... ,

.::r Neyer ~ That Man Laugh.tQ ~ His Teeth": RelatiQnships between Whites alli! Blacks at GeQrge WashingtQn's MQunt vernQn

NOT TO BE REPRODUCED OR QUOTED

WITHOUT THE PERMISSION OF

THE AUTHOR AND

THE MOUNT VERNON LADIES' ASSOCIATION

At the conclusion of his lengthy and sometimes lyrical description oi George Washington's beloved Mount Vernon, visitor Jedidiah Morse closed with the words:

"Such are the philosophic shades to which the late Commmander in Chief of the

American Armies has retired from the tumultuous scenes Qf a busy world" (from

"The American Geography"). Despite its beautiful and impressive setting, however,

life at George Washington's beloved horne was far from idyllic. By 1799, Mount

Vernon was an estate of approximately 8,000 acres, which were horne tQ slightly

more than 300 individuals, living in rather dense little clusters, on five separate

farms. The inevitable tensions Qf living in close proximity to the same people with

whom one had to work for ten to sixteen hours a day were exacerbated by the subtle

and not-so-subtle strains associated with the institution of slavery. For all the

residents of Mount Vernon, relationships were both defined and complicated by issues of race and social status.

I.M WashingtQns as Master and Mistress

For many 20th century Americans, George WashingtQn is the quintessential

1 ·"

leader, the charismatic head of a rebel army, who was able, through the sheer force

of his personality and his embodiment of an ideal, to keep together a poorly

equipped and ill-prepared army, until its eventual triumph over the greatest military

power of the day. Because of the nature of their relationship, the slaves who labored for him at his home, however, saw at once the same and a very different man.

While it is only in rare instances that the voices of these slaves can actually tell what they thought of the man they served, their message is powerful.

According to one member of Congress, George Washington organized his plantation much the way he had his army during the Revolution (see Figure ---->. Senator William Maclay cattily noted in his diary a bit of gossip passed on by an acquaintance who had visited Mount Vernon:

"[Mount Vernonl..is under different overseers, who may be

styled generals, under whom are grades of subordinate

appointments descending down through whites, mulattoes, negroes, horses, cows, sheep, hogs, etc.; it was hinted all were

named. The crops to be put into the different fields, etc., and the hands, horned-eattle, etc. to be used in tillage, pasturing,

etc., are arranged in a roster calculated for ten years. The

Friday of every week is appointed for the overseers, or we will

say the brigadier-generals to make up their returns. Not a

day's work but is noted; what. by whom, and where done; not a cow calves or a ewe drops a lamb but it is registered; death, etc., whether accidental or by the hands of the butcher, all

minuted. Thus the etiquette and arangement of an army are

preserved on his farm ...... (Early Descriptions Notebook, Journal

Qf William Maclay, 1789-1791).

2 I}~~------

,.,

Organization Char1 Qf 1M Mount Vernon Plantation

George Washington

I Martha Washington

I . Secretaries & Estate Supenntendant Housekeeper Tutors (hired whites) and/or Stewards (hired whites) (hired whites and/or slaves)

Farm Overseers Artisans Gardener's Carpenters, bricklayers, Wife (hired whites and slaves) blacksmiths, gardeners, (wife of millers, weavers, etc. hired (hired whites) white)

1, Grain Cradlers & Artisans House Servants, Spinners, Carpenters, bricklayers, Knitters, Seine Makers (hired Cooks, Dairy whites) & cool?ers, shoemakers, Maids, Seamstresses drivers, postillions, (slaves) Field Workers Washwomen (slaves) ditchers, gardeners, (slaves) millers, etc. (slaves)

" Maclay was not the only one of Washington's contemporaries to make a connection between his organization and management of Mount Vernon and his military

experience. A former neighbor, Englishman Richard Parkinson, believed that keeping order on a plantation required the same "severe discipline" as an army and credited

Washington's success at managing slaves not only to his industrious, methodical

nature, but also to his "being brought up in the army" (Parkinson, Tour in America, p.436).

Washington was very much a "hands-on" manager, who kept close watch on all aspects of the plantation, from how well various crops were doing to whether the

clothes being made for the slaves were of the correct type. Thoughts of his

plantation were never far from his mind. During a visit with the family of one of

Mrs. Washington's granddaughters in the new Federal City, for instance, he SUddenly

set out for Mount Vernon "between seven and eight o'clock in the morning in a great hurry to see the effect the last rains had had on his fields", leaving his wife and a foreign guest to get back at a more decorous pace (Niemcewicz, Vine & fig ~,

5/1798). One of the best illustrations of just how personally involved Washington

could get comes from the reminiscences of an assistant to sculptor Jean Antoine

Houdon, who visited Mount Vernon in the fall of 1785. Known as Beglair, the

Frenchman was watching the harvest of a crop, when one of the slaves reported that

he was unable to work because his arm. which had been injured, was in a sling.

According to Beglair, Washington put one hand in his pocket and raked with the

other, admonishing the slave to watch him: .....Since you still have one hand free. you can guide a rake. See how I do it: I have one hand in my pocket and with the other

I work. If you can use your hand to eat, why can't you use it to work?" (translation by Jean M. Marrengale, from Les carnets de David d'Angers, publies pour la premiere fois avec une introduction par Andre Bruer. Paris, 1958, pp. 133-134, quoted

3 in a letter from Mrs. Jean M. Marrengale to Mr. Charles C. Wall, the Resident Director of Mount Vernon, 3/27/1976).

Washington's "hands-on management style" may have formed during his years

with the army in the French and Indian War, but it was perfected on the plantation

prior to the Revolution, and reached its highest development after that war. An

early letter to a military subordinate, written when Washington was only twenty-six. hinted at the mature style to come:

"...you will take care therefore to keep up Discipline at the

same time [sic] use lenity, to prevent discontent and Desertion.

Be vigilent, and keep your Men Sober observe Order and

Regularity in the Garrison; which keep clean and wholesome;

and as your numbers will be few, keep a regular and strict watch ..." (GW to Lieutenant Charles Smith, 6/24/1758).

These instructions, so appropriate for the small and struggling army on the frontier,

would have applied equally well to Washington's plantation thirty years later, where

the white population was outnumbered by slaves by a factor of about ten to one.

Twenty years after the just-quoted letter, as commanding general of the

Continental Army during the Revolution, Washington continued to keep a "regular and strict watch" on those he led. He frequently observed details which concerned him and consequently ordered changes in routine practices, which might seem unworthy of notice to a modern commanding officer. By way of comparison,

Washington was in roughly the same position as General Dwight Eisenhower in the

Second World War, with charge over the military forces, including not only the army, but the navy and marines, as well, of more than one country. Granted there had been changes in military organization over the years and "Ike" was dealing with

4 a considerably larger force, but try to imagine him taking the time to write the following: "The General in riding thro' the Incampment, observing that many huts

were covered with tents whilst Chimneys were building to others, again repeats his Orders to have the Tents delivered up the moment the Huts are, or can be

completed, .." (OW, General Orders, 1/6/1778). Very early in the war, Washington had

ordered that "Necessarys lsicl...be filled up once a Week, and new ones dug; the

Streets of the encampments and Lines to be swept daily, and all Offal and Carrion,

near the camp, to be immediately burned: The Officers commanding in Barracks, or

Quarters, to be answerable that they are swept every morning, and all Filth and Dirt

removed from about the houses ..." (GW, General Orders, 7/14/1775). Several years later, at another location, he directed that "Vaults for Necessaries...be immediately sunk, the Offal at the slaughtering pens...be buried and the dead horses removed or buried" (7/3/1778). When some of the men balked at the idea of carrying their

cooking kettles, rather than simply tossing them into a wagon, Washington suggested

that they "have recourse to the expedient 0,£ converting the old tents unfit for use, into bags large enough to contain the kettles, that with proper belts or slings of the tent cloth itself or of leather...they might be carried at the mens [sic] backs. As these bags will have to bear little weight they are not liable to the same objection as the forage bags" (GW to Colonel Timothy Pickering, 2/10/1781). No matter was too small to escape the Commander's attention, including the personal habits of his troops.

During the sojourn at Morristown, the army was greeted one day with the news that "The General orders that no Soldier shall bath [sic] in the heat of the day, nor stay long in the water at a time" (OW, General Orders, 7/5/1777). Those orders were, apparently, too nebulous, so about a year later, Washington directed that none of his troops remain "longer than ten minutes in the Water" (GW, General Orders, 5/14/1778).

5 For most of the years he was in residence at Mount Vernon. George

Washington made a daily circuit of his farms. While he may not have gotten to each

of the five every day. in the course of a week he would check progress at each and

later recorded his observations in a diary. In a letter to a friend following his

retirement from the presidency. he described his daily schedule:

"...1 begin my diurnal course with the Sun ...if my hirelings are

not in their places at that time I send them messages expressive

of my sorrow for their indisposition: then having put these

wheels in motion. I examine the state of things further...by the time I have accomplished these matters. breakfast...is ready.

This over. I mount my horse and ride round my farms. which

employs me until it is time to dress for dinner. .." (GW to the Secretary of War. 5/29/1797. See Figure __ . For an example

of nephew Bushrod Washington occupied in a similar practice.

see the article on Mount Vernon in the Early Descriptions Notebook. from The Cyclopedia ill: Useful Knowledge. dated prior to 1829).

This description was echoed many years later by one of his former slaves. who told a

19th century tourist to Mount Vernon that the "sun never caught him [George

Washington] in bed and he was unwilling it should find any of his people sleeping" (Parley's Magazine. "Visit to Mount Vernon." 10/1838).

George Washington kept such close personal watch on the plantation in order to prevent problems from occuring or, if they had begun. to stop them at an early stage. before things went seriously wrong. As he reminded a new farm manager in the fall of 1793. nothing was inconsequential. It was necessary to look into "the smaller matters belonging to the Farms; which, though individually may be trifling,

6 ..

.~

-. ~-..

..

.-. are not found so in the agregate; for there is no add age more true than an old Scotch

one, that "many mickles make a muckle." He complained of one hired white overseer

that the man was too much of a social creature. both making and receiving frequent

visits from friends. Such behaviour took his attention from his business. leaving the

slaves on the farm to their own devices. Little work was done and several slaves were punished as a consequence. something which would not. in Washington's

opinion. have been necessary if the overseer had done his job properly. Besides being

unpleasant. Washington realized that punishment, or "correction," would never replace the time that was lost and often led to "evils which are worse than the disease" (OW to the Overseers at Mount Vernon. 7/14/1793;GW to William Pearce, 12/18/1793). In a similar vein, he cautioned another overseer that "...he must stir early and late. as I expect my people will work from daybreaking until it is dusk in the evening; and. that the only way to keep them at work without severity. or wrangling, is always to be with them" (GW to Anthony Whiting. 116/1793).

Overseers and other supervisors at Mount Vernon were required to report weekly, in writing, to their employer about work done on the farms under their care. how many man-days were required for each task. and how much time was lost to illness. These reports were given to Washington at the end of the week. or to the farm manager, if he was away from home. Though often busy with national affairs. Washington admitted that he was "anxious for thelsel weekly remarks". While chairing the Constitutional Convention. he asked one manager. his nephew George Augustine Washington, to transcribe the overseers' reports "between Saturday and

Monday Night." so that they could be in the mail by Tuesday morning and get to him in Philadelphia by Friday (GW to George Augustine Washington. 5/17/1787. For other references to weekly reports. see GW to Anthony Whiting, 1lI4/1792: GW to the Overseers at Mount Vernon. 7/14/1793. See also Figure _). Washington

7 advised that the reason he wanted the reports was not for "mere curiosity, or

gratification of the moment; but that I may see into, and be informed of the State of

things at any past period, by having recourse to them herafter; as they are all preserved" (GW to Anthony Whiting. 3/24/1793).

He routinely questioned his farm managers about how the crops were coming.

the status of various assignments. and whether the plantation's work force was being

kept sufficiently busy. Their answers. however. often did not contain enough detail

to satisfy him and. on at least two occasions, Washington gave explicit instructions to his farm managers about his desired method for responding to letters. To a young nephew who was temporarily managing the estate. he advised:

"Directions will forever escape you. unless you keep a

pocket memorandum book to refresh the memory; and

questions asked (in my letters) will often go unanswered unless. when you are about to write. the letter is 1lJ&n. not only read over. but all the parts. as you read on. is noted.

either on a piece of waste paper. or a Slate which require

to be touched upon in your answr [sic]" (GW to Anthony Whiting. 2/3/1793).

The following year. a recently-hired manager was given similar instructions. with the additional suggestion that. in making a reply. "note after note. as the contents are inserted in your letter. is scratched out." This method would guarantee that "no part of a long letter can ever escape notice by not carrying the whole in your memory. when you sit down to write. or by being called off while you are writing it" (GW to

William Pearce, 8/31/1794). These stipulations are particularly interesting for the light they shed on how Washington very likely kept track of his own voluminous correspondence. on subjects ranging from the theory and practice of agriculture to

8 . ,

family gossip, where to find housewares at the best price, fashions in interior

decorating, and the permutations of politics. Several small memorandum books kept

by the Washingtons, and similar to that mentioned in above, were preserved by Mrs. Washington's descendants.

There is no question that Washington was a stickler for detail. During the

presidency, he wrote his farm manager frequently, often complaining about the lack

of certain facts he needed from Mount Vernon: "...I wanted to know the quantity

[of potatoes] which grew in each lot. and in a particular manner, the quantity that

grew among the Corn at that place; that I might see and compare the Crop of Corn

and the Crop of Potatoes together; but it would seem as if my blundering Overseers would forever put it out of my power to ascertain facts from the accuracy of

experiments ..." (GW to William Pearce, 11/23/1794). He would also question

information given in the weekly reports. In the summer of 1793, nephew Howell Lewis, then acting as temporary manager of the estate, was directed to pay closer

attention to what he wrote in his reports:

"...I see by the Report respecting the Ditchers that one of them

is working at Union farm in the room of Cupid; but no mention

is made of the latter, whether Sick, absent, or dead ...In the

Mansion house report you make Godrey sick six days, (which is

the whole week), and yet. he appears to be engaged in business

some part of the week. I mention these matters not with a view to find fault, but to shew [sic] the advantages of

correctness ..." (GW to Howell Lewis, 8/18/1793).

This incredible capacity for registering detail was noted in several tales related

by former slaves. Many years after his master's death, one "venerable old colored

9 man, 77 years of age" remembered that the "slaves...did not quite like" Washington.

primarily because "he was so exact and so strict.... The most close attention must be

paid to the condition of all the roads, fences. buildings. &c.; and if a rail. a clapboard.

or a stone was permitted to remain out of its place. he complained; sometimes in language of severity". Perhaps to soften the effect of his recollections on his white

audience, the old man added that Washington was "however...a most excellent man"

(10/1838."Visit to Mount Vernon," Parley's Magazine). Many years after the fact,

Sambo Anderson, a slave carpenter at Mount Vernon, gave an example of how this attention to detail led to additional work for himself:

"...At one time, when he was building a corn house at Mount Vernon, he had the frame up and was setting the studding at

the gable ends, but had not been particular to use his plumb. His master came riding along, and glancing at the building,

said, "Sarnbo, that studding is not plumb; knock it off and use

your plumb, and always do your work correctly." Sambo told

me that he did not believe any man could have told the defect with his naked eye but his master, "but," said he, "his eye was

a perfect plumb ball ...... (from "Mount Vernon Reminiscences Continued," in Alexandria Gazette, 1/22/1876).

A number of Washington's contemporaries described a fierce temper lurking

just beneath a generally calm surface. Martha Washington's grandson was raised at

Mount Vernon by the Washing tons and when, as an adult, he was asked whether

"children felt at home" with his step-grandfather, he replied that though he was always kind, they "felt they were in the presence of one. who was not to be trifled with ...." (Augusta Blanche Berard to Mrs. Mary Berard. quoted in "Arlington and

Mount Vernon, 1856,"Virginia Magazine Q.( History and Biography, April 1949, p.

10 162). Two of the best-known artists to capture Washington's likeness took note of his temper, as well. Jean Antoine Houdon's famous bust of Washington was based on his subject's appearance during a disagreement with a horse trader who, Washington

believed, was trying to take advantage of him (See Figure _; also Gustavus A.

Eisen, Portraits Qf Washington, p. 761). About a decade later, a visitor from England discussed the American president's physical appearance with artist Gilbert Stuart,

who had recently painted what was to become the most popular portrait of George Washington:

.....All his features ...were indicative of the strongest and

most ungovernable passions, and had he been born in the forests it was his [Stuart's] opinion that he would have

been the fiercest man amongst the savage tribes. In this Mr. Stuart has given a proof of his great discernment and intimate knowledge of the human countenance; for

although General Washington has been extolled for his

great moderation and calmness, during the very trying

situations in which he has so often been placed, yet those

who have been acquainted with him the longest and most

intimately say, that he is by nature a man of a fierce and

irritable disposition; but that, like Socrates, his judgment

and great self-command have always made him appear a man of a different cast in the eyes of the world" (Black

Research Notebook on "George Washington:Personal

Items", from Isaac Weld, Jr.'s, Travels Through the

States Qf North America, circa 1796).

Some time after Washington's death, Thomas Jefferson, his former Secretary of

State, who had known and worked with him for years, wrote a lengthy and detailed

11 "

t

; HOUDON'S BUST OF WASHJNGTON description of his personality, in which he mentioned the temper which could so

suddenly erupt: "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" (from the Black Research Notebook on "George Washington: Personal Items," Thomas Jefferson to Dr. Walter Jones, 1/2/1814,quoted in William Alfred Bryan's George Washington in American Literature, 1775-1865,pp, 49-50),

The "severity" of Washington's language toward those who worked for him, mentioned briefly above by the slave who recorded Washington's concern with loose clapboards and downed fence rails, was recalled by several people who knew him privately, and seems to have affected hired whites. as well as slaves. Richard

Parkinson noted his amazement at the "utterance of his [Washington's] words" the first time he observed his famous neighbor interacting with the slaves at Mount

Vernon, for he "spoke as differently as if he had been quite another man, or had been in anger. .." (Richard Parkinson, Im!r in America. pp. 419-420). The wife of the British ambassador, who had visited the Washingtons both officially in Philadelphia and at home in Virginia, wrote in her journal that the American president, whom she had grown to admire very much, tended to control his emotions, or "passions," in public, "but in private and particularly with his servants, its violence sometimes broke out" (Mrs. Henrietta Liston, Journal, p. 515, quoted in James Flexner, George

Washington: Anguish and Farewell. 1793-1799,p. 435n.). Perhaps it was for this reason that another acquaintance noted that Washington's servants "seemed to watch his eye and to anticipate his every wish; hence a look was equivalent to a command"

(Transcript in the research notebook on Early Descriptions Prior to 1800, from Men

& Times Q[ the Revolution or Memoirs Q[ Elkanah Watson, edited by Winslow C. Watson, editor, p. 278).

12 · , , .

While his family and colleagues could certainly attest to Washington's temper,

it did not have the same implications for them as for servants. either free or slave,

who were occasionally the targets of that anger. White servants risked losing their jobs, housing, and food allowance, however, because skilled labor was often in short supply, especially in cities, they could usually find a new employer within a fairly

short time or go into business for themselves, For a slave. on the other hand, the

situation was more perilous. A master who was angry with a slave could punish him physically. abolish privileges such as visits by relatives or trips outside the plantation,

or sell him away from everyone he knew, family and friends alike, In other words, the consequences for a slave were considerably worse than for a workman who was free,

The grim possibilities suggested by Washington's temper are modified somewhat when one considers other aspects of his interactions with the slaves at Mount Vernon,

Perhaps chief among these considerations is the fact that Washington, like many

other slave owners in late 18th century Virginia, took a rather paternalistic view of the slaves who labored for him, Unlike other parts of the New World, slave owners

in the Chesapeake were not generally absentee landlords, for whom slaves were

simply the machinery by which they raised cash crops, On the contrary, masters in

the Chesapeake usually lived on the plantation they owned and, thus, came to know

the black population quite well (see Kolchin, American Slavery 1619-1887,59-61), By the end of his life, George Washington had been the proprietor of Mount Vernon for

over 50 years and had known as many as three generations of the same slave

families, As with other slave owners of this period, he knew the slaves on his

plantation as individuals, with their own quirks. talents, and proclivities, They were

neither an abstract concept nor automata to him.

13 As did others of his social class, Washington habitually referred to the slaves at Mount Vernon, and the hired whites, as well, as part of his family. For instance, in

May of 1795, he wrote to his farm manager, after learning of the deaths of two slaves: "...1 am sorry to find by your last reports that there has [sic] been two deaths

in the family since 1 left Mount Vernon; and one of them a young fellow. 1 hope

every necessary care and attention was afforded him..." (OW to William Pearce,

5/10/1795). Martha Washington, too, typically spoke of the slaves at Mount Vernon as members of her family. She informed a friend, several months after her husband's death, that "...we have had an uncommon sickly autumn; all my family whites, and Blacks, have been very sick, many of them very ill-thank god [sic] they have all recovered again and 1 was so fortunate as not [to] loose [sic] any of them ..."

(MW to Mrs. Tobias Lear, Sr., 11111/1800,quoted in Decatur, Private Affairs Qf Washington, p. 306).

Similar use of the term "family" to refer to everyone in the household, including hired help, was common in New England at this same period. According to historian Jane Nylander, the inclusion of servants in the term "family" reflected paternalism, for they were not considered equals, but it also spoke of mutual responsibility. While servants, and one can extrapolate to include slaves, were providing services to their employer's family, they were given, in turn, services by that family such as care when sick, clothing, a dwelling of some sort, food, and, if they were free, wages. Employers or masters were also responsible, not unlike parents, for the behaviour of the people in their employ, within the larger community (Nylander, Our Own Snllg Fireside, pp. 41-43). While the physical facts of their Iives-the type of work they did, how they were housed, clothed, and fed--may have been similar for free people, whether whites or blacks, and slaves, there was, however, a major difference. Free workmen generally made a contract

14 with their employer and differences in those contracts suggest that some negotiating went on between the two before a contract was signed. A slave, on the other hand. could not generally reject a master and his job as unacceptable and there was no signed contract.

Paternalism might have softened the treatment given to slaves in the 18th century Chesapeake. but it also created a problem for them. The master or mistress

who looked at an adult slave as someone who needed to be taken care of essentially

saw that person as a child who was incapable of looking after him or her self. In other words. they were seen as perpetual children. not as adults with the capacity for earning a living and making decisions on their own. Aside from the unfairness of such a view on the part of a master, it also threatened the self-view of the slaves. some of whom may well have felt that they could not make it as free men.

This. perhaps. explains the situation at Mount Vernon about a year after

George Washington's death. At that time. while making plans to free her late husband's slaves. Martha Washington confided in an old friend that she was terribly worried about what would become of them:

.....one hundred and fifty of them are now to be liberated. men

with wives & young children who have never seen an acre

beyond the farm are now about to quit it. and go adrift into the world without horse Home or Friend. Mrs. Washington is distrest for them ...and very many of them are already

misirable [sic] at the thought of their Lot....She feels a parent &

a wife ..;" (Abigail Adams to Mrs. Richard Cranch, 12/21/1800).

Evidence from other sources contradicts several particulars in this account by showing that slaves at Mount Vernon travelled away from the plantation to sell

15 · .

produce from their gardens and things they had made, as well as to contract

marriages with people on other estates. While they may not have had horses and

would soon be leaving their homes, they had work skills and a network of both

whites and blacks in the neighborhood as business associates, relatives, and friends.

The Mount Vernon slaves were, thus, hardly in the position of small children being

abandoned in the woods. The irony, of course, is that the Washingtons, like others of their class, had themselves been cared for and supported by these slaves. Both Mrs.

Washington and the slaves who were worried at the thought of gaining their freedom

failed to see that they were dependent on one another. All were victims of

paternalism and the consequences did not end with emancipation. After they were

freed, some of the former Mount Vernon slaves did quite well for themselves,

buying land, and supporting their families (Conversation with Shawn Costley, a

descendant of former Mount Vernon slaves, Davy and Edy Jones, 9/30/1994. See also

"Mount Vernon Reminiscences," Alexandria Gazette, 1118/1876, 1122/1876, 1125/1876).

Even though they had skills, however, others seem to have had trouble adjusting to

life as free men. According to Martha Washington's grandson, "many ...with a view

to their liberation, had been instructed in mechanic trades, yet they succeeded very

badly as freemen: so true is the axiom, "that the hour which makes a man a slave, takes half his worth away"" (GWPC, Recollections, p. 158).

In his dealings with the Mount Vernon slaves, Washington's sternness was also

counteracted to at least a small degree by his sense of humor, although he never

seems to have given way completely to mirth. The reader can almost hear him

chuckling in a letter to a family friend concerning the health of a young slave who

had been bitten by a dog and treated for rabies. According to Washington. the young

man now "placed such confidence in his Doctors. [sic] skill, that he wou'd not again

dispair of being cured of a mad dog; if the Hydrophoby was strong upon him." (GW

16 to George Washington Motier Lafayette. 12/5/1797). In the 1830s, a visitor to Mount

Vernon spent several minutes talking with an elderly former slave near

Washington's tomb. The two men discussed the burial of 100 slaves or "people of colour" in the area in front of the Washington family vault. Their rather disjointed conversation continued for some minutes, when the old man remarked about his former master that "I never see that man laugh to show his teeth-he done all his laughing inside" (Early Descriptions Notebook. "Tomb of Washington." from The

Rhetorical Reader, 1838). While Washington may well have been self-conscious about his teeth, which were a source of pain and concern for much of his life, this description also suggests that he was consciously trying to keep up a certain stern front.

The reserve noted by this former slave was consistent with Washington's habitual manner with whites of his own social class. Again and again in descriptions left by those who came to know him. the same picture is painted, regardless of the race or social status of the person writing. To a German count, who came to America during the Revolution, Washington appeared "very distant" and sparing of words (see

Chinard, letter of Hans-Axel, the Comte de Fersen, 1780, p. 62). About a decade later. the wife of Vice President John Adams found the newly-elected president to be

"a singular example of modesty and diffidence. He has a dignity which forbids

Familiarity mixed with an easy affibility which creates Love and Reverence" (Abigail Adams to her sister, Mrs. Cranch, 7/12/1789,printed in New Letters cl Abigail

Adams). A Philadelphia neighbor at this same period described Washington as having

"so much dignity of manner, that no person whatever could take any improper liberties with him." According to this person. Washington was terribly serious and rarely displayed either a smile or frown. In the theatre. however. where he was no longer the focus of attention and could let down his guard. he sometimes laughed

17 "heartile [sic)" (from the autobiography of Charles Biddle, printed in W.S. Baker's Washington M1IT the Revolution. p. 89).

Another mitigating factor in George Washington's relationship with the slaves at Mount Vernon was his consideration of their feelings. For example, most of the slaves were free from work on Sundays, but at least some of the house servants were required to be on duty at the Mansion, so that food could be cooked and meals served. According to Mrs. Washington's youngest granddaughter, George

Washington tried to ensure that these people got at least a long afternoon off, by ordering that dinner be served an hour earlier on Sunday than during the rest of the week (Nelly Custis Lewis to Elizabeth Bordley Gibson, 4/29/1823). He also insisted on punctuality at meal times, in part to keep those slaves who served in the mansion from having to do extra, unnecessary work. As he reminded his step-grandson, who wanted to hunt before breakfast: "...It is not only disagreeable, but it is also very inconvenient. for servants to be running here, and there, and they know not where, to summon you to them, when their duties, and attendance, on the company who are seated, render it improper" (GW to George Washington Parke Custis, 11711798).

Many years after Washington's death, a former Mount Vernon slave, Sambo

Anderson. told a neighbor that "his master was very particular and the most correct man that ever lived." As an example of what he meant by this, he said that, while living at Mount Vernon, he kept a little boat for travelling on some of the small bodies of water in the area. Occasionally, George Washington would borrow Sarnbo's boat, "but he was never the man to take it withou t asking me if he could use it. Then he was so particular to place the boat just where he took it from. If it happened to be high tide when he took it, and low tide on his return, I have known him to drag the boat twenty yeard Isicl, so as to place it exactly where he took it from" (An Old

Citizen of Fairfax County, "Mount Vernon Reminiscences," Alexandria Gazette,

18 1/18/1876. This story confirms others about Washington's "correctness"; see Parkinson, Im!.r in America, pp. 436-440).

A letter, written during the settlement of his mother's estate, shows

Washington's unwillingness to force a slave who wanted to stay with him to go elsewhere, even if it meant a financial loss. Early in his presidency, Washington

informed his sister, Betty, that an unnamed male slave, who had belonged to their

mother, was living at Mount Vernon, and that. because the man had "never stayed

elsewhere" and apparently had a family there, "1 should be glad to keep him":

"...He must 1 should conceive be far short in value of the fifth

of the other negroes which will be...divided, but 1 shall be content to take him as my proportion of them; and, if from a

misconception either of the number or the value of these

negroes it should be found that he is of greater value than falls to my lot 1 shall readily allow the difference, in order

that the fellow may be gratified, as he never would consent to

go from me" (GW to Elizabeth Washington Lewis, 9/13/1789).

Even during his final illness, as he lay on his deathbed, Washington exhibited thoughtfulness toward those around him, including the slaves. When he became ill in the early morning hours of December 14, 1799, he would not allow Mrs. Washington to call one of the servants to help him, because he was afraid she [Mrs. Washington] would catch cold. Some hours later, during the afternoon, realizing that Christopher

Sheels, the young slave who worked as his body servant, had been in the room all day and had been standing for the en tire time, Washington asked him to have a seat

(Lear, Tobias, Letters and Recollections, pp. 130 & 135).

19 As with other facets of Washington's personality, the consideration shown to his

slaves was simply an extension of the way he treated everyone. One visitor to Mount Vernon recorded that upon his arrival at the plantation, in January of 1785, he was

suffering from a severe cold and bad cough, which got worse when he went to bed.

After a while. the door to his room opened and George Washington himself came in

with a bowl of hot tea to help ease the visitor's symptoms. The poor guest was

"morified, and distressed beyond expression." In his opinion. Washington's hospitable

gesture, "occurring in common life with an ordinary man, would not have been

noticed; but as a trait of the benevolence and private virtue of Washington. it

deserves to be recorded" (Elkanah Watson, p. 278). Thirteen years later. another

guest, knowing that the Washing tons habitually went to bed early, made a move to retire to his room about nine o'clock. When his host noticed that there was no

servant about, he proceeded to get a candle for the young man and directed him to

his room himself. In recording this incident, the flabbergasted guest remarked,

"Think of this!" (transcript from the Memoir of Thomas Handasyd Perkins, in the

Early Descriptions Ante 1800 research notebook). In the first case, Washington may

have shown courtesy not only to the guest. for whom he left his bedroom in a private

wing to make the dark, cold trek to the main part of the house, but also to the slave

he did not ask to get up in the middle of the night to prepare and serve the tea. In

the second, probably aware that the house servants would be finishing up their work

and getting ready to go to their own beds, he once again saw to the care of a visitor himself, without bothering his slaves.

Servants belonging to others also benefitted from Washington's thoughtfulness.

Artist and engineer Benjamin Henry Latrobe immigrated to the United States in 1795 and visited Mount Vernon the following year. After breakfast, on the morning he was to leave the estate, Latrobe stood on the steps outside the west door of the

20 mansion. talking with Washington for about an hour on the subject of establishing a

university in the newly constructed Federal City

o'clock, Washington seemed anxious to get to work. so the young guest signalled to one of the Mount Vernon slaves that he needed his horses. When Latrobe's own servant brought the horses up to the door. Washington approached him to make sure

that he had had breakfast. before they set off (Diary of Benjamin Latrobe. excerpt in an article entitled "George Washington: Country Gentleman." in Country Life. 1921; transcript in Mount Vernon research notebook entitled "Early Descriptions Ante 1800).

The Mount Vernon slaves found Washington approachable about such things as new jobs. marriages. and problems. Early in the presidency. the Washingtons' cook. Hercules. requested that his son, Richmond, be brought north to work with him as a scullion in the kitchen of the presidential household. Washington replied that he was granting this request not from any desirable qualities in the young man himself. but out of respect or affection for his father, or as he put it "because he was the son of

Hercules and his desire to have him as an assistant" (GW to Tobias Lear. 11/22/1790, in Letters and Recollections Qf George Washington, p. 31). Several years later, through her husband will, who was an overseer, Kate at Muddy Hole Farm asked the president during one of his visits home if she could be given the job of midwife for the women on the estate, a request which Washington sanctioned. as long as her qualifications were adequate (OW to William Pearce, 8/17/1794). He also supported appeals by slaves at Mount Vernon who wished to marry individuals living off the plantation. both free and slave. a fact that resulted in almost one quarter of the married adults (22.9%) having spouses who did not belong to George Washington. In

1799. for example. Alee. a spinner who lived at the Mansion House Farm. was married to Charles. a free black. while her daughter Anna had a husband in

21 Georgetown (see GW to Roger West, 9/19/1799and the 1799slave census). When the

corn meal ration was changed in the early 1790sfrom "a heaping and squeezed peck...of unsifted meal" to a sifted, "struck peck only," presumably a level peck,

Washington received numerous complaints from his slaves. He initially attributed

the grumbling to the fact that sifted corn meal left them no "husks" to feed to their chickens, but a conversation with Davy, another black overseer, convinced him that

the people were genuinely hungry. Washington ordered his manager to look into the

situation and admitted that his "feelings" had been hurt by the complaints (GW to

Anthony Whiting, 4/28/1793and 5/26/1793). In this case, Washington's actions testified to the trust he placed in Davy. Several months later, in a letter to a new farm manager describing the personalities and qualities of his overseers, Washington gave Davy a fairly good recommendation:

"Davy at Muddy-hole carries on his business as well as the

White Overseers, and with more quietness than any of

them.-With proper directions he will do very well; and

probably give you less trouble than any of them, except in attending to his care of the stock, of which I fear he is

negligent; as there are deaths too frequent among them" (OW

to William Pearce, 12/18/1793,quoted in Lear, Letters and Recollections, p. 156).

Close contact over the years led to the development of affectionate ties between Washington and certain slaves. Perhaps the best example of this was his relationship with William or Billy Lee, his valet, who was described by a contemporary as being "always at his [Washington's] side" (Elkanah Watson, p. 278).

Purchased from Mary Lee in 1768, Billy accompanied George Washington to war, serving faithfully for all eight years of the Revolution. Washington never forgot

22 that loyalty. Several years after the war, although he was not fond of the woman Billy had married in Philadelphia, Washington tried to get a passage for her to

Mount Vernon, because of his feelings of affection and appreciation for Billy, who had "lived with me so long and followed my fortunes through the War with fidelity"

(Ford, Washington as

Clement Biddle, 7/28/1784). When Washington again left Mount Vernon for the presidency, Billy wanted to go along, even though two accidents in the intervening years had left him an invalid. Washington's secretary wrote that the president would prefer for Billy to remain at Mount Vernon, because he would probably, due to his infirmity, be of little use in the busy executive mansion and might even need someone to look after him. However, Tobias Lear wrote, "if he is still anxious to come on...the President would gratify him Altho' [sic] he will be troublesome. He has been an old and faithful Servant this [sic] is enough for the President to gratify him in every reasonable wish" (Tobias Lear to Clement Biddle, 5/3/1789, quoted in

Writings, Volume 30, p. 308n). Ten years later, in one of his final acts, Washington rewarded Billy for his faithfulness, making him the only one of the Mount Vernon slaves to be freed outright upon Washington's death. This provision of freedom and an annuity of $30 was given "as a testimony of my sense of his attachment to me, and for his faithful services during the Revolutionary War" (Fitzpatrick. LM1 Will and

Testament. p. 4).

While George Washington kept close watch on the overall operation of the plantation, Martha Washington managed the domestic side of things. She had a reputation in the family as an "admirable" manager, who was at the same time, a firm but fair mistress, whose "household was remarkable for the excellence of its domestics." Like her husband, she rose at dawn, going first to the kitchen to oversee the preparation of breakfast and then stopping by the laundry and other buildings 23 related to her tasks. such as the dairy and the smokehouse. Sometime after

breakfast, probably about 8 o'clock, she met with the cooks to decide the menu for

the main meal of the day. dinner. which was eaten in mid-afternoon. In the late

morning or early afternoon she would gather a group of young female slaves in her

bedroom and teach them to sew. She was back in the kitchen again before bedtime to

supervise the mixing and kneading of bread. (Custis. Recollections. p. 514. and

Blanche Berard. "Arlington and Mount Vernon 1856." p. 162). Much as her husband

did. Mrs. Washington made notes to herself regarding various household items in small notebooks. which she carried with her (See Figure --.J. She also. like him.

kept track of what was happening on the plantation while she was away. Little

passages such as "Mrs. Washington desires you will direct old Doll to distil a good deal of Rose and Mint Water. &ca.; and we wish to know whether the Linnen for the

People is all made up?" are fairly common in George Washington's letters to his farm managers. Mrs. Washington's own letters on domestic topics are an invaluable resource for modern researchers. In these letters she might order a thorough cleaning of the kitchen. china. and glassware prior to a visit home. insist that Frank

Lee. the butler. "clean every part of the House constantly every week sellers [sic] and all." or ask Caroline. one of the housemaids. to air the bedclothes and "Brush and clean all the places and rooms that they were in" (GW to Anthony Whiting. 5/12/1793;

MW to Fanny Bassett Washington. 8/29/1791,7/111792. 8/4/1793. 6/2/1794).

Mrs. Washington may have read the weekly reports from Mount Vernon with as much interest as her husband. In a letter to one of his farm managers. George

Washington noted that the seamstresses had not made as many shirts the previous week as they were normally expected to do. Mrs. Washington probably noticed the discrepancy and pointed it out to her husband. for Washington continued: "Mrs.

Washington says their usual task was to make nine with Shoulder straps. and good

24 ,

Pocket memorandum book kept by Martha Washington sewing...Their work ought to be well examined, or it will be most shamefully executed, whether little or much of it be done ...." (GW to Anthony Whiting,

12/23/1792).

Where George Washington was often remembered as stern and distant with his slaves, their relationship with Mrs. Washington was warmer and her role was,

perhaps even more than his, that of a mediator. During the presidency, Mrs. Washington periodically sent Austin, one of the house servants from Mount Vernon

who had been north to work in the executive mansion, back home to visit his family,

even though she "could but illy spare him at this time." Although there were

important legal reasons for sending Austin home at the time, primarily because, as an

adult slave, he could claim his freedom after six consecutive months in Pennsylvania,

Mrs. Washington admitted a compelling personal reason, as well, "to fullfill my

promise to his wife" (MW to Fanny Bassett Washington, 4/19/1791). Martha

Washington seems to have developed especially close ties with the maids and

seamstresses, with whom she had presumably spent many hours, while teaching them to sew. She was extremely upset when one of those young women, a maid named

Oney Judge, ran away during the presidency. George Washington spent the next

three years trying to get Oney to come home, with promises that. should she return of her own free will, "her late conduct will be forgiven by her Mistress ..." (GW to

Joseph Whipple, 11128/1706).

When Charlotte, one of the seamstresses, was listed as sick for several weeks in the work reports, it was Martha Washington, then in Philadelphia as first lady, who asked that the doctor be called in to take care of her (OW to William Pearce,

1/12/1794). About a year before, in January 1793, Charlotte had been whipped several times during a dispute with farm manager Anthony Whiting. Whiting quickly wrote

25 the president in Philadelphia to relate the story from his point of view. The reason

why he was in such a hurry to present his case is found at the end of the story in his

letter: "She [Charlotte] threatens me very much with informing Lady Washington

when she comes home...." In other words, he had to tell his side of the story to

George Washington before Charlotte, with undoubtedly a very different slant on the

episode, could speak to the mistress and get him in trouble. In this instance, George Washington approved of Whiting's actions. but within a year, his overall opinion of

the manager would change drastically. Whiting became quite ill and died about 5

months after the incident with Charlotte. In July 1793, Washington wrote to a

friend that he was looking for a new manager and would consider himself "very

fortunate" to find someone "as well qualified for my purposes as the late Mr.

Whitting lsicl...." Two months later, he and Mrs. Washington came back to Mount Vernon for about six weeks, their first visit home since Whiting had whipped

Charlotte. It is entirely possible that, during that visit, Mrs. Washington and

Charlotte had a serious talk about the incident, for by the end of the year, George

Washington was relating that he had "learnt lately" that Whiting "drank freely, kept

bad company at my house and in Alexandria, and was a very debauched person .."

(Anthony Whiting to GW, 1/16/1793;GW to Anthony Whiting, 1/20/1793).

The memories of at least one former slave concerned Martha Washington's

"good management" at Mount Vernon. An elderly woman, the nurse at Arlington

House, told stories to Martha Washington's great great granddaughter, Agnes Lee, about her childhood at Mount Vernon. One of the most memorable events of her long life was the marriage of Mrs. Washington's granddaughter. Nelly Custis, to

George Washington's nephew, Lawrence Lewis, in 1799. Martha Washington invited the slaves in for the occasion and "gave them such good things to eat." While

"Mammy" remembered the bride as a "celebrated beauty" dressed in "something

26 white," she was outshone that day by her grandmother or "Ole Mistis." In contrast

with her glowing opinion of Martha Washington, the elderly woman mentioned that

"...she could not see why so much fuss was made over "the genl, he was only a man!",

a very good master she was sure, but she didn't suppose he was so much better than anyone else."" {Agnes Lee, Journal, pp. 80-8D.

Mrs. Washington appears to have been as fond of the slaves at Mount Vernon

as they were of her. One of George Washington's nephews, Robert Lewis, escorted

Martha Washington and her grandchildren to New York, shortly after George Washington's first inauguration as president. In his diary account of the trip, the

young man described the new first lady's departure from Mount Vernon in the spring of 1789. For several days, the household had been in a state of confusion,

occasioned by "packing, -and making all the necessary preparations for the intended

peregrinations to N.Y." On the afternoon of May 16th, following an early dinner and completion of "all the necessary arrangements," which Lewis noted were "greatly retardleld," the travellers finally got underway about three in the afternoon. A

considerable number of slaves, including not only house servants, but field workers,

as well, gathered to bid Mrs. Washington farewell. Lewis reported that many of them, whom he described as "poor wretches," were "much affected" and "greatly

agitated" about her departure. Perhaps not surprisingly, Lewis noted that his aunt was "equally so" (Robert Lewis, manuscript diary, May 14-16,1789).

27 Relationships Between Blacks and Whites ar Mount Vernon

On a large plantation like Mount Vernon, slaves had the opportunity to interact with far more people than just the master and his wife. While some of these individuals had, like the Washing tons, a great deal of authority and control over the slaves, others were not part of the organization scheme of the estate and could have a more relaxed and perhaps equitable relationship with them.

For the majority of the slaves on the estate, the whites with whom they had the most contact were the farm managers, overseers, and hired or indentured craftsmen who directly supervised them. Washington expected each man he hired to "remain constantly with the People over whom he is to look, and never stir from them during their hours of work, but at mealtimes-He is not to go off the Plantation (except on

Sundays) without asking leave" (Articles of Agreement between George Washington and Burgess Mitchell, 5/1/1762,quoted in Ford, Washing:ton M an Employer and

Importer Qf l&.QQr, p. 27). George Washington typically had a poor opinion of many of these people and references to "the inattention and carelessness of the Overseers," "the insufferable conduct of my Overseers," and "my blundering Overseers" are common (GW to Anthony Whiting, 5/19/1793;GW to William Pearce, 12/18/1793and

11/23/1794). Washington cautioned a new farm manager that he would soon find there was "little dependence" on his overseers and that, because they got a fixed salary or "standing wages" and were not generally "actuated by the principles of honor or honesty, and not very regardful of their characters," there was a tendency to slack off, "as their profits, whatever may be mine, are the same whether they are at a horse race or on the farm-whether they are entertaining company (which I believe is too much the case) in their own houses, or are in the fields with the

28 Negroes" (GW to William Pearce, 12/18/1793). He complained to another manager

that "too few of that class of (common) Overseers" were "overburthened" with either principle or "a regard for reputation" (OW to Anthony Whiting, 1/13/1793).

Whereas Washington distrusted the basic character of his overseers, he also had little or no trust in their care for the humanity of his slaves. He may have had good reason to worry. In contrasting the treatment of slaves at Mount Vernon with other places he had visited, a French traveller noted that in Virginia "a Negro is not regarded as a fellow human being" (Louis-Philippe, Journal de mon voyage d'Amerique, pp. 53-55). After two slaves died in the spring of 1795, Washington expressed concern that they had been given "every necessary care and attention" during the course of their illness. He went on to say that he did not believe their overseer, "or indeed most of his class," would ordinarily have seen to such care, complaining that "they seem to consider a Negro much in the same light as they do the brute beasts, on the farms; and often times treat them as inhumanly" (GW to

William Pearce, 5/10/1795). Several years earlier he had complained about "the generality" of overseers, who neglected the slaves when they were too sick to work,

"instead of comforting and nursing them when they lye [sic] on a sick bed" (GW to

Anthony Whiting, 10/14/1792;see also GW to Anthony Whiting, 10/28/1792). On occasion, Washington even included these concerns in the employment contracts drawn up with new supervisors. Edward Violette, who had been hired to oversee one of the outlying farms. promised to "take all necessary and proper care of the Negroes committed to his management using them with proper humanity and discretion".

