FAREWELL ADDRESS (1796)
George Washington
George Washington had been the obvious choice to be the first president
of the United States, and indeed, many people had supported ratification
of the Constitution on the assumption that Washington would be the head
of the new government. By all measures, Washington proved himself a capable,
even a great, president, helping to shape the new government and leading
the country skillfully through several crises, both foreign and domestic.
Washington, like many of his contemporaries, did not understand or believe
in political parties, and saw them as fractious agencies subversive of
domestic tranquility.
When political parties began forming during his administration,
and in direct response to some of his policies, he failed to comprehend
that parties would be the chief device through which the American people
would debate and resolve major public issues. It was his fear of what parties
would do to the nation that led Washington to draft his Farewell Address.
The two parties that developed in the early 1790s were the Federalists,
who supported the economic and foreign policies of the Washington administration,
and the Jeffersonian Republicans, who in large measure opposed them. The
Federalists backed Secretary of the Treasury Alexander Hamilton's plan
for a central bank and a tariff and tax policy that would promote domestic
manufacturing; the Jeffersonians opposed the strong government inherent
in the Hamiltonian plan, and favored farmers as opposed to manufacturers.
In foreign affairs, both sides wanted the United States to remain neutral
in the growing controversies between Great Britain and France, but the
Federalists favored the English and the Jeffersonians the French. The Address
derived at least in part from Washington's fear that party factionalism
would drag the United States into this fray.
Two-thirds of the Address is devoted to domestic matters and the rise
of political parties, and Washington set out his vision of what would make
the United States a truly great nation. He called for men to put aside
party and unite for the common good, an "American character"
wholly free of foreign attachments. The United States must concentrate
only on American interests, and while the country ought to be friendly
and open its commerce to all nations, it should avoid becoming involved
in foreign wars. Contrary to some opinion, Washington did not call for
isolation, only the avoidance of entangling alliances. While he called
for maintenance of the treaty with France signed during the American Revolution,
the problems created by that treaty ought to be clear. The United States
must "act for ourselves and not for others."
The Address quickly entered the realm of revealed truth. It was for
decades read annually in Congress; it was printed in children's primers,
engraved on watches and woven into tapestries. Many Americans, especially
in subsequent generations, accepted Washington's advice as gospel, and
in any debate between neutrality and involvement in foreign issues would
invoke the message as dispositive of all questions. Not until 1949, in
fact, would the United States again sign a treaty of alliance with a foreign
nation.
For further reading: Burton I. Kaufman, ed., Washington's Farewell Address:
The View from the 20th Century (1969); Paul A. Varg, Foreign Policies of
the Founding Fathers (1963); Alexander De Conde, Entangling Alliances (1958).
FAREWELL ADDRESS
Friends and Fellow-Citizens:
The period for a new election of a citizen to administer the Executive
Government of the United States being not far distant, and the time actually
arrived when your thoughts must be employed in designating the person who
is to be clothed with that important trust, it appears to me proper, especially
as it may conduce to a more distinct expression of the public voice, that
I should now apprise you of the resolution I have formed to decline being
considered among the number of those out of whom a choice is to be made....
The impressions with which I first undertook the arduous trust were
explained on the proper occasion. In the discharge of this trust I will
only say that I have, with good intentions, contributed toward the organization
and administration of the Government the best exertions of which a very
fallible judgment was capable. Not unconscious in the outset of the inferiority
of my qualifications, experience in my own eyes, perhaps still more in
the eyes of others, has strengthened the motives to diffidence of myself;
and every day the increasing weight of years admonishes me more and more
that the shade of retirement is as necessary to me as it will be welcome.
Satisfied that if any circumstances have given peculiar value to my services
they were temporary, I have the consolation to believe that, while choice
and prudence invite me to quit the political scene, patriotism does not
forbid it....
Here, perhaps, I ought to stop. But a solicitude for your welfare which
can not end with my life, and the apprehension of danger natural to that
solicitude, urge me on an occasion like the present to offer to your solemn
contemplation and to recommend to your frequent review some sentiments
which are the result of much reflection, of no inconsiderable observation,
and which appear to me all important to permanency of your felicity as
a people.... Interwoven as is the love of liberty with every ligament of
your hearts, no recommendation of mine is necessary to fortify or confirm
the attachment.
