.jpg?w=1)
Details
WASHINGTON, George (1732-1799). Autograph letter signed ("Go: Washington") to François Jean de Beauvoir, Marquis de Chastellux (1734-1788), Mount Vernon, 2 June 1784. 2 pages, 4to, very fine.
Writing to Chastellux on his official communications to Rochambeau, L’Enfant, d’Estaing and other French members of the Society of the Cincinnati, mentioning its recent general meeting, where Washington had threatened to resign unless key reforms be carried out in the face of public opposition.
Washington has "the honor to receive a short letter from you by Maj[o]r L'Enfant.—My official letter to the Counts de Estaing & Rochambeau (which I expect will be submitted to the members of the Society of the Cincinnati in France) will inform you of the proceedings of the Genl. Meeting held at Philad[el]a...& of the reasons which induced a departure from some of the original principles, and rules of the Society:— As these have been detailed, I will not repeat them — and as we have no occurrences out of the common course, except the establishment of ten New States in the [North] Western Territory, and the appointment of Mr. Jefferson (whose talents & worth are well known to you) as one of the Commissioners for forming Commercial Treaties in Europe; I will only repeat to you the assurances of my friendship, and express to you a wish that I could see you in the shade of those Trees which my hands have planted, and which by their rapid growth, at once indicate a knowledge of my declination, & disposition to spread their mantles over me before I go hence, to return no more.— for this, their gratitude, I will nurture them while I stay.—”
He adds a recommendation for David Humphreys, recently appointed Secretary to the Commission, who “possesses an excellent heart, and a good understanding....”
The Society of the Cincinnati, founded by Henry Knox and other officers who fought in the War for Independence, was named after Lucius Quintius Cincinnatus, who left his farm twice to save Rome (458 and 439 B.C.), and returned to farming once peace had returned. The French veterans’ participation was approved by the King himself. Despite allusions to the ideals of Cincinnatus, the Society was met with opposition from republican quarters, fearing the hereditary Society was merely a means to establish an American nobility that would supplant the authority of Congress. The chorus of opposition concerned Washington enough that he proposed a series of reforms at the Society’s meeting that began on 4 May 1784. In that meeting, he warned of “disagreeable consequences” unless basic changes were made, including the removal of any language that could be construed to have “a political tendency,” rejecting donations from foreign citizens, placing the control of each state society under control of the legislature, and most importantly, the abolition of hereditary membership.
Washington’s proposals were not warmly received. The delegations from New York and New Jersey immediately opposed his suggestion to abolish the hereditary component. The next day, Henry Knox read aloud a letter from Chastellux, who seemed also to oppose hereditary membership. (In a 6 March 1784 letter to Washington, Chastellux expressed his hopes that “this establishment being contained in proper bounds, will triumph…and I hope your country will understand how to unity the glory of the military to the liberty of the citizens.”) Then Washington delivered another impassioned plea to the assembly, threatening to resign unless his reforms were implemented. Ultimately the Society agreed to revise the charter mostly to his wishes. Ultimately, the Society did remain a hereditary one, and though its member wielded a good deal of influence in the formation of the federal Constitution several years later, it never became a dominant political force that posed a threat to the republic.
See M. Myers, Jr. Liberty without Anarchy: A History of the Society of the Cincinnati. Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 1983.
Letter book copy published in Papers, Confederation Series, 1:413.
Writing to Chastellux on his official communications to Rochambeau, L’Enfant, d’Estaing and other French members of the Society of the Cincinnati, mentioning its recent general meeting, where Washington had threatened to resign unless key reforms be carried out in the face of public opposition.
Washington has "the honor to receive a short letter from you by Maj[o]r L'Enfant.—My official letter to the Counts de Estaing & Rochambeau (which I expect will be submitted to the members of the Society of the Cincinnati in France) will inform you of the proceedings of the Genl. Meeting held at Philad[el]a...& of the reasons which induced a departure from some of the original principles, and rules of the Society:— As these have been detailed, I will not repeat them — and as we have no occurrences out of the common course, except the establishment of ten New States in the [North] Western Territory, and the appointment of Mr. Jefferson (whose talents & worth are well known to you) as one of the Commissioners for forming Commercial Treaties in Europe; I will only repeat to you the assurances of my friendship, and express to you a wish that I could see you in the shade of those Trees which my hands have planted, and which by their rapid growth, at once indicate a knowledge of my declination, & disposition to spread their mantles over me before I go hence, to return no more.— for this, their gratitude, I will nurture them while I stay.—”
He adds a recommendation for David Humphreys, recently appointed Secretary to the Commission, who “possesses an excellent heart, and a good understanding....”
The Society of the Cincinnati, founded by Henry Knox and other officers who fought in the War for Independence, was named after Lucius Quintius Cincinnatus, who left his farm twice to save Rome (458 and 439 B.C.), and returned to farming once peace had returned. The French veterans’ participation was approved by the King himself. Despite allusions to the ideals of Cincinnatus, the Society was met with opposition from republican quarters, fearing the hereditary Society was merely a means to establish an American nobility that would supplant the authority of Congress. The chorus of opposition concerned Washington enough that he proposed a series of reforms at the Society’s meeting that began on 4 May 1784. In that meeting, he warned of “disagreeable consequences” unless basic changes were made, including the removal of any language that could be construed to have “a political tendency,” rejecting donations from foreign citizens, placing the control of each state society under control of the legislature, and most importantly, the abolition of hereditary membership.
Washington’s proposals were not warmly received. The delegations from New York and New Jersey immediately opposed his suggestion to abolish the hereditary component. The next day, Henry Knox read aloud a letter from Chastellux, who seemed also to oppose hereditary membership. (In a 6 March 1784 letter to Washington, Chastellux expressed his hopes that “this establishment being contained in proper bounds, will triumph…and I hope your country will understand how to unity the glory of the military to the liberty of the citizens.”) Then Washington delivered another impassioned plea to the assembly, threatening to resign unless his reforms were implemented. Ultimately the Society agreed to revise the charter mostly to his wishes. Ultimately, the Society did remain a hereditary one, and though its member wielded a good deal of influence in the formation of the federal Constitution several years later, it never became a dominant political force that posed a threat to the republic.
See M. Myers, Jr. Liberty without Anarchy: A History of the Society of the Cincinnati. Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 1983.
Letter book copy published in Papers, Confederation Series, 1:413.