Image: Washington's Deathbed By Junius Brutus Stearns - Wikimedia Commons
George Washington wrote at least two wills, and on his deathbed in December 1799, he had his wife bring him the two wills from the desk in his study. He then gave her one and told her to throw it into the fire, leaving the other one as his official last will and testament. No one knows what was in the burned will. You can find Tobias Lear’s account of Washington’s illness and death, including the story about the wills, at Founders Online.
The will itself makes fascinating reading, as it expresses Washington’s intentions and feelings at the time of his death quite well. You can find a complete, annotated text of the will at Founders Online as well.
Aside from minor bequests, there are two major parts to the will: what to do with the slaves belonging to Washington, and what to do with his land and company shares. This blog entry will explain the part of the will that had to do with his slaves.
First, a little background. Washington’s views on slavery evolved a lot over his lifetime. Before the Revolution, he was a fully committed slave owner and member of the Virginia plantation aristocracy. During his exposure to black soldiers and white abolitionists during the War, his attitudes underwent a shift. By 1789, when he became President, Washington was already trying to find ways to free his slaves. He trained many slaves in crafts and professions such as smithing and carpentry, and he had some enslaved overseers taught to read and write, primarily so they could write reports to him about farm operations.
But there was a big catch. The slaves of Mount Vernon came in three variations of ownership: outright, dower, and leased. He owned less than half of the slaves outright, meaning he could free them or sell them at will. The dower slaves were his wife’s dower estate property, meaning she had inherited them for her lifetime only from her dead husband, who died intestate. At her death, the slaves or their monetary value would go to other heirs of the Custis estate. Washington could not free the dower slaves without paying their value to the estate, a very large amount of money that he did not have. The third kind of ownership was lease—he paid rent for the use of several dozen slaves on a farm he had bought, French’s Farm. They actually belonged to Mrs. Penelope French. He had no power to free or sell leased slaves.
Another big catch was Virginia law. In 1782, the House of Delegates passed a new law on manumission that replaced the earlier law that made it illegal to manumit slaves except under very specific circumstances. The new law permitted manumission but required the owner to support any slave “not being in the judgment of the court, of sound mind and body, or being above the age of forty-five years, or being males under the age of twenty-one, or females under the age of eighteen years.” That would again force Washington to pay, on an ongoing basis, a very large amount of money that he did not have.
The first thing Washington says in the item about his slaves is that he frees them “upon the decease of my wife.” He then explains why: the slaves he owned outright had intermarried with the dower slaves, and thus freeing them would either break apart families or force the freed slaves to stay with their enslaved loved ones. He makes no mention of any inconvenience to his widow from the absence of the freed slaves or to any issue with the plantation work, just to breaking up families. He stresses that this logic applies only while the slaves belong to the same person (meaning his widow); after her decease, all bets are off because the dower slaves will be distributed to the different Custis heirs. In other words, when Martha Washington dies, the slave families will break up as a consequence of the Custis estate disposition, over which neither Washington nor his wife has any control.
He then takes the 1782 Act into account. He states that his heirs must supply food and clothing to any slaves freed who are too old or too infirm or too young to earn their living. Young slaves without parents able to take care of them are to be “bound by the Court” (in other words, given a court-appointed guardian or put under direct supervision by the court) until the age of 25. Washington willed that hese young freemen “be be taught to read & write; and to be brought up to some useful occupation” subject to the laws applying to orphans.
Washington then shows he harbors few illusions about his executors and heirs:
I do hereby expressly forbid the Sale, or transportation out of the said Commonwealth, of any Slave I may die possessed of, under any pretence whatsoever. And I do moreover most pointedly, and most solemnly enjoin it upon my Executors hereafter named, or the Survivors of them, to see that th⟨is cla⟩use respecting Slaves, and every part thereof be religiously fulfilