George Washington: The Reluctant President
It seemed as if everyone rejoiced at the election of our first chief executive except the man himself
- By Ron Chernow
- Illustration by Joe Ciardiello
- Smithsonian magazine, February 2011, Subscribe
(Page 3 of 4)
Washington knew that everything he did at the swearing-in would establish a tone for the future. “As the first of everything in our situation will serve to establish a precedent,” he reminded Madison, “it is devoutly wished on my part that these precedents may be fixed on true principles.” He would shape indelibly the institution of the presidency. Although he had earned his reputation in battle, he made a critical decision not to wear a uniform at the inauguration or beyond, banishing fears of a military coup. Instead, he would stand there aglitter with patriotic symbols. To spur American manufactures, he would wear a double-breasted brown suit, made from broadcloth woven at the Woolen Manufactory of Hartford, Connecticut. The suit had gilt buttons with an eagle insignia on them; to round out his outfit, he would wear white hosiery, silver shoe buckles and yellow gloves. Washington already sensed that Americans would emulate their presidents. “I hope it will not be a great while before it will be unfashionable for a gentleman to appear in any other dress,” he told his friend the Marquis de Lafayette, referring to his American attire. “Indeed, we have already been too long subject to British prejudices.” To burnish his image further on Inauguration Day, Washington would powder his hair and wear a dress sword on his hip, sheathed in a steel scabbard.
The inauguration took place at the building at Wall and Nassau streets that had long served as New York’s City Hall. It came richly laden with historical associations, having hosted John Peter Zenger’s trial in 1735, the Stamp Act Congress of 1765 and the Confederation Congress from 1785 to 1788. Starting in September 1788, the French engineer Pierre-Charles L’Enfant had remodeled it into Federal Hall, a suitable home for Congress. L’Enfant introduced a covered arcade at street level and a balcony surmounted by a triangular pediment on the second story. As the people’s chamber, the House of Representatives was accessible to the public, situated in a high-ceilinged octagonal room on the ground floor, while the Senate met in a second-floor room on the Wall Street side, buffering it from popular pressure. From this room Washington would emerge onto the balcony to take the oath of office. In many ways, the first inauguration was a hasty, slapdash affair. As with all theatrical spectacles, rushed preparations and frantic work on the new building continued until a few days before the event. Nervous anticipation spread through the city as to whether the 200 workmen would complete the project on time. Only a few days before the inauguration, an eagle was hoisted onto the pediment, completing the building. The final effect was stately: a white building with a blue and white cupola topped by a weather vane.
A little after noon on April 30, 1789, following a morning filled with clanging church bells and prayers, a contingent of troops on horseback, accompanied by carriages loaded with legislators, stopped at Washington’s Cherry Street residence. Escorted by David Humphreys and aide Tobias Lear, the president-elect stepped into his appointed carriage, which was trailed by foreign dignitaries and throngs of joyous citizens. The procession wound slowly through the narrow Manhattan streets, emerging 200 yards from Federal Hall. After alighting from his carriage, Washington strode through a double line of soldiers to the building and mounted to the Senate chamber, where members of Congress awaited him expectantly. As he entered, Washington bowed to both houses of the legislature—his invariable mark of respect—then occupied an imposing chair up front. A profound hush settled on the room. Vice President John Adams rose for an official greeting, then informed Washington that the epochal moment had arrived. “Sir, the Senate and House of Representatives are ready to attend you to take the oath required by the Constitution.” “I am ready to proceed,” Washington replied.
As he stepped through the door onto the balcony, a spontaneous roar surged from the multitude tightly squeezed into Wall and Broad streets and covering every roof in sight. This open-air ceremony would confirm the sovereignty of the citizens gathered below. Washington’s demeanor was stately, modest and deeply affecting: he clapped one hand to his heart and bowed several times to the crowd. Surveying the serried ranks of people, one observer said they were jammed so closely together “that it seemed one might literally walk on the heads of the people.” Thanks to his simple dignity, integrity and unrivaled sacrifices for his country, Washington’s conquest of the people was complete. A member of the crowd, the Count de Moustier, the French minister, noted the solemn trust between Washington and the citizens who stood packed below him with uplifted faces. As he reported to his government, never had a “sovereign reigned more completely in the hearts of his subjects than did Washington in those of his fellow citizens...he has the soul, look and figure of a hero united in him.” One young woman in the crowd echoed this when she remarked, “I never saw a human being that looked so great and noble as he does.” Only Congressman Fisher Ames of Massachusetts noted that “time has made havoc” upon Washington’s face, which already looked haggard and careworn.
