Essay on the Character and Influence of Washington in the Revolution of the United States of AmericaGuizot, François
History
Essay on the Character and Influence of Washington in the Revolution of the United States of America
Guizot, François
Washington, George, 1732-1799 -- Military leadership
A man of experience and a man of action, he had an admirable
wisdom, and made no pretension to systematic theories. He took no
side beforehand; he made no show of the principles that were to
govern him. Thus, there was nothing like a logical harshness in
his conduct, no committal of self-love, no struggle of rival
talent. When he obtained the victory, his success was not to his
adversaries either a stake lost, or a sweeping sentence of
condemnation. It was not on the ground of the superiority of his
own mind, that he triumphed; but on the ground of the nature of
things, and of the inevitable necessity that accompanied them.
{111}
Still his success was not an event without a moral character, the
simple result of skill, strength, or fortune. Uninfluenced by any
theory, he had faith in truth, and adopted it as the guide of his
conduct. He did not pursue the victory of one opinion against the
partisans of another; neither did he act from interest in the
event alone, or merely for success. He did nothing which he did
not think to be reasonable and just; so that his conduct, which
had no systematic character, that might be humbling to his
adversaries, had still a moral character, which commanded
respect.
Men had, moreover, the most thorough conviction of his
disinterestedness; that great light, to which men so willingly
trust their fate; that vast power, which draws after it their
hearts, while, at the same time, it gives them confidence that
their interests will not be surrendered, either as a sacrifice,
or as instruments to selfishness and ambition.
{112}
His first act, the formation of his cabinet, was the most
striking proof of his impartiality. Four persons were selected by
him; Hamilton and Knox, of the federal party; Jefferson and
Randolph, of the democratic. Knox was a soldier, of integrity, of
moderate abilities, and easily influenced; Randolph, a restless
spirit, of doubtful probity, and little good faith; Jefferson and
Hamilton were both sincere, honest, enthusiastic, and able,--the
real heads of the two parties.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account