Several years later, the contract with a carpenter gave him "sufficient power and authority" to oversee the slave carpenters, but cautioned that this authority was to be exercised "with prudence and discretion" (Articles of Agreement with Edward Violett and Benajmin Buckler, 8/5/1762 and 2/25/1771,quoted in Ford, Washington as an

29 EmplQyer ll.lli! ImpQrter Qf Labor. pp.29 & 42).

As in SQmany aspects of their lives, George Washington wanted those in

authority on the plantation to emulate his management style. While they were

expected to be with the slaves constantly during work hours and nearby the rest of

the time, Washington stressed over and over the necessity for hired whites to

maintain their emotional distance from the people they were overseeing, much as he

did himself. In 1794, for example, he advised his farm manager to caution a new hired artisan "against familiarities with the Negros" (GW to William Pearce,

12/7/1794). One of his major complaints about Thomas Green, a carpenter supervisor,

was that he could not exert enough authority over the slaves, because "he is tQQmuch on a level with the Negros to exert it". This may have been the problem with

another hired white, as well, whom Washington found almost useless at supervising

the slaves: "1 am persuaded he has no more authority over the Negros ...than an old woman would have; and is as unable to get a proper day's Work done by them as she would, unless led to it by their own inclination wch 1 know is not the case" (GW to William Pearce, 12/18/1793).

It is very likely that Washington's concern with over-familiarity between the hired whites and slaves on the plantation was a by-product of his military background, where officers traditionally kept their distance from the men they supervised. TQQclose a relationship could jeopardize the authority a leader must have in order tQ function properly. An officer could open himself up to charges of either favoritism toward, or prejudice against, particular individuals under his command. Soldiers who knew all their superior's faults might not follow him intQ a dangerQus situatiQn, CQuldhave such a IQw QpiniQn Qf him that he was an Qbject Qf ridicule, Qr might even try tQ blackmail him. An Qfficer whQ was tQQintimately

30 involved with his men could find himself unable to give orders necessary for completing a mission, because he was thinking too much about the cost to his troops.

Evidence from Mount Vernon suggests that Washington was thinking of situations like these when he counselled those in authority on the plantation to keep

their distance. For example, in the early 1790s the hired head carpenter, Thomas Green, had a severe drinking problem, which got worse over time. Washington felt

that Green's situation made it impossible for him to chastise the men he supervised

because they had too much information with which to blackmail him: .....he dare not

find fault with those who are entrusted to his care lest they shd. retort and disclose his rascally conduct." As a consequence, "work that the same number of hands would perform in a week, takes mine a month" (GW to William Pearce, 5/4/1794).

Washington even cautioned a new farm manager about the dangers of getting too close to the overseers he supervised: "To treat them civilly is no more than what all men are entitled to, but, my advice to you is, to keep them at a proper distance; for they will grow upon familiarity, in proportion as you will sink in authority, if you do not" (GW to William Pearce, 12/18/1793).

One of the ways Washington encouraged this emotional distance was to physically separate the living spaces of the slaves and hired whites of all types.

When James Donaldson, a new supervisor for the Mount Vernon carpenters, arrived on the estate before the family of his predecessor had vacated the house intended for him, he was moved into a section of the greenhouse complex, where the primary slave quarter at the Mansion House Farm was located. Washington was very unhappy with this situation, because he preferred that the new man be "kept as seperate [sic]' and as distinct as possible from the Negros, who want no encouragement to mix with, and become too familiar (for no good purposes) with

31 these kind of people" (GW to William Pearce. 11/16/1794).

Racial or class prejudice may also have been involved in Washington's feelings about blacks and whites living in close proximity. Among his concerns with the

Donaldson family's initial housing situation was that they "will get disgusted by living among the Negros if he [Donaldson] is still in the Green house" (GW to William

Pearce. 11/2/1794). About a year earlier. in correspondence with English agronomist

Arthur Young. Washington had discussed the possibility of renting his four out-lying farms. Individuals contracting for the farms would be able to hire as laborers. on an annual basis. the slaves living on those units. if they preferred this approach to importing "that class of people." Washington worried. however. about the wisdom of having a mixed work force of imported Europeans and African-American slaves:

", .it deserves consideration how far the mixing of whites and blacks together is advisable; especially where the former. are entirely unacquainted with the latter" (GW to Arthur Young. 12/12/1793).

In this instance. however. he may have been most concerned with the white laborers picking up the work habits of his slaves. Writing to his farm manager shortly after the arrival of James Donaldson as the carpenter supervisor. Washington wrote a long section on just this problem:

", .1 would have him cautioned against an error which I have felt no small inconvenience from; and tha tis. tha t rather than persevere in doing things right themselves. and being at the

trouble of making others do the like. they will fall into the

slovenly mode of executing work which is practiced by those.

among whom they are. I have experienced this not only from

European tradesmen. but from farmers also. who have come

32 from England, and from none in a greater degree, than from

Me Whiting, and one Bloxham, who preceeded him; and who,

tho' perfectly acquainted with every part of a farmers business;

and peculiarly so (the latter I mean) in the management and

use of Oxen for the Cart or plow, double or single, with yokes

or with harness; yet, finding it a little troublesome to instruct

the Negros, and to compel them to the practice of his modes, he slided into theirs; and at length (which I adduce as a proof)

instead of using proper flails for threshing the grain, I have

found my people at this work with hoop poles, and other things

similar thereto" (GW to William Pearce, 112511795).

When a slave had a problem with an overseer, he could turn to George Washington for help, much as Charlotte, mentioned earlier, had threatened to take

her complaint against farm manager Anthony Whiting to Mrs. Washington. During

the presidency, George Washington was approached while home for a visit by slaves

who complained that they had not received their usual ration of fish. Apparently a

storehouse had been broken into and the fish stolen, ostensibly. the slaves suggested,

as a "pretence to cover a more nefarious mode of disposing of them." They believed

that Hyland Crow, an overseer, had stolen the fish intended for the slaves and sold

them. Since Washington had no way, at that point, of determining the truth, he ordered his farm manager to "lay in a sufficiency [of fish] for my people this year; secure them well; and let only one person have access to them for delivery, and to be responsible." The key to the storehouse would be locked up at the Mansion House with the other keys and the fish distributed to the overseers for the slaves at each farm on a regular basis (OW to William Pearce, 4/20/1794).

33 Visitors to Mount Vernon were in an interesting position. Generally of the same social status as the Washingtons, they were often, especially after the

Revolution, from outside the south. Slavery was, for many of these people,

something of a novelty and a number of them took the time to talk to the slaves and

record their impressions. While the response of the slaves to questions about their

happiness and feelings for their master was often positive, it is possible that they were hesitant to voice their negative feelings to someone who might relay the inf orma tion back to the Washingtons. Several years after the Revolution, a houseguest remarked that George Washington was "revered and beloved by all around him." The man went on to note, after a discussion of the house servants, that

"Smiling content animated and beamed on every countenance in his [Washington's] presence" (Elkanah Watson, p. 278). Another gentleman, who visited Mount Vernon in 1793, reported that, in his opinion, the slaves there were "better clothed and fed than negroes generally are in this Country." One morning he went for a walk, during which he "saw and conversed with many of them ...who seem well contented in their Situation and most attached to their Master. .." (Research notebook, "Early

Descriptions Ante 1800," Diary of Winthrop Sargent, 1793). The nephew of John Hancock, Washington's fellow-revolutionary, noted in a letter that there were "upwards of 500 slaves" at Mount Vernon, a slight exaggeration, and that "they are all as happy as Lords" (Research notebook, "Early Descriptions Ante 1800," John

Hancock to John Nicholson, 5/22/1799).

Among the most valuable descriptions of the slaves at Mount Vernon :wasan account written by an exiled French nobleman, the duc d'Orleans and future king of of the French, Louis-Philippe. The young duke was travelling with a servant named

Beaudoin and the two men were intrigued with the institution of slavery, which was so totally foreign to them. They recorded information about the number and

34 ·.

fertility of the Mount Vernon slaves, their hopes for freedom, proselytization among them by several religious groups, punishment, and their feelings about relatives who ran away. One of the most hurnerous and, at the same time, poignant details noted

by Louis-Philippe concerned the behaviour of blacks toward whites, and vice versa,

which was typical of Virginia at this period, but completely unacceptable to the young Frenchman, who was taken up with ideas of democracy:

"...When Negroes come upon a white man, they bow to him

from a long way off and very low, and often look astonished

when we ll.ouis-Philippe and Beaudoin] return their bow, since

no one does this here ...." (Research notebook, "Early

Descriptions Ante 1800," the journal of Louis-Philippe, 1797). Hasty reading of the last phrase in Louis-Philippe's description might be taken to

mean that white Americans never bowed, perhaps considering it a monarchist custom. Surviving Washington family manuscripts, however, confirm that white Americans did bow to one another and that this custom was a typical social nicety. For instance,

George Washington's nephew, Robert Lewis, served briefly as a secretary to his

uncle, during the early months of the presidency. After spending one evening

walking with a friend on the Battery in New York City and greeting acquaintances,

Lewis went home, commenting in his diary that he "took my leave by making a very

pretty Bow" (Robert Lewis, manuscript diary, 8/2/1789). Given this information,

Louis-Philippe was saying that white Americans never returned the bows of slaves.

Not all of the Washingtons' house-guests were so well-intentioned toward the slaves. A letter written by a young officer, and future U.S. senator from New York, suggests that at least some of them expected slave women to provide sexual services.

