The Amazing Man Who Just Wouldn’t Be King
The only known, recorded suggestion that George Washington, Commander-in-Chief of fledgling America’s army, should become king of the new country came from one of Washington’s officers, Colonel Lewis Nicola in a letter to Washington, dated May 22, 1782. The amazing victory at Yorktown became history in 1781. The Treaty of Paris and Washington’s resignation wouldn’t happen until 1783. Meanwhile, soldiers wanted their back pay from Congress and officers worried over their promised pensions. [See Dave Roos at How Stuff Works.com] Explaining his “scheme” to Washington, Nicola writes:
This war must have shewn to all, but to military men in particular the weakness of republicks, & the exertions the army has been able to make by being under a proper head [General Washington], therefore I little doubt, when the benefits of a mixed government are pointed out & duly considered, but such will be readily adopted; in this case it will, I believe, be uncontroverted that the same abilities which have lead us [meaning Washington], through difficulties apparently unsurmountable by human power, to victory & glory, those qualities that have merited & obtained the universal esteem & veneration of an army, would be most likely to conduct & direct us in the smoother paths of peace.
Some people have so connected the ideas of tyranny & monarchy as to find it very difficult to separate them, it may therefore be requisite to give the head of such a constitution as I propose, some title apparently more moderate, but if all other things were once adjusted I believe strong arguments might be produced for admitting the title of king, which I conceive would be attended with some material advantages. [National Archives, Founders Online; bold emphasis is mine]
Though merely the “scheme” of an officer, Washington was so astonished at the thought that he took his pen and replied the same day that he was pained and greatly surprised…
of there being such ideas existing in the Army as you [Nicola] have expressed, & I must view with abhorrence, and reprehend with severity—For the present, the communication of them will rest in my own bosom, unless some further agitation of the matter, shall make a disclosure necessary. [National Archives, Founders Online, listed “Next” after the above letter]
That was the end of that idea. But George Washington did indeed gain fame and great respect, shocking many, by resigning his commission as Commander-in-Chief (Dec. 23, 1783) and years later, refusing to pursue a third term as President. A man who could have great power for the asking but declined it?! What a guy! A true patriot who actually believed in the term, “civil service.”
The Famous Quote from England’s King George III ~ Is It Real? The Search!
You may well have seen or heard the popular and oft repeated story of King George III’s reaction to Washington’s refusal to remain in power, delivering his farewell address at the end of his second term as America’s first President, on March 4, 1797. Here’s a standard version of the classic quote as I found it in an article by David Boaz at Cato.org [Feb. 20, 2006, The Man Who Would Not Be King]:
Give the last word to Washington’s great adversary, King George III. The king asked his American painter, Benjamin West, what Washington would do after winning independence. West replied, “They say he will return to his farm.” “If he does that,” the incredulous monarch said, “he will be the greatest man in the world.”
It’s a great story, a great quote. Did it really happen? We need a documented reference. But these popular quotes are rarely referenced, or they refer to another “quoter” in a round robin. I wanted to track down the origin and possible documentation of this story, so, first, I looked at the “players” involved. Hopefully, we all know George Washington as well as George III, the King of England during our American Revolution. But who was Benjamin West? And when did the conversation with the King take place? The quote above references the end of the Revolution. (1781? 1783?) And were the King and West in the right place at the right time?
The Answer Revolves Around Artist Benjamin West
Born in Pennsylvania in 1738, Benjamin West became a famous American artist, across America, England, and Europe. He went to Italy to study at the age of 21, then stopped in London on his way home. He never left, joining the Royal Academy and becoming its president in 1792. He was appointed historical painter to King George III in 1772. [Smithsonian, https://americanart.si.edu/artist/benjamin-west-5336] So, West certainly did converse with George III over many years, during the Revolution and after.
Digging into the Internet, I came upon the fascinating and entertaining site of cartoonist and history writer, Chip Cooper. In a section called They Didn’t Quite Say That (But They May Have Come Close) [https://www.coopertoons.com/merryhistory/quotes/theydidntquitesaythat.html], Chip discusses the famous quote issue and includes part of a memo written May 3, 1797 by Rufus King, saying that “Mr. West called on me” and that the resignation of Washington had inspired the King to call Washington “the greatest character of the age.” Aha! A dated reference that mentions West, King George, Washington’s resignation, and the King’s complimentary statement, though expressed in different words. But I needed to see this memo or letter or whatever it was for myself, so on with the search!
The Evidence Revolves Around Rufus King and Joseph Farington
Meanwhile, who was Rufus King? Courtesy of Britannica Online, we find that King was born in Massachusetts in 1755, became a lawyer, a state legislator, and a Founding Father. He served in the Continental Congress where he introduced a resolution in 1785 to prohibit slavery in the Northwest Territory. In 1787, he introduced a resolution to convene at Philadelphia to craft a new Constitution. He was a Federalist (strong central government). He moved to New York and became a Senator, then served as Ambassador to Great Britain from 1796 to 1803, then again from 1825 to 1826. He ran unsuccessfully for both Vice President and President.
