Washington’s constitutional reticence deepened from his first assumption of command. Frederick the Great once declared that “if he suspected that his nightcap would betray his thoughts while he slept, he would burn it.” Washington, like Frederick, and like Grant and Lee, great soldiers of the American Civil War, largely owed his success and supremacy over weak or jealous companions in arms to this subtle power. And this, with Washington, was never a studied actor’s part in the drama of Revolution. It was based upon a devout, reverential, and supreme devotion to country and the right. His moral sense was delicate, and quick to discern the great object of the people’s need and desire. He was also reverential in recognition of an Almighty Father of all mankind, whose Providence he regarded as constant, friendly, and supervising, in all the struggle which America had undertaken for absolute independence. Under this guidance, he learned how to act with judicial discretion upon the advice of his subordinates, and then,—to execute his own sentence. Baron Jomini pronounced Napoleon to have been his own best chief of staff; and such was Washington. Congress discovered as the years slipped by, and jealousies of Washington, competitions for office and for rank, and rivalries of cities, sections, and partisans, endangered the safety of the nation and the vital interests involved in the war, to trust his judgment; and history has vindicated the wisdom of their conclusion. And yet, with all this will-power in reserve, he was patient, tolerant, considerate of the honest convictions of those with contrary opinions; and so assigned officers, or detailed them upon special commissions, that, when not overborne by Congress in the detail of some of its importunate favorites, he succeeded in placing officers where their weaknesses could not prejudice the interests of the country at large, and where their faculties could be most fruitfully utilized. If the thoughtful reader will for a moment recall the name of some battlefield of the Revolution, or of any prominent military character who was identified with some determining event of that war, he will quickly notice how potentially the foresight of Washington either directed the conditions of success, or wisely compensated the effects of failure. Washington never counted disappointments as to single acts of men, or the operations of a single command, as determining factors in the supreme matter of final success. The vaulting ambition, headstrong will, and fiery daring of Arnold never lessened an appreciation of his real merits, and he acquired so decided an affection for him, personally, and was so disappointed that Congress did not honor his own request for Arnold’s prompt promotion, at one time, that when his treason was fully revealed, he could only exclaim, with deep emotion, “Whom now can we trust?”