George Washington played a key role in the lives of many people. In this two-part series we look at how he recognized talent and developed a number of younger men during his life. In part 2 of 2, we look at how Washington developed Henry Knox and Alexander Hamilton, and conclude with 5 key take-aways. Michael Wilhelm explains.
If you missed it you can read part 1 here.
Alexander Hamilton in the uniform of the New York Artillery. By Alonzo Chappel.
The Portly Bookseller
Henry Knox was born on July 25, 1750. Knox was raised by a single mother and received only a fifth-grade education. Needing to go work to help support the family, he eventually became a bookstore owner in Boston called The London Bookshop. It was in his bookshop that he read the works that would teach him about artillery, thus beginning his preparation for his role in the Continental Army. Knox taught himself to reach French because the French army was the acknowledged leader in artillery siege tactics during that time. He met and immediately fell in love with Lucy Fluckner, who came from aristocratic and Loyalist stock. They married in July 1774. They would have an extremely happy marriage with the exception that 10 or their 13 children died young. He left to join the Revolution at age 25.
After arriving at Cambridge, Washington used his eye for talent to appoint both Nathanael Greene and Henry Knox to significant roles within the new Continental Army. Washington would describe him as “a big, fat, garrulous, keenly intelligent” man. Knox would serve as chief of artillery through the majority of the war. Probably Knox’s chief claim to fame during the war came quite early. During the siege of Boston, Knox conceived a plan for bringing the cannon from Fort Ticonderoga to bear on the British occupying the city. Fifty-nine of Fort Ticonderoga’s cannons equaling over 119,000 pounds of brass were mobilized by Knox and his men. The trek to Boston was a trip of over 300 miles. He and his men even used sleds where the snow made this the easier way to keep moving. With the deploying of the cannon over Dorchester Heights, the British knew they had no choice but to evacuate the city.
After the war, it was Knox who proposed the idea of the Society of the Cincinnati, a hereditary organization for the descendants of those who fought in the American Revolution. The Society still has 3,900 members and is headquartered in Washington, D.C. Knox would continue to serve in Washington’s inner circle as the country’s first Secretary of War from 1789-1794. He would assist Washington in the nation’s dealings with the Native American tribes and oversee the establishment of the U.S. Navy. His dwindling financial prospects forced his retirement from government. He retired to the territory of Maine and built a home called Montpelier. He briefly considered coming out of retirement during the Quasi-War with France during the Adams administration. However, when he discovered that Alexander Hamilton would outrank him in the new army, he refused to serve. This is one particular instance when Washington appears to be particularly tone-deaf and out of touch. The relationship seems never to have recovered from the strain. Knox would be honored by the nation by having Fort Knox named in his honor. He died October 25, 1806.[1]
The Clerk from Nevis
Alexander Hamilton was born in the West Indies in either 1755 or 1757 on the island of Nevis. His illegitimacy would at times make him a target for his political enemies. He was abandoned by his father in 1766. His mother died two years later. He began working as a clerk at a trading company at age 11. He came to some public attention in 1772 after the publication of his description of a hurricane that hit the island. Locals raised money for him to be able to go to America to pursue an education. He studied at King’s College, which is now Columbia University. Before joining the Continental Army, he had defended the Continental Congress’ embargo of British goods in a pamphlet called, “A Full Vindication of the Measures of Congress.”
He was commissioned to lead an artillery company in the Continental Army and fought in the Battles of Trenton and Princeton. In 1777, he joined Washington’s staff as an aide-de-camp. It was while on Washington’s staff that he showed the ability to think and express the General’s thoughts for him. This made him much depended upon by “His Excellency.” Hamilton could be thin-skinned and imperious. It is likely a testament to Washington’s skill in being able to handle troublesome personalities that they worked so well together, so long. He was so prickly an individual, Jane Freeman states that Hamilton was involved in ten affairs of honor before the duel with Aaron Burr that ended his life.[2] However, he would leave Washington’s staff peeved over a clash when he had kept Washington waiting. Though the true reason may have been that Hamilton had been pressing for a battlefield commission. Washington would assign him to an artillery regiment at the battle of Yorktown in which by all accounts, he fought heroically.