The sole constitutional requirement for the swearing-in was that the president take the oath of office. That morning, a Congressional committee decided to add solemnity by having Washington place his hand on a Bible during the oath, leading to a frantic, last-minute scramble to locate one. A Masonic lodge came to the rescue by providing a thick Bible, bound in deep brown leather and set on a crimson velvet cushion. By the time Washington appeared on the portico, the Bible rested on a table draped in red.
The crowd grew silent as New York Chancellor Robert R. Livingston administered the oath to Washington, who was visibly moved. As the president finished the oath, he bent forward, seized the Bible and brought it to his lips. Washington felt this moment from the bottom of his soul: one observer noted the “devout fervency” with which he “repeated the oath and the reverential manner in which he bowed down and kissed” the Bible. Legend has it that he added, “So help me God,” though this line was first reported 65 years later. Whether or not Washington actually said it, very few people would have heard him anyway, since his voice was soft and breathy. For the crowd below, the oath of office was enacted as a kind of dumb show. Livingston had to lift his voice and inform the crowd, “It is done.” He then intoned: “Long live George Washington, president of the United States.” The spectators responded with huzzahs and chants of “God bless our Washington! Long live our beloved president!” They celebrated in the only way they knew, as if greeting a new monarch with the customary cry of “Long live the king!”
When the balcony ceremony was concluded, Washington returned to the Senate chamber to deliver his inaugural address. In an important piece of symbolism, Congress rose as he entered, then sat down after Washington bowed in response. In England, the House of Commons stood during the king’s speeches; the seated Congress immediately established a sturdy equality between the legislative and executive branches.
As Washington began his speech, he seemed flustered and thrust his left hand in his pocket while turning the pages with a trembling right hand. His weak voice was barely audible in the room. Fisher Ames evoked him thus: “His aspect grave, almost to sadness; his modesty, actually shaking; his voice deep, a little tremulous, and so low as to call for close attention.” Those present attributed Washington’s low voice and fumbling hands to anxiety. “This great man was agitated and embarrassed more than ever he was by the leveled cannon or pointed musket,” said Pennsylvania Senator William Maclay in sniggering tones. “He trembled and several times could scarce make out to read, though it must be supposed he had often read it before.” Washington’s agitation might have arisen from an undiagnosed neurological disorder or might simply have been a bad case of nerves. The new president had long been famous for his physical grace, but the sole gesture he used for emphasis in his speech seemed clumsy—“a flourish with his right hand,” said Maclay, “which left rather an ungainly impression.” For the next few years, Maclay would be a close, unsparing observer of the new president’s nervous quirks and tics.
Single Page « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »
Subscribe now for more of Smithsonian's coverage on history, science and nature.
Related topics: George Washington American Revolution
Additional Sources
George Washington: A Biography, Volume Six: Patriot and President by Douglas Southall Freeman, Scribner & Sons, 1954









Comments (9)
I THINK IS INTERESTING, BUT THERE ARE SOME WORDS THAN I DON`T UNDERSTAND =(
Posted by manuel on February 11,2011 | 09:32 AM
This was a very interesting article to me. Presently I am reading "George Washington - the Christian" by William J. Johnson (The Abingdon Press, New York/Cincinnati, 1919). As it treats the time leading up to this inauguration, the content of Washington's correspondence corroborates Chernow's premise of reluctance. Washington seems to have had a very limited view of his own capabilities. He attributed his success as a general and his hope of success as president to Almighty God. This is attested in his public and private worship as well as his diary and correspondence. There can be no doubt of his deep, abiding faith. He was a communicant in good standing with the Protestant Episcopal Church (successor to the Church of England after the revolution), but he attended other services, including Presbyterian and Roman Catholic. He confessed no prejudice toward any man's faith, but this seemed to be confined to the Christian religions since Washington qualified his statement by saying that a man's faith should lead him to God. As a Christian himself, he would have subscribed to Jesus' statement, "No man comes to the Father except through me." (Gospel of John 14:6b)
Posted by Rev. Charles Hofmeister on February 9,2011 | 02:35 PM
George Washington, on his journey to his inauguration, did not arrive in Elizabethtown at the docks, and immediately climb aboard a barge to N.Y. He arrived at Boxwood Hall on Water Street (now East Jersey St.) the home of Elias Boudinot, the President of the Continental Congress. There he had lunch with Boudinot and his guests, William Livingston, John Jay, Richard Henry Lee, and Charles Carol. Washington's wife Martha was, at that time , a guest at William Livingston's home, Liberty Hall, on Morris Ave. in Elizabethtown.
Dan Pagdon
Posted by Dan Pagdon on February 7,2011 | 05:15 PM
Chernow’s a superb writer and a great story teller.
But his portrait suffers from laudatory boredom. This is the same old story told and retold since Mason Weems authored the first “history” of Washington in 1800 with the express purpose of making money, something he candidly admitted to his publisher.