After visiting at Mount Vernon for several days with Baron von Steuben, a visit lengthened by bad weather and made more miserable by the age and marital status

35 · .

of the members of the household, Major William North decided to pass the time writing to a friend, Ben Walker, who had once been George Washington's aide

during the Revolution, Amid gossip and complaints about the boredom, the solitude, and being sequestered in his room when he wasn't eating or playing cards, North

suddenly interjected, "Will you believe it-I have not humped a single mullato [sic]

since I am here .," (Historical Society of Pennsylvania, letter of William North to

Ben Walker. 3/911784). From the tone of his statement, North appears to have been

surprised about his enforced chastity, although whether it was due to an edict from

Washington, the lack of receptivity by the slave women who crossed his path, or the

fact that his supervisor Von Steuben may have ordered him to be on his best

behaviour in this particular household is impossible to say from the evidence at hand.

The presence of mixed race slaves at Mount Vernon suggests that visitors may not have been the only whites on the estate to seek a sexual relationship with them.

For several reasons, George Washington is unlikely to have been physically involved with his slaves. Given his feelings on the question of over-familiarity between those in authority and the people they oversaw and the moral correctness for which he is legendary, it would have been grossly out of character for Washington to have had a

liaison with one of his slaves. This, together with the lack of either documentary

evidence for such a relationship or gossip by neighbors and his many political

enemies, and the lack of a tradition among the families of former Mount Vernon

slaves alleging such behaviour would all tend to cast doubt upon Washington having such a relationship with a slave.

Physical/romantic relationships between white masters and slaves do not seem,

however, to have been unknown in either George or Martha Washington's larger

families. Although not mentioned by later generations of the family, Mrs.

36 , .

Washington's first father-in-law, John Custis, is believed to have had a long-standing

relationship with one of his slaves, a woman named Alice, which probably began

sometime after the death of his wife in 1715. Custis seems to have cared deeply for Alice's child, a boy known as Christoforo John, who received numerous privileges

while Custis was alive and was well-provided for in the latter's will. In that

document, he directed that a "handsome Strong and convenient dwelling house" be

constructed for John and, further, that it should be richly furnished with two dozen

chairs, a couch, three bedsteads with featherbeds, and two walnut tables. Daniel

Parke Custis, the legitimate heir, who was then in his late thirties, was to care for John until his twentieth birthday. Still a minor when both his presumed father and

older half-brother died, John, or "Jack" as he was known in the family, continued on in the household of his half-brother's widow, Martha Dandridge Custis, at least until

shortly after her marriage to George Washington (Sobel, pp. 150-152,285n-286n; see

also Freeman, George Washington, Vol. II, pp. 293-295; Berard, "Arlington and Mount Vernon," pp. 159-160;and Custis, Recollections and Private Memoirs, p. 20n).

A prominent black family in Georgetown claims descent from Martha

Washington's grandson. George Washington Parke Custis of Arlington House. Custis

is said to have been the father of a child. later known as Maria Syphax, who was

born about 1803 to a slave at Arlington named Airy or Areanna Carter. Although it has been suggested by some historians that Maria's mother had been a slave at Mount

Vernon originally, her name does not appear on the 1799 census. taken by George

Washington the summer before his death. When Maria was married in 1821.George

Washington Parke Custis gave her 17 acres, part of the Arlington estate, where she

lived with her husband and their 10 children until the mid-1880s. An 1866 move by

the United States Congress to give Maria title to the land suggested that Custis's gift had been prompted by the "interest" he felt for this young woman, "something

37

------_._----- perhaps akin to a paternal instinct." Portraits of Custis. his legitimate daughter, and

Maria Syphax do exhibit certain similarities. especially in the area of the nose and mouth. but cannot be taken as conclusive proof of paternity (See Figure _'

Information from personal conversations with Christine Meadows. Curator of Mount

Vernon. and Agnes Mullins, Curator of Arlington House; see also Priest. Dana.

"Arlington Bequest a Footnote in Black History." The Washington £.Qg. 2/27/1990),

If Maria was the child of a union between George Washington Parke Custis and a slave woman, she may not have been the only one, About the time Maria was born. Custis freed another young slave, a two year old girl named Louisa. who was the daughter of Judith. a former Mount Vernon slave. Judith. also known as Judy. had been 21 years old and unmarried at the time of the 1799 Mount Vernon census. Just three years older than Martha Washington's grandson. Judith and young Custis had probably known each other since childhood (see Alexandria Court House Deed

Book E (1803). p. 153. quoted in an letter from Anna Lynch to Nancy Hayward, dated

3/22/[1995] and 1799 Mount Vernon slave census). There was no acknowledgment of paternity in the manumission papers and no explanation for why Custis chose to free this particular child. The logical inference. however. is that the little girl was emancipated because she was his daughter.

In both these cases. the children were born prior to 1804. when Custis. then 23 years old. married Mary Lee Fitzhugh. As a young man. George Washington Parke

Custis seems to have spent considerable time hunting at Mount Vernon. probably with Tom Davis (see below), a slave who provided game for the Washing tons' table.

His reminiscences of life on the estate contain more than a few stories about individual slaves. written with a warmth and intimacy that could only have come from close association, Perhaps it is understandable that. having grown up among

38 ·.

Left, portrait of George Washington Parke Custis

Mary Custis Lee, the daughter of George Washington Parke Custis Maria Syphax, said to be the and his wife, Mary Lee Fitzhugh daughter of George Washington Parke Custis and a slave woman, Areanna Carter O!&

African-Americans, with whom he felt comfortable, and being emotionally adrift

after the deaths of his surrogate parents, George and Martha Washington, in 1799

and 1802, respectively, the young bachelor might turn to slave women for

companionship and comfort. A similar dynamic may have been at work in the case

of a slightly more distant family member, George Washington Parke Custis's cousin,

George Calvert of Riversdale Plantation in Maryland. Shortly after the death of his father in 1788, Calvert began a long-term relationship with one of his slaves, Eleanor

Beckett. by whom he had several children. Calvert eventually freed both the

children and their mother (see Margaret Callcott, Mistress Qf Riversdale, pp. 378-384).

George Washington's nephew, Bushrod Washington, a Supreme Court Justice,

abolitionist, and first president of the American Colonization Society, is said to have

been the father of West Ford, a mulatto slave who, like the above-mentioned

Christoforo Jack, Maria, and Louisa, was singled ou t for preferential treatment by the white family to whom he belonged. West Ford was born in 1784 to a slave

woman named Venus at Bushfield, the home of George Washington's favorite

younger brother, John Augustine. At the time of the birth, Bushrod Washington was

a young bachelor, only 22 years old. According to provisions made in the will of

Hannah Bushrod Washington, the Judge's mother and thus, possibly, West Ford's

grandmother. Ford was inoculated for smallpox, taught a trade-carpentry. and was

to be freed in 1805 at the age of twenty-one. When Bushrod Washington inherited

Mount Vernon in 1802.West Ford moved to the estate. where he served for many

years as overseer. A very talented man. he could read and write and continued to

work in responsible positions at Mount Vernon, after his emancipation, through a

succession of proprietors, until his death in 1863. Bushrod Washington himself died

in 1829, making a bequest to Ford of 119acres of land in Fairfax County. near Mount

39 Vernon (see the ~ Annual Report of the Mount Vernon Ladies' Association, pp. 34-35; Corbin, David A., "The Gum Springs Community, pp. 1-2, 5; "Gum Springs

holding on to past: Historic black community tries to replenish family roots," The

Journal. 11129/1991;Sweig, "Dear Master," pp. 1-3. 5; Robinson, Henry S., "Who Was West Ford?", pp. 167, 170-171).

Again. one has to wonder what it was about this individual slave that led to his

being so favored. If there was no blood tie between West Ford and the Washington

family, why single him out? It is possible that gratitude for many years of faithful

service, and nothing more. led Bushrod Washington to provide so generously for

West Ford in his will. Almost three decades before. however, when Hannah

Washington made arrangements to free Ford, he was just a teenager and not an old

and trusted family retainer. There might be any number of reasons why she would

have freed him, including perhaps an interest in and the opportunity to help a

promising young man whom she had known since infancy. As in the other cases

mentioned above, however. the simplest and most logical explanation is that Ford was a relative who could not be openly acknowledged, the child of a member of the

family and a slave. Comparison of the portraits of Bushrod Washington and West

Ford as young men suggests a possible family connection, even if Bushrod himself was not West Ford's father (see Figure __ .)

At least some of the hired whites who worked and lived most closely with the

Mount Vernon slaves may have become physically intimate with them. Two of the

slaves mentioned frequently in Washington's correspondence in the 1790s were a

spinner, Betty Davis, and a bricklayer named Torn Davis, who was known at Mount

Vernon as a skilled hunter. About thirty years before, during the late 1760s and early 1770s. there had been a hired white weaver, Thomas Davis, working on the

40 Left, portrait of Bushrod Washington at the age of 20

;

Right, pencil sketch of West Ford, who is said to be the son of Bushrod Washington & a slave woman named Venus plantation (see "Account of Weaving Done by Thomas Davis &ca. at Mount Vernon,

1767-1771"). The similarity in names between these three people may not be

coincidental. At least one historian studying slavery at Mount Vernon feels that the

hired weaver was probably the father of both these slaves (conversations with Professor David Coon, Department of History, Washington State University,

Summer 1982). While the connection between the Davises is tenuous, a letter written

by Washington in 1793 strongly suggests a carnal relationship between an overseer and those he supervised. Responding to a letter from his farm manager, George

Washington replied that he was sorry to learn that "the Itch" or body mites had

spread among the slaves at one of his farms. He then went on to say that "If it was caught in the way you describe, and justice could be done, Garner [the overseer]

ought to pay for it" (GW to Anthony Whiting, 2/17/1793). Unfortunately, the

whereabouts of the initial letter from the farm manager, detailing how this condition

was transmitted, are unknown, but the logical inference from Washington's response

is that Garner was infected first and passed the mites on to others through sexual contact.