The unity of government which constitutes you one people is also now
dear to you. It is justly so, for it is a main pillar in the edifice of
your real independence, the support of your tranquility at home, your peace
abroad, of your safety, of your prosperity, of that very liberty which
you so highly prize. But as it is easy to foresee that from different causes
and from different quarters much pains will be taken, many artifices employed,
to weaken in your minds the conviction of this truth, as this is the point
in your political fortress against which the batteries of internal and
external enemies will be most constantly and actively (though often covertly
and insidiously) directed, it is of infinite moment that you should properly
estimate the immense value of your national union to your collective and
individual happiness; that you should cherish a cordial, habitual, and
immovable attachment to it; accustoming yourselves to think and speak of
it as of the palladium of your political safety and prosperity; watching
for its preservation with jealous anxiety; discountenancing whatever may
suggest even a suspicion that it can in any event be abandoned, and indignantly
frowning upon the first dawning of every attempt to alienate any portion
of our country from the rest or to enfeeble the sacred ties which now link
together the various parts.
For this you have every inducement of sympathy and interest. Citizens
by birth or choice of a common country, that country has a right to concentrate
your affections. The name of American, which belongs to you in your national
capacity, must always exalt the just pride of patriotism more than any
appellation derived from local discriminations. With slight shades of difference,
you have the same religion, manners, habits, and political principles.
You have in a common cause fought and triumphed together. The independence
and liberty you possess are the work of joint councils and joint efforts,
of common dangers, sufferings, and successes.
But these considerations, however powerfully they address themselves
to your sensibility, are greatly outweighed by those which apply more immediately
to your interest. Here every portion of our country finds the most commanding
motives for carefully guarding and preserving the union of the whole.
The North, in an unrestrained intercourse with the South, protected
by the equal laws of a common government, finds in the productions of the
latter great additional resources of maritime and commercial enterprise
and precious materials of manufacturing industry. The South, in the same
intercourse, benefiting by the same agency of the North, sees its agriculture
grow and its commerce expand. Turning partly into its own channels the
seamen of the North, it finds its particular navigation invigorated; and
while it contributes in different ways to nourish and increase the general
mass of the national navigation, it looks forward to the protection of
a maritime strength to which itself is unequally adapted. The East, in
a like intercourse with the West, already finds, and in the progressive
improvement of interior communications by land and water will more and
more find, a valuable vent for the commodities which it brings from abroad
or manufactures at home. The West derives from the East supplies requisite
to its growth and comfort, and what is perhaps of still greater consequence,
it must of necessity owe the secure enjoyment of indispensable outlets
for its own productions to the weight, influence, and the future maritime
strength of the Atlantic side of the Union, directed by an indissoluble
community of interest as one nation. Any other tenure by which the West
can hold this essential advantage, whether derived from its own separate
strength or from an apostate and unnatural connection with any foreign
power, must be intrinsically precarious.
While, then, every part of our country thus feels an immediate and particular
interest in union, all the parts combined cannot fail to find in the united
mass of means and efforts greater strength, greater resource, proportionably
greater security from external danger, a less frequent interruption of
their peace by foreign nations, and what is of inestimable value, they
must derive from union an exemption from those broils and wars between
themselves which so frequently afflict neighboring countries not tied together
by the same governments, which their own rivalships alone would be sufficient
to produce, but which opposite foreign alliances, attachments, and intrigues
would stimulate and embitter. Hence, likewise, they will avoid the necessity
of those overgrown military establishments which, under any form of government,
are inauspicious to liberty, and which are to be regarded as particularly
hostile to republican liberty. In this sense it is that your union ought
to be considered as a main prop of your liberty, and that the love of the
one ought to endear to you the preservation of the other....
Is there a doubt whether a common government can embrace so large a
sphere? Let experience solve it. To listen to mere speculation in such
a case were criminal. It is well worth a fair and full experiment. With
such powerful and obvious motives to union affecting all parts of our country,
while experience shall not have demonstrated its impracticability, there
will always be reason to distrust the patriotism of those who in any quarter
may endeavor to weaken its bands.