There are contrary views, from Paul Longmore’s famous, The Invention of George Washington, to more present accounts, such as John Ferling’s, The Ascent of George Washington: The Hidden Political Genius of an American Icon.
In my view, both views lack context. To see Washington as something more than a reluctant president, or one secretly harboring a desire to be president, as is suggested in these books, a comparison that takes us beyond the confines of the United States is needed. This is really an elementary step given that the United States at that time was a product of an Atlantic World.
Of course, such a telling would gravitate to a figure most un-Washington at the surface level, Napoleon Bonaparte. But their similarities are astounding. These contemporaries both presided over an age of revolution, and this important context binds them together.
Alas, no such comparison exists, one that refocuses the debate of Washington by placing it in the international—Atlantic World—context it deserves.
That is, none exists until later this year, when a book I am co-authoring is to be released. Titled, Washington and Napoleon: Leadership in the Age of Revolution.
Longmore had suggested long ago that Washington was playing the part of general to secure a place in colonial society. Did he take that ambition to the presidency, a desire to cement his place as the greatest American? And how best to accomplish this? Would it be by feigning a reluctance to accept power?
Answers to these and other questions are what is “new” when studying Washington.
Matthew Flynn
Hisotry Professor, USMA, West Point
Posted by Matthew J. Flynn on February 5,2011 | 03:48 PM
Wow, what a great idea, I like it.
Posted by GemiHemi on February 4,2011 | 09:34 AM
After reading this article, I am sure it was daunting for George Washington to be faced with the task of being the leader of this new country. It was almost as if that people expected him to wave magic wand and fix everything. The same could be said for the men that occupied this office since Washington. Washington certainly realized that all of those celebrations were easiest thing he would attend to.
Posted by Rose Ann Jones on January 30,2011 | 03:41 PM
While reading of Washington's fear that he would disappoint the extravagant expectations of his countrymen, I could only rejoice that we now have presidential candidates who are unencumbered by such crippling doubts. Indeed, rather than wait for extravagant praise from others, they take the more dependable course and manufacture it themselves. Some even muse that their mere nomination for the office has signaled a moment when oceans have ceased to rise and the earth itself has begun to heal. I don't know about you, but I certainly prefer a politician of the modern kind rather than an old fuddy-duddy like George Washington. I want someone who will do something, and stopping the rise of oceans sounds pretty impressive to me.
Posted by Robert Pujat on January 26,2011 | 03:33 PM
Ron Chernow is not only a sophisticated historical biographer, but, at heart, he is also a very imaginative storyteller.
It's simple to see how Chernow's imagination allows his inaugural narrative to wander away from the facts at several critical points.
As an example, Chernow explains the presence of a Bible at the inauguration by saying, "That morning, a Congressional committee decided to add solemnity by having Washington place his hand on a Bible during the oath." There's a problem here, because there's no historical record of any congressional representative recommending the use of a Bible during the administration of the oath. In reality, the distinction of having Washington swear his oath on a Bible most likely belongs to NY Chancellor Robert Livingston.
Another example occurs where Chernow writes "the president finished the oath, he bent forward, seized the Bible and brought it to his lips." Unfortunately, if anyone saw Washington seize the Bible of British manufacture, no one other than Chernow has ever said so.
Next up, Chernow tells the reader: "very few people would have heard him [add 'So help me God'] anyway, since his voice was soft and breathy." It's a puzzle why Chernow chose to rev up the notion that "few people would have heard him anyway," because even if Washington spoke with a quiet voice, the French ministerial report filed by Count de Moustier included a complete transcription of the oath as it was heard by the Count while standing nearby on the balcony. In addition, William Duer, who witnessed the event from a position across the street from Federal Hall (say, forty feet away) wrote: "The words of the oath were audibly, distinctly repeated by Washington after the Chancellor, in a solemn and impressive manner, and after he had reverently kissed the book ... ."
Posted by Ray Soller on January 22,2011 | 10:03 AM
Thank you for a very interesting and informative book excerpt, which expands on a comprehensive biography, "Washington: The Indispensible Man," that I own. I had not realized he was that reluctant, though I knew from the bio that he had not wanted to serve. He also must have known about the unstated assumption of the 1787 Constitutional Convention that he would be the first to fill the presidency. Does the book treat that period?
This is also the first time the role of Madison has been detailed. At the same time he was Washington's confidante, a point not at all mentioned in the bio above, he was also the key legislator in the 1st Congress, pushing through the Bill of Rights, the first tariff legislation, the patent legislation and Hamilton's economic measures, among other things.
Posted by mark gruenberg on January 20,2011 | 12:41 AM