L

CHAPTER V

WASHINGTON, THE FOUNDATION

INCOLN was invited in 1842 to make a Washington's Birthday address at Springfield. He devoted his entire speech, with the exception of the closing paragraph, to the general theme of government. Then he referred to Washington in these words: "This is the one hundred and tenth anniversary of the birthday of Washington. We are met to celebrate this day. Washington is the mightiest name of earth-long since mightiest in the cause of civil liberty. On that name no eulogy is expected. It cannot be. To add brightness to the sun or glory to the name of Washington, is alike impossible. Let none attempt it. In solemn awe pronounce the name, and in its naked, deathless splendor leave it shining on."

As a tribute that paragraph takes rank among the most fitting things ever said about the great American. On the other hand, it is precisely that attitude of admiration from afar which has in recent years made Wash

ington more of a myth than a man. The result has been a growing tendency to treat him as a figurehead by means of which abler but less popular men carried on the gigantic task of securing and fortifying American freedom.

He did not make half a dozen suggestions bearing on the details of the Constitution on the floor of the convention in Philadelphia. For that reason, some historians have maintained that he really had but little part in its formation and adoption. No idea could be more unfair to him.

There is significance in the fact that the two ablest executives of the Revolution, Washington and Robert Morris, were apparently noncombatants during the critical months in which the Constitution was taking shape. Morris spoke only once, and that was to nominate Washington for chairman. With that act he seemed to feel that his duties as a speaker in the gathering had been discharged. Washington, likewise, took no direct part in the discussions, save as presiding officer, never relinquishing the chair to put the weight of his personality behind any proposition which was in the balance in debate.

、

This did not mean that Washington and Morris were incapable of making a convincing speech. On the contrary, Morris, in Congress during the Revolutionary period, and Washington, in addressing his soldiers and later in his utterances as chief executive, proved themselves thoroughly capable of carrying their audiences along with them.

Washington was simply convinced that the system which had been worked out, minor imperfections being allowed for, was the only one for the American people. He did not want to ram it down the throats of the delegates, however, or to make any attempt to stampede the people into clamor for its approval. He played a tremendous part in the formation of the new government, from the time he took the field against the British until he had completed his Farewell Address, yet he never flaunted his leadership before

men.

As a statesman he stood ready to throw his influence publicly into the scales wherever he saw that selfish politicians actually threatened to prevent the adoption of the Constitution, unless he came to its rescue. But he was also

a shrewd enough judge of human nature to know that the people must be convinced of the value of the new government, not merely stampeded into approving it.

For that reason, debate was valuable. In addition, he knew that only in the give and take of a convention of all the states could the compromises necessary to general satisfaction with the plan be fully revealed. Therefore, he was in the background, just far enough back to avoid overshadowing the other men who were zealous for the national welfare, and just close enough up to step in with his influence in quiet fashion when it was required.

So universal was the public confidence in him, that it was admitted by all prior to the meeting of the convention in Philadelphia that without the strength of his presence the task could not be accomplished. That confidence was not based on mere exploits in the field, splendid though they had been. It was founded upon the magnificent character of the man, which all felt to be genuine and powerful. Similarly, after the Constitution was adopted, it was realized that the government

could not be truly successful without his guidance at the outset.

The great concept out of which this Republic grew was Washington's, and his was the personality that made it a reality. The lawyers arranged the phrases and clauses and worked out the details of the system of checks and balances. The lovers of history furnished whatever feeble light was to be had from the past. The orators presented the matter to the convention and to the people. The writers carried forward the argument in the press. All that is to be admitted, and no man would be more eager than Washington to give ungrudging credit to all of the splendid men who worked under his inspiration toward the common goal. But Washington was the seer of America, and in the larger aspect, he it was who, using all men who faced the light, won the victory for lasting freedom.

One of the favorite devices of those who would lessen confidence in our government is to insinuate that Washington, and those who surrounded him, only pretended to work for the general welfare and actually sought to set