In contemplating the causes which may disturb our union it occurs as
matter of serious concern that any ground should have been furnished for
characterizing parties by geographical discriminations--Northern and Southern,
Atlantic and Western -- whence designing men may endeavor to excite a belief
that there is a real difference of local interests and views. One of the
expedients of party to acquire influence within particular districts is
to misrepresent the opinions and aims of other districts. You can not shield
yourselves too much against the jealousies and heartburnings which spring
from these misrepresentations; they tend to render alien to each other
those who ought to be bound together by fraternal affection....
To the efficacy and permanency of your union a government for the whole
is indispensable. No alliances, however strict, between the parts can be
an adequate substitute. They must inevitably experience the infractions
and interruptions which all alliances in all times have experienced. Sensible
of this momentous truth, you have improved upon your first essay by the
adoption of a Constitution of Government better calculated than your former
for an intimate union and for the efficacious management of your common
concerns. This Government, the offspring of our own choice, uninfluenced
and unawed, adopted upon full investigation and mature deliberation, completely
free in its principles, in the distribution of its powers, uniting security
with energy, and containing within itself a provision for its own amendment,
has a just claim to your confidence and your support. Respect for its authority,
compliance with its laws, acquiescence in its measures, are duties enjoined
by the fundamental maxims of true liberty. The basis of our political systems
is the right of the people to make and to alter their constitutions of
government. But the constitution which at any time exists till changed
by an explicit and authentic act of the whole people is sacredly obligatory
upon all. The very idea of the power and the right of the people to establish
government presupposes the duty of every individual to obey the established
government....
Toward the preservation of your Government and the permanency of your
present happy state, it is requisite not only that you steadily discountenance
irregular oppositions to its acknowledged authority, but also that you
resist with care the spirit of innovation upon its principles, however
specious the pretexts. One method of assault may be to effect in the forms
of the Constitution alterations which will impair the energy of the system,
and thus to undermine what can not be directly overthrown. In all the changes
to which you may be invited remember that time and habit are at least as
necessary to fix the true character of governments as of other human institutions;
that experience is the surest standard by which to test the real tendency
of the existing constitution of a country; that facility in changes upon
the credit of mere hypothesis and opinion exposes to perpetual change,
from the endless variety of hypothesis and opinion; and remember especially
that for the efficient management of your common interests in a country
so extensive as ours a government of as much vigor as is consistent with
the perfect security of liberty is indispensable. Liberty itself will find
in such a government, with powers properly distributed and adjusted, its
surest guardian. It is, indeed, little else than a name where the government
is too feeble to withstand the enterprises of faction, to con-fine each
member of the society within the limits prescribed by the laws, and to
maintain all in the secure and tranquil enjoyment of the rights of person
and property.
I have already intimated to you the danger of parties in the State,
with particular reference to the founding of them on geographical discriminations.
Let me now take a more comprehensive view, and warn you in the most solemn
manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party generally.
This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its
root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under different
shapes in all governments, more or less stifled, controlled, or repressed;
but in those of the popular form it is seen in its greatest rankness and
is truly their worst enemy....
It serves always to distract the public councils and enfeeble the public
administration. It agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and
false alarms; kindles the animosity of one part against another; foments
occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence
and corruption, which finds a facilitated access to the government itself
through the channels of party passion. Thus the policy and the will of
one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.
There is an opinion that parties in free countries are useful checks
upon the administration of the government, and serve to keep alive the
spirit of liberty. This within certain limits is probably true; and in
governments of a monarchical cast patriotism may look with indulgence,
if not with favor, upon the spirit of party. But in those of the popular
character, in governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged.
From their natural tendency it is certain there will always be enough of
that spirit for every salutary purpose; and there being constant danger
of excess, the effort ought to be by force of public opinion to mitigate
and assuage it. A fire not to be quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance
to prevent its bursting into a flame, lest, instead of warming, it should
consume.