Hamilton had married into the wealthy Schulyer family when he wed Elizabeth. They would have eight children together. The Schulyer’s were part of the New York aristocracy, so Hamilton passed the bar and set up his law practice in New York. He attended the 1787 Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia. He argued for such a strong central government based on the British model that it is likely that he influenced very few people there. After the Convention had done his work, he collaborated with James Madison and John Jay to produce the Federalist Papers to argue for the ratification of the new Constitution. Though Washington had not taken a very active part in the debate, he had become convinced both through his service in the American Revolution and his own observations of the weaknesses of the Articles of Confederation, that a new Constitution with some teeth was necessary. He would use his influence to encourage the writers to do their work and lauded the completed effort. Washington waited in the wings with some trepidation regarding the result of what would be the fate of the Constitution. Though all were nearly unanimous in agreement that if the Constitution were ratified, Washington would be the first president. A number of the delegates from Philadelphia contended that the office of president would not be nearly so powerful if this were not the prevailing expectation.
Peacemaker
On April 30, 1789, Washington was inaugurated as president. He would bring in one of the most talented Cabinet’s the government would ever see. This is true even if one considers only his choice of Secretary of Treasury and Secretary of State. Both Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson would serve in the Washington administration during his first term. It appears that both men seemed to take an immediate dislike to each other. Washington took pains to play peacemaker between them. Jefferson seemed to feel that Hamilton was evil incarnate. However, the reason for this is almost comic in its irony. Jefferson felt that Hamilton had monarchial inclinations. That if he were allowed to succeed, the common people would be eaten up by aristocracy. So, the illegitimate clerk from the West Indies was the champion of banking and wealth interests, while Jefferson, the slave owner, saw himself as the champion of the common man and untainted by his privileged upbringing. To make matters worse, when it came to financial matters such as the creation of the national bank and the assumption of state debts from the American Revolution, Washington backed Hamilton. Jefferson soothed himself with the thought that if he was not duped or out of his mind, Washington would never have done such a thing.
Though he perhaps would want to dispute the point, it is almost certain that Hamilton would have been a footnote in history had he never come under the tutelage of Washington. Washington appears to have been self-assured enough that neither Hamilton nor Jefferson as talented as they were could intimidate him. Yet, through his association with Washington, Hamilton was able to unleash his monumental talents and prodigious energies on the young nation’s most fundamental questions. His association with Washington opened doors for Hamilton in both the public and private spheres. Indeed, it is worth pondering that the one thing that Hamilton and Jefferson seemed to have been in absolute accord upon was the indispensability of Washington to the fledging county when both wished to resign from the government.
Washington would call upon Hamilton once again when he finally decided to retire and made certain that those in influence understood, this time there would be no changing his mind. Washington had asked Madison to help with a valedictory address toward the end of his first term. At that time, several advisors had stressed that the young nation would not survive without Washington as the helm. Very much against his wishes, Washington put the address away for another day. However, after the criticism that he has drawn from the Jay Treaty and the Democratic-Republicans during his second term, he would not be moved. First, Washington kept some of the original document in what would become known as his Farewell Address. This made it clear, as just as a reminder, Washington was not leaving just because things had gotten tough, he had just gotten to the point that he was going to do what he had wanted to do for some time. Second, he contacted Hamilton (Madison along with Jefferson had by now gone over to the opposition) for help with the document. This has caused some to question who is the actual author of Washington’s Farewell. On this point, James Madison writes, “arguing that Washington’s friends and allies ‘ought to claim for him the merit only of cherishing the principles and views addressed to his Country, and for the address itself the weight given to it by his sanction; leaving the literary merit, whatever it be, to the friendly pen employed on the occasion; the rather as it was never understood that Washington valued himself on his writing talent, and no secret to some that he occasionally availed himself of the friendship of others who he supposed more practiced than himself in studied composition.”[3]
Madison is certainly correct. Indeed, this is the pattern that is found throughout Washington’s public career. Washington found others who were practiced and more learned than himself and relied on them to express his thoughts for him. This same pattern holds here. Hamilton is the penman but the ideas belong to Washington. The printer who published the Farewell Address for his newspaper (it was never given as an address) noted that Washington was making correction to the text even as it was going to press. This was another collaboration in a lifetime of collaborations by the shrewdest player on the national and international stage. After Hamilton’s death on July 12, 1804, his beloved Elizabeth championed his authorship of the Farewell Address both to rehabilitate her husband’s reputation and enhance it. However, even at that time, those who knew Washington and how he had worked were never convinced. Hamilton referred to Washington when he stated, “’Perhaps no friend of his has more cause to lament on personal account than myself’ he told an associate, saying that Washington had been, ‘an aegis very essential to me.’”[4] Such was a profound understatement. Without Washington, what would we know of Hamilton?
