Posted on 11/02/2002 11:20:01 AM PST by Aurelius
To WhiskeyPapa, perhaps some fresh insight into your hero.
Fortunately for posterity, a complete record of Washington's account exists. You can even look at scans of it, in entirety, online. The father of the United States, it seems, was magnificent at padding his accounts.
Take, for example, the entry on June 22, 1775:
To cash paid for Sadlery, a Letter Case, Maps, Glasses, &c &c &c. for the use of my Command... $831.45 Eight hundred dollars? Ten times what a private made for saddles? That must have been some pretty damn nice tackwork. £3, or about $81, went to the letter case, which was made of Russian leather. We're sure it kept his letters very dry. As for those "&c"s, they were probably worth a couple hundred each. Washington was a great fan of "&c" and "Ditto". There are innumerable "ditto"s in the account, most of which cost at least a hundred dollars. Other bits of finery are equally outlandish:
To sundry Exp.'s paid by myself at different times and places... on the Retreat of the Army thro' the Jerseys into Pennsylvania & while there... $3,776. Yes, George Washington charged thousands of dollars to retreat from the enemy. He also gave loans to his friends that were never repaid, he bought limes by the crateload (400 at one point), and he treated himself to every "sundry" good available. From July 21-22 1775, he bought a pig, an unreadable number of ducks, "1 dozen pigeons, veal, 1 dozen squash, 2 dozen eggs, hurtleberries, biscuit and a cork cask."[3] The Washington family diet for the month of August included chickens, oysters, whortleberries, pears, cucumbers, veal, mutton, bread, and milk. In October, they bought nearly 32 dozen eggs. Washington's taste for Madeira wine shows up with mindnumbing regularity: from September 1775 to March 1776, Washington spent over six thousand dollars on booze. He was careful enough to note a change in his wine supplier no less than three times.
Getting Fat for the Winter
To say the least, Washington was resplendent in gastronomic finery. Some of this business extended into the infamous 1777-78 winter spent in Valley Forge. That winter, some 9,000 troops lacked shoes or coats. Many sat next to the fires all night for want of blankets; starvation and sickness were rampant. Of course, Washington didn't have to suffer through all this. He was too busy chowing down on mutton and fowl. He also hired a band to play on his birthday (we speculate he took Monday off). However, it is important to note that, despite enjoying himself, he worked extremely hard to keep the army from dissolving entirely. The fledgling government owned sufficient supplies in Boston and Newport; they sat molding in warehouses due to problems in military distribution. Washington must have paced in disgust and thrown up his hands. He wrote to another General:
The Army, as usual, are without Pay; and a great part of the Soldiery without Shirts; and tho' the patience of them is equally thread bear, the States seem perfectly indifferent to their cries. Indeed, in an effort to keep his troops happy, the General staged a play. Of all the outlandish purchases he stiffed Congress with, however, this was the one uniquely singled out by his Puritanical superiors as being work of the devil: "Any person," Congress subsequently decreed, "holding an office under the United States, who shall attend a theatrical performance shall be dismissed from the service." Too bad that wasn't enforced when Lincoln was President.
A Weighty Problem
Fortunately, the Valley Forge winter eventually let up, and Washington was again free to indulge himself. He did so, without reservation, until July 1, 1783, some six months after the Peace of Paris had been signed in early February. In those eight long years of belt-tightening war, Washington himself had put on nearly thirty pounds. All of his close cronies, who dined with him frequently, weighed over 200 pounds each; General Henry Knox won the fat man prize at 280. In comparison, Brigadier General Eben Huntington, not a close associate of Washington's, tipped the scales at 132 pounds dripping wet at war's end. When Washington's account was closed, though, he was not chastised for living extravagantly. The auditors accepted every claim, and we mean every claim. One entry for $20,800 read, "the accounts were not only irregularly kept, but many of them were lost or mislaid, & some of them so defaced as not to be legible, that it is impossible for me to make out a statement of them." Put simply, George lost the receipts. Or maybe he never had them. Did Congress blink? Of course not. Instead, they lauded for his exacting arithmetic, and gratefully signed over the requested amounts.
So, in the end, how much did Washington spend over his eight years of service?
$449,261.51, in 1780 dollars.
Taking into account 220 years of inflation that'd be worth over $4,250,000.00 today.Four million dollars' worth of "expenses", and, after going over the account with a fine-toothed comb (at one point he was corrected for undercounting 89/90 of a dollar), Congress approved the lot of it.
Parsimony may be ill-placed.
-George Washington
It was June 16, 1775, and American statesman George Washington was feeling magnanimous. Or, at least, that's what he wanted everyone to think. Washington had just been appointed general of the Continental Army over the soaring hopes of John Hancock, and, in order to not look too pleased with himself, America's future first president declined fiscal remuneration for his services. Well, almost. He said:
Sir, I beg leave to assure the Congress that as no pecuniary consideration could have tempted me to have accepted this arduous employment, I do not wish to make any profit from it. I will keep an exact account of my expenses. Those I doubt not they will discharge, and that is all I desire.
"Expenses", eh? Latter-day patriots, infused with nationalistic fervor, might assume this meant Washington would only take the barest hint of sustenance for his labors. As Commander-in-Chief of the Continental Army, Washington might expect a comfortable salary. For a little perspective, the very day Washington accepted his commission, Congress drew up the pay for officers and privates. A private made $6 2/3 a month, a captain $20, and a major general $166. Seems to us Washington was giving up a decent sum in exchange for this promise of discharging these expenses. He was well-regarded for stonily taking this economic hit for the tea
Of course not. These neo-rebs are nuts. And they are a hateful small bunch too. It makes them feel big to make others feel small.
Walt
I heard it was more than that.
Still makes you wonder how he got on the great seal of the so-called CSA, doesn't it?
It's beyond absurd for you to be insulting George Washington. If anybody ever gave you any credence, you've surely p@ssed it away by belittling GW. But you are feeling a bit desperate, so it's understandable, I guess.
And you are applying a modern day judgment to an historical person -- always a slippery slope. He was a slave holder, remember? All slave holders are immune from criticism. That's the FR rule.
Walt
"It's beyond absurd for you to be insulting George Washington. If anybody ever gave you any credence, you've surely p@ssed it away by belittling GW. But you are feeling a bit desperate, so it's understandable, I guess."
Your thought precesses (and I believe I am being kind in using that characterization) completely baffle me. Why do you keep obsessing on the fact that George Washinton's picture was on the great seal of the Confederacy. What is the relevance that you see in that? It completely escapes me. I don't have a clue.
Your other theme, that by calling attention to historically recorded facts about George Washington I am insulting and belittling him and damaging my credibility - not in my view in the minds of anyone whose escalator goes to the top floor, or who has any credibility themselves (either of which would explicitely exclude you, I might point out).
Your thought precesses (and I believe I am being kind in using that characterization) completely baffle me. Why do you keep obsessing on the fact that George Washinton's picture was on the great seal of the Confederacy.
They must have been as big or bigger bums as he was, right?
Walt
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.