It is important, likewise, that the habits of thinking in a free country
should inspire caution in those intrusted with its administration to confine
themselves within their respective constitutional spheres, avoiding in
the exercise of the powers of one department to encroach upon another.
The spirit of encroachment tends to consolidate the powers of all the departments
in one, and thus to create, whatever the form of government, a real despotism....
If in the opinion of the people the distribution or modification of the
constitutional powers be in any particular wrong, let it be corrected by
an amendment in the way which the Constitution designates. But let there
be no change by usurpation; for though this in one instance may be the
instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments
are destroyed. The precedent must always greatly overbalance in permanent
evil any partial or transient benefit which the use can at any time yield.
Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity,
religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man
claim the tribute of patriotism who should labor to subvert these great
pillars of human happiness -- these firmest props of the duties of men
and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to
respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections
with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked, Where is the
security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious
obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation
in courts of justice? And let us with caution indulge the supposition that
morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to
the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason
and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail
in exclusion of religious principle.
It is substantially true that virtue or morality is a necessary spring
of popular government. The rule indeed extends with more or less force
to every species of free government. Who that is a sincere friend to it
can look with indifference upon attempts to shake the foundation of the
fabric? Promote, then, as an object of primary importance, institutions
for the general diffusion of knowledge. In proportion as the structure
of a government gives force to public opinion, it is essential that public
opinion should be enlightened.
As a very important source of strength and security, cherish public
credit. One method of preserving it is to use it as sparingly as possible,
avoiding occasions of expense by cultivating peace, but remembering also
that timely disbursements to prepare for danger frequently prevent much
greater disbursements to repel it; avoiding likewise the accumulation of
debt, not only by shunning occasions of expense, but by vigorous exertions
in time of peace to discharge the debts which unavoidable wars have occasioned,
not ungenerously throwing upon posterity the burthen which we ourselves
ought to bear....
Observe good faith and justice toward all nations. Cultivate peace and
harmony with all. Religion and morality enjoin this conduct. And can it
be that good policy does not equally enjoin it? It will be worthy of a
free, enlightened, and at no distant period a great nation to give to mankind
the magnanimous and too novel example of a people always guided by an exalted
justice and benevolence. Who can doubt that in the course of time and things
the fruits of such a plan would richly repay any temporary advantages which
might be lost by a steady adherence to it? Can it be that Providence has
not connected the permanent felicity of a nation with its virtue? The experiment,
at least, is recommended by every sentiment which ennobles human nature.
Alas! is it rendered impossible by its vices?
In the execution of such a plan nothing is more essential than that
permanent, inveterate antipathies against particular nations and passionate
attachments for others should be excluded, and that in place of them just
and amicable feelings toward all should be cultivated. The nation which
indulges toward another an habitual hatred or an habitual fondness is in
some degree a slave. It is a slave to its animosity or to its affection,
either of which is sufficient to lead it astray from its duty and its interest.
Antipathy in one nation against another disposes each more readily to offer
insult and injury, to lay hold of slight causes of umbrage, and to be haughty
and intractable when accidental or trifling occasions of dispute occur.
So, likewise, a passionate attachment of one nation for another produces
a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite nation, facilitating the
illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases where no real common
interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays
the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter
without adequate inducement or justification. It leads also to concessions
to the favorite nation of privileges denied to others, which is apt doubly
to injure the nation making the concessions by unnecessarily parting with
what ought to have been retained, and by exciting jealousy, ill will, and
a disposition to retaliate in the parties from whom equal privileges are
withheld; and it gives to ambitious, corrupted, or deluded citizens (who
devote themselves to the favorite nation) facility to betray or sacrifice
the interests of their own country without odium, sometimes even with popularity,
gilding with the appearances of a virtuous sense of obligation, a commendable
deference for public opinion, or a laudable zeal for public good the base
or foolish compliances of ambition, corruption, or infatuation....
Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe
me, fellow-citizens) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly
awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one
of the most baneful foes of republican government. But that jealousy, to
be useful, must be impartial, else it becomes the instrument of the very
influence to be avoided, instead of a defense against it. Excessive partiality
for one foreign nation and excessive dislike of another cause those whom
they actuate to see danger only on one side, and serve to veil and even
second the arts of influence on the other. Real patriots who may resist
the intrigues of the favorite are liable to become suspected and odious,
while its tools and dupes usurp the applause and confidence of the people
to surrender their interests.
The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is, in
extending our commercial relations to have with them as little political
connection as possible. So far as we have already formed engagements let
them be fulfilled with perfect good faith. Here let us stop.
Europe has a set of primary interests which to us have none or a very
remote relation. Hence she must be engaged in frequent controversies, the
causes of which are essentially foreign to our concerns. Hence, therefore,
it must be unwise in us to implicate ourselves by artificial ties in the
ordinary vicissitudes of her politics or the ordinary combinations and
collisions of her friendships or enmities.
Our detached and distant situation invites and enables us to pursue
a different course. If we remain one people, under an efficient government,
the period is not far off when we may defy material injury from external
annoyance; when we may take such an attitude as will cause the neutrality
we may at any time resolve upon to be scrupulously respected; when belligerent
nations, under the impossibility of making acquisitions upon us, will not
lightly hazard the giving us provocation; when we may choose peace or war,
as our interest, guided by justice, shall counsel.
Why forego the advantages of so peculiar a situation? Why quit our own
to stand upon foreign ground? Why, by interweaving our destiny with that
of any part of Europe, entangle our peace and prosperity in the toils of
European ambition, rivalship, interest, humor, or caprice?
It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliances with any
portion of the foreign world, so far, I mean, as we are now at liberty
to do it, for let me not be understood as capable of patronizing infidelity
to existing engagements. I hold the maxim no less applicable to public
than to private affairs that honesty is always the best policy. I repeat,
therefore, let those engagements be observed in their genuine sense. But
in my opinion it is unnecessary and would be unwise to extend them.
Taking care always to keep ourselves by suitable establishments on a
respectable defensive posture, we may safely trust to temporary alliances
for extraordinary emergencies.
Harmony, liberal intercourse with all nations are recommended by policy,
humanity, and interest. But even our commercial policy should hold an equal
and impartial hand, neither seeking nor granting exclusive favors or preferences;
consulting the natural course of things; diffusing and diversifying by
gentle means the streams of commerce, but forcing nothing; establishing
with powers so disposed, in order to give trade a stable course, to define
the rights of our merchants, and to enable the Government to support them,
conventional rules of intercourse, the best that present circumstances
and mutual opinion will permit, but temporary and liable to be from time
to time abandoned or varied as experience and circumstances shall dictate;
constantly keeping in view that it is folly in one nation to look for disinterested
favors from another; that it must pay with a portion of its independence
for whatever it may accept under that character; that by such acceptance
it may place itself in the condition of having given equivalents for nominal
favors, and yet of being reproached with ingratitude for not giving more.
There can be no greater error than to expect or calculate upon real favors
from nation to nation. It is an illusion which experience must cure, which
a just pride ought to discard....
Though in reviewing the incidents of my Administration I am unconscious
of intentional error, I am nevertheless too sensible of my defects not
to think it probable that I may have committed many errors. Whatever they
may be, I fervently beseech the Almighty to avert or mitigate the evils
to which they may tend. I shall also carry with me the hope that my country
will never cease to view them with indulgence, and that, after forty-five
years of my life dedicated to its service with an upright zeal, the faults
of incompetent abilities will be consigned to oblivion, as myself must
soon be to the mansions of rest.
Relying on its kindness in this as in other things, and actuated by
that fervent love toward it which is so natural to a man who views in it
the native soil of himself and his progenitors for several generations,
I anticipate with pleasing expectation that retreat in which I promise
myself to realize without alloy the sweet enjoyment of partaking in the
midst of my fellow-citizens the benign influence of good laws under a free
government -- the ever-favorite object of my heart, and the happy reward,
as I trust, of our mutual cares, labors, and dangers.
Source: J.D. Richardson, ed., Compilation of Messages and Papers of
the Presidents, vol.1 (1907), 213.
|