Tying the Ends Together
1. It must be admitted that over a lifetime that lasted sixty-seven years, there were ups and downs, and outright failures. Even among the men we considered there were those who caused Washington more headaches than others. Yet, once Washington had moved someone into his inner circle, it took a great many grievances for them to be removed. This patience is not something that Washington is much known for in many of the biographies that have been written. Yet, it does appear to exist, at least to the extent that if he had decided that a young man had potential, he seemed willing to take the long road to see that potential fulfilled. This patience did not even always carry over to those closest to Washington. Indeed, the evidence seems to suggest that Mrs. Washington had no patience with Hamilton whatsoever. In fact, she named a feral cat known around the presidential residence Hamilton. Washington seems to have seen Hamilton’s talent as worthy of a wide berth in his personal life.
2. Joseph Ellis gives a wonderful illustration of Washington’s leadership style. “All major decisions were collective occasions, in which advisers, like spokes on a wheel, made contributions, usually in written form. But in the end the final decision, to include the final choice of words, came together at the center, which was always Washington.”[5] In context, Ellis is referring to the writing process of the Farewell Address. However, this image helps to illustrate Washington’s method of making decisions throughout his entire public career. He trusted those that he put in position and expected them to provide him with the best information that they had. In Cabinet proceedings, the different department heads reported on decisions that needed to be made. There was a place for debate and argument. Washington expected that those who espoused a position voice it forcibly. Yet, when he had made a decision and the government or army had moved in a direction, he expected debate to be at an end. In this he was at times, disappointed. This is how he expected it to work in any case.
3. Those who came under the tutelage of Washington in a number of cases owe to him their place on the historical stage. He had an eye for talent and he seemed to enjoy using it. From Greene to Knox, to even the Marquis de Lafayette, Washington believed in giving responsibility and then letting others fulfill it. There were times that this led to disappointing results, but in the long run he was often proved right. Thomas Jefferson would find fault with his education, but even he had to admit that Washington’s reasoned conclusions were usually accurate to a remarkable degree. There are very few in the Revolutionary generation who are known to us that were not influenced, assisted, or in some promoted by Washington. It was in many ways, his generation.
4. This line of inquiry and investigation brings to the fore an aspect of Washington that our generation often misses, though his generation took it for granted. This involves his personal magnetism. People were drawn to Washington. He was considered by his generation a natural born leader. He was a hit with the ladies, with whom he enjoyed flirting and dancing. Graceful was a word that often described his movements among his contemporaries. What explains this separation of opinion? It likely has to do with the deification that began to occur with the persona of Washington even during his lifetime. You may revere a god but it is difficult to be attracted to one if you are mere mortal who will never measure up. He seems distant and unknowable. Perhaps it is time to attempt to recover at least a glimpse of Washington as his generation saw him. Even a stern a critic of men and the times as Abigail Adams echoed the words of the Queen of Sheba after she had met Solomon, “I felt the half had not been told me.”[6] Why do we still study, write, and think about Washington? Because the half has not yet been told, indeed.
5. Finally, it is perfectly true that this line of thought could have been extended much farther. Fans of the Marquis de Lafayette are perhaps disappointed that he did not rate discussion. However, there are some within Washington’s circle who were well on their way before meeting him. Lafayette is, in my view, a case in point. In addition, I have not mentioned the relationship that Washington had with James Madison. These are just two examples of others who might have been included here. I leave these and others for those whose interest has been sparked to pursue. I am sure that I will likely do some of this myself.
Much ink has been spilled over the life of Washington and yet, this will continue to be the case. It is such a stimulating conversation.
What do you think of George Washington’s ability to develop young men? Let us know below.
[1] General biographical help received at knoxmuseum.org/Henry-Knox/
[2] History.com/topics/American-revolution/Alexander-Hamilton
[3] Avlon, John. Washington’s Farewell: The Founding Father’s Warning to Future Generations. Simon & Schuster, New York: 2017, p. 225.
[4] Chernow, ibid, p. 811.
[5] Ellis, Joseph J. Founding Brothers: The Revolutionary Generation. Alfred A. Knopf, New York: 2000, p. 150.
[6] Chernow, Ibid, p. 195.