Overriding George Washington's concerns about over-familiarity between

supervisors and slaves were several factors which may have led to the development of these relationships. One of the most important contributing factors was probably the isolation felt by many of the hired whites. As detailed earlier, Washington expected his employees to stay on the farms they oversaw most of the time, with the exception of a few hours away on Sunday to attend church, if they were so inclined.

This meant that they could almost never get into town to socialize with others of their own social class. Washington also discouraged his overseers and managers from entertaining friends in their homes. In a case mentioned above, Anthony Whiting, an overseer who invited friends onto the estate to visit, was censured by his employer. 41 , .

Artisans. such as weavers, carpenters, and masons probably faced the same difficulty.

Here then were men who were physically and emotionally isolated from their peers.

If they had recently immigrated to the United States. they might be separated. and

virtually cut off. from their families. as well. further increasing the sense of being

emotionally adrift. John Harrower. a young indentured Scotsman on another

Virginia plantation at this period. put his feelings into a pathetically sad poem.

likening his situation to that of a leper banished outside a camp or a prisoner. with

"No freendly [sic] soul...My greiff [sic] to ease, or hear my moan" (Harrower.

Journal. p. 130). Few of the hired whites at Mount Vernon would have had the

education Harrower did, meaning they either could not or were unlikely to turn to

books and letter writing as a means of assuaging their loneliness and boredom. The

company of slave women who lived near them. and with whom these men were

probably closer in both social status and culture than the Washingtons, may have

been seen by some as very appealing. Depending on the personalities and ethical

standards of the individuals involved. the ensuing relationships could have been the

result of mutual attraction and affection. an exercise in manipulation. or

demonstrations of power and control. At this distance. and with the evidence at

hand. there is no way to say for sure.

This isolation. combined with the fact that they were working for George

Washington. a man who expected those around him to follow the same exacting work

ethic that drove him, made for tremendous pressures on these men. Caught between

two cultures. a number of them turned to drink for solace and the combination of

loneliness. work pressures. and alcohol could lead to unpleasant situations. During

the Revolution. the Mount Vernon farm manager noted that William Roberts. a

hired miller. drank too much. causing him to neglect his work. A further

complication. however, was that. "when in liquor." Roberts' personality was "apt to

42 be ill-natured" (Lund Washington to GW, 9/2/1778). Some years later, George

Washington complained about a hired German gardener with "too great a propensity to drink," which led him to behave "improperly when in liquor," a radical change

from his habitual conduct when sober (GW to William Pearce, 12/22/1793). He cautioned the man, whose wife and children lived on the estate, to exercise willpower and call on his religious faith to combat "so intolerable a vice," which produced "bad behaviour, at the moment, and ...more serious evils...afterward," including the infliction of pain, presumably on the man's family (GW to John Christian Ehler,

12/23/1793). The contracts with several hired whites reiterated the importance

Washington placed on sobriety. One of these documents, for example, contained the following agreement:

.....And whereas there are a number of whiskey stills very

contiguous to the said Plantations, and many idle, drunken and

dissolute People continually resorting [to] the same, priding

themselves in debauching sober and well-inclined Persons the

said Edd. Violett doth promise as well for his own sake as his employers [sic] to avoid them as he ought... .. (Contract between

George Washington and Edward Violett, 8/5/1762,quoted in

Ford, Washington as an Employer and Importer Qf l.&J2Qr. pp. 30-31. See also Articles of Agreement between George

Washington and Philip Bater. 4/23/1787).

It is hardly inconceivable that men with so much authority over others, whose temper and judgment had been impaired by alcohol. and whose employer was a considerable distance away, might coerce sexual favors from those they supervised.

When Washington was on the estate. his presence probably mitigated somewhat against such abuses. Including the French and Indian War, the Revolutionary War, and two terms as president. however, he was gone for about 20 of the 45 years he 43 .\

owned Mount Vernon, leaving open the possibility for unfortunate and, in his opinion, undesirable consequences.

44 CQnclusiQn

The over-riding fact that comes through in all the surviving documentation about life at Mount Vernon is that George Washington was, by nQ means, an easy man to work for. He was a picky, detail-oriented boss, who continually looked over the shoulders Qf those who served him, could always find a better way tQhave done a job, and was not above blowing up at a servant, white or black, who didn't meet his standards. Balancing these managerial shortcomings was a sense of humor. a thoughtfulness which softened the rough edges of his temper, and the fact that he would listen to, seriously consider, and bother to investigate the problems brought to his attention. He could also be counted on to give support and encouragement to those who were trying tQ overcome personal problems, In all these things he was consistent, exhibiting the same personality traits toward, and expecting the same behaviour from, both free men, whether they were Qf his own social class or not, and slaves alike.

In his will, written several months before his death in December 1799,

Washington left directions for the emancipation, after Martha Washington died, of all the slaves who belonged to him. Thus, Qf the 316 slaves on the estate in that year, a little less than half, 123individuals, would go free. When her first husband, Daniel

Parke Custis, died without a will. Mrs. Washington had received a life interest in one-third of his estate, including the slaves. The other two-thirds of the estate went to her children. Martha Washington could not free these slaves and, upon her death they reverted to the Custis estate and were divided among her grandchildren. By 1799, 153slaves at Mount Vernon belonged to her. Another 40 were rented from a neighbor and would return to their owner. 45 In accordance with state law, George Washington stipulated that elderly slaves or those who were too sick to work were to be supported throughout their lives.

Children without parents, or those whose families were too poor or indifferent to see to their education, were to be bound out to masters and mistresses who would teach them reading, writing, and a useful trade, until they were ultimately freed at the age of 25. Washington stated quite strongly that he took these charges to his executors very seriously:

"And I do moreover most pointedly, and most solemnly enjoin

it upon my Executors ...to see that this clause respecting Slaves,

and every part thereof be religiously fulfilled at the Epoch at

which it is directed to take place; without evasion, neglect or delay, after the Crops which may then be on the ground are harvested, particularly as it respects the aged and infirm"

(Fitzpatrick, L&ll Will and Testament, pp. 2-4. For Virginia laws dealing with the estate issues and manumission

requirements faced by the Washing tons, see Hening, Statutes,

Volume V, pp. 445. 446, and 464; Volume XI, pp. 39-40;

Volume XXII, pp. 145, 146. and 150).

In December 1800, Martha Washington signed a deed of manumission for her deceased husband's slaves, a transaction which is recorded in the abstracts of the

Fairfax County, Virginia, Court Records.

Time and again since the end of the Civil War, interviews with former slaves and letters written by them have sometimes expressed the idea that they were better off before they were freed and showed a remarkable attachment to former masters.

These statements are often embarassing to their descendants and completely incomprehensible to most modern Americans. The following remarks, recorded

46 ••

during the Depression, are not unusual: "I think slavery was a mighty good thing

for. ..the [speaker's] family, and I cannot say anything but good for my old master

and missus": "Missus died since the surrender. When she got sick she sent for me to

go and wait on her. I just couldn't refuse Missus when she sent for me, even if she

had treated me bad"; "Miss Ella [a former mistress] died two years ago....I sure

missed her. There wasn't ever no one like her"; and "I think some of the slaves was

better off when they had owners and was in slavery than they is now" (Hurlence, ~

~ l2mU ~ ~ 1Q Talk About Slavery. pp. xii-xiii, 50. 66, 74, and 87). One emancipated South Carolina slave even wrote to his former master, a Mr. Ball, to

assure him that "As long as there are Balls, I will have mistresses and masters"

(quoted in Lynne Duke. Harrowed Ground, p. 21). There may have been a number of reasons why these people, who had lived under an essentially de-humanizing

system, should have felt this way, including the possibility that they were only telling

the interviewers what they wanted to hear. In any case, these statements remind us

that for everyone, white and black, involved with the institution of slavery the

relationships that developed could be very complex. Simplistic answers do a disservice to all.

At least some of the slaves who labored for George Washington at Mount

Vernon came to feel a similar loyalty to him that lasted beyond the grave. As an old

man, freed for many years, former Mount Vernon carpenter Sambo Anderson

echoed the sentiments above, when he told a white acquaintance that he "was a much

happier man when he was a slave than he had ever been since," because he had then

"had a good kind master to look after all my wants, but now I have no one to care

for me." The narrator remarked that he had known quite a few former Washington

slaves and "they all spoke in the highest terms of their master" C'Mount Vernon

Reminiscences Continued," Alexandria Gazette, 1/22/1876, transcript in "Early

47 Descriptions After 1800"research notebook at Mount Vernon).

Many years after Washington's death, a visitor to Mount Vernon noticed a work party, made up of eleven black men, making some improvements to the ground around Washington's new tomb, which had been constructed by a few years before.

Struck by the "earnest expression of feeling about them," he began a conversation with them. It developed that they were some of the slaves freed by George

Washington and had returned to Mount Vernon to do this work, volunteering "their services upon this last and melancholy occasion, as the only re turn in their power to make to the remains of the man who had been more than a father to them ...they should continue their labors as long as any thing should be pointed out for them to do" (Alexandria Gazette, 11/16/1835).

Mary V. Thompson Curatorial Registrar Mount Vernon Ladies' Association

6/23/1995

48