianapolis, IN: Liberty Fund, Inc. 2000 (reprint, first published in 1838). Paddleford, Clementine. “A Cake for George Washington.” Ladies Home Journal, 1958. Parry, Jay A. and Andrew M. Allison. The Real George Washington. American Classic Series vol 3. Washington, D.C. National Center for Constitutional Studies, 1991. Virginia Slave Laws 1700s, digitalhistory.uh.edu.

End Notes:

1. Parry, pp. 80, 446-447. 

2. Virginia Slaves Laws, 1700s, digitalhistory.uh.edu. 

3. Paddleford, “A Cake for George Washington”,  Ladies Home Journal, February 1958. The former kitchen slave Washington helped to set up in business in Manhattan was named Mary Simpson.        4. Flexner, p. 21. Brady, p. 69. 

5. Brady, pp. 62-63. 

6. Ibid. pp. 49-50. 

7. Boyle, pp. 31, 55. 

8. The George Washington Society, founders.archives.gov. 

9. Flexner, pp. 83-84. 

10. Jefferson, “A Description of George Washington.” Loc.gov.