So, Rufus King was indeed in Britain in 1797, the date of the referenced memo. Note, he was not in England until 1796. The multi-volume Life and Correspondence of Rufus King edited by Charles R. King, 1896, is online at Google Books and at Archive.org. Chip Cooper referenced Volume III, but Volume III covers letters from 1799 to 1801. And we need 1797. So I found Volume II with letters from 1795 to 1799. [Note it is marked incorrectly at Archive under “03”. Go here: https://archive.org/details/lifeandcorrespo03kinggoog] The letter (or memo) in question is not in that volume. So, I looked through Volume III. [At Archive, find it here: https://archive.org/details/rufuskinglife03kingrich] The letter (or memo) is not there either, at least, not in the order of dated letters.
I called the very gracious and helpful New York Historical Society Library where King letters are housed and they could not find it. The book All Cloudless Glory: The Life of George Washington by E. Harrison Clark, 1895, has the proper quote from a May 3, 1797 “report” (pgs. 349-350), but no reference of where the “report” can be found.
I went back to Chip Cooper and he graciously sent me the link to Appendix III (!) of Volume III of King’s correspondence (and memos) at Google Books. I did not think to search the Appendix section. I will in the future! There was the “letter,” with an explanation that it and others were added out of sequence due to several moves of the Rufus King papers and the later discovery of a memorandum book (as noted by Chip Cooper), hidden in a drawer under other papers. The memo of May 3, 1797 was hidden in an appendix of the wrong volume!! It’s actually not a letter but a dated entry in a memorandum book which formed the basis for letters (reports) to the American Secretary of State.
Rufus King begins his “memorandum” of May 3, 1797 with “Mr. West called on me — we entered into politics after speaking of the Dinner at the Royal Academy and of the Annual exhibition;” There was indeed the 29th Exhibition of the Royal Academy in 1797. Featuring a bit of shorthand, the entry continues with:
Mr. West said things respecting Amer. had changed very much; that people who cd (could) not formerly find words of unkindness eno’ (enough) now talked in a different language; that the King had lately spoken in the most explicit manner of the wisdom of the American Gov. and of the abilities and great worth of the characters she produced and employed. He said the King had lately used very handsome expressions respecting Mr. Jay [John Jay] and — and that he also spoke in a very pleasing manner of Mr. Gore. [Christopher Gore, U.S. diplomat in England in 1796]
But that in regard to Genl Washington, he told him since his resignation that in his opinion “that act closing and finishing what had gone before and viewed in connection with it, placed him in a light the most distinguished of any man living, and that he thought him the greatest character of the age.” [The quotes are Rufus King’s, the bold is mine.]
So, this is Rufus King’s memo of a conversation with George III’s artist, Benjamin West, after George Washington gave his farewell address earlier in 1797 as he had refused a third term as President and went home to his wife and plantation. Thus, this comment did not take place after Washington’s resignation as Commander, though the resignation may have contributed to the King’s thoughts about Washington. Note this was during a time between bouts of the King’s “madness” (or illness), which some say was porphyria while others disagree about the modern diagnosis. [https://www.royal.uk/george-iii]
The Diary of Joseph Farington
Now, who was Joseph Farington? This is a fascinating story of its own, but, here, we will keep the reference short and to the point, regarding The Farington Diary, by Joseph Farington, The Royal Academician, ed. James Greig, Vol. 1, July 1793 to Aug 1802, Chapter LXXVIII, Dec. 28, 1799 entry, pg. 278 (pg 326 on Archive). Joseph Farrington lived from 1747-1821. He was an Englishman and a member of the Royal Academy (v), and knew almost every eminent man and woman of his time (viii). He knew Benjamin West and, most probably, Rufus King. Two years after the meeting of Rufus King and West, Farington records the following about conversations between West and the King which had taken place soon after the defeat of Cornwallis at Yorktown in 1781.
The next day West had occasion to go to the Queens Palace to transact some business for the Queen, which when He had done it, she asked him if He was engaged that morning. He said not. She then told him to go into Her Closet with Her which He did & found the King sitting there. — The King began to talk abt. America. He asked West what would Washington do were America to be declared independant. West said He believed He would retire to a private situation. — The King said if He did He would be the greatest man in the world. He asked West how He thought the Americans would act towards this country if they became independant. West said the war had made much ill blood but that would subside, & the dispositions of many of the Chiefs, Washington, Lawrence, — Adams, — Franklin, — Jay were favorable to this country which would soon have a preference to any other European Nation. During this conversation the Queen was much affected, & shed tears.”
This is Farington’s 1799 recollection of what must have been a conversation with West regarding a visit to the King and Queen in 1781. According to this, West had heard that Washington intended to resign his commission and return home, which did not occur until two years later in December 1783. I have not tried to chase down this bit of information, but it may have been that Washington’s intentions were expressed and known, and West had connections in important positions.
Thus, the “standard” popular quote seems to come from Farington’s Diary. Is there any reason to question either account ~ King or Farington? So, were there two “quotes” in two conversations about Washington between West and King George, 16 years apart? It seems so. At least, here we have the words of two prominent men “in the know.”