Was George Washington the Indispensable Man without whom the American Revolution would have failed? Historian James Flexner thought so. He released his prize-winning biography: Washington-The Indispensable Man, in 1984. Flexner says that without Washington, there would have been no United States. He adds that Washington was an active presence in the country for 24 years. "For seventeen of those years, comprising the war, the Constitutional Convention, and the Presidency, he was from day to day actively engaged in great events." By contrast, Abraham Lincoln was on the national stage for merely six years.
Washington represented Virginia at the Second Continental Congress in 1775. He didn't have much to say. He didn't have to. He spoke through his presence. Dressed in his Virginia Militia uniform, Washington emitted gravitas. Those who didn't know him personally knew him by reputation. Many had read his Journal chronicling his 1000-mile journey in 1753 into the frozen Pennsylvania wilderness on a mission for Virginia demanding that the French leave lands claimed by Great Britain. The French refused the ultimatum.
Less than a year later, Washington was back in Pennsylvania with a second demand for the French. Both sides brought armed men with them. Gunfire erupted. Although both sides accused the other of starting the fray, the French lost 10 men, including a diplomat. Technically, a state of war now existed between the two powers. A larger French force then approached. The Virginians retreated and built a fort to defend themselves. The rickety structure, known as Fort Necessity, provided little protection. The defenders quickly ran out of food and ammunition, forcing them to surrender. The Virginians lost about 100 men, nearly one-third of their force. Washington survived the initial criticism he received for his role in the disaster.
In April of 1755, Washington joined the staff of General Edward Braddock as a volunteer aide-de-camp. General Braddock was a commander with extensive experience in European wars. He held a high opinion of himself and an equally low view of the American colonial soldier. Washington tried to convince Braddock to give him command of the colonials so that he could engage the French and their Indian allies in the hit-and-run tactics more suitable for the terrain. Braddock refused. The Brits were decimated by the French. Washington fought like a madman. Two horses were shot from under him, and his clothing was hit by at least four balls. Braddock was mortally wounded. Washington buried Braddock and got the colonials home. He emerged as a genuine hero.
For the next twenty years, Washington farmed, married, and served in various political positions. When the Continental Congress convened in 1775, not all of the delegates wanted Washington as the army's commanding general. But he was "available". He immediately left for Boston to take command of his army. Washington was not a particularly good battlefield tactician. He lost more battles than he won. However, he was a genius at conducting retreats. He could deliver a sting to his enemy and then withdraw before his enemy could recover. He understood the war on the strategic level. He knew he couldn't destroy the world's strongest army. But he understood that if he could stay a potent force, he’d wear them down and eliminate their political support.
By 1787, the fledgling nation was in trouble. Its governing document, the Articles of Confederation, was proving to be inadequate. Public debt was growing rapidly. The British were still occupying American lands in the Northwest Territory, fomenting discord. Native tribes were threatening. A convention was called to reform the Articles. The delegates quickly agreed, however, not to reform but to scrap the Articles and begin anew.
Washington was the obvious choice to preside over the convention. His mere appearance at the convention gave it legitimacy. He sought consensus and compromise. He worked behind the scenes, forging agreements on difficult issues.
The 56 delegates knew that Washington would be the first president. Because they implicitly trusted him to do the right thing when called upon, they left some of the Constitution’s provisions deliberately vague. This is especially true in Article Two, The Executive Branch. It names the president as Commander in Chief, but what powers does that declaration mean, and how does it differ from the power that the Constitution grants to Congress? Every president since Washington has jealously protected that power.
Washington was unanimously elected and re-elected as president. At the end of his second term, he declared he would not seek a third. He willingly turned over his power and retired to his plantation-an act truly rare in history.
The president had one more gift for the American people-his Farewell Address. It was in the form of a 6,100-word letter to “Friends and Fellow Citizens,” which was published in a Philadelphia newspaper. It is the distillate of more than twenty years of his experiences serving in the highest offices of government and the military. He warned his fellow citizens of the dangers of foreign alliances, of disunity, hyperpartisanship, accumulation of public debt, and the need for morality and virtue in the public sector. It is remarkable how relevant Washington’s words are today, more than 200 years later.
Each year, around Washington’s birthday, a member of the U.S. Senate is chosen by his party to read the Address on the floor of the Senate. This practice has been carried out on a regular basis since 1900. According to the Senate historian, ”no Senate tradition has been more steadfastly maintained than the annual reading of the Farewell Address.”
It would be reassuring to know that our senators took this tradition as a guideline for public service, rather than a quaint, empty, symbolic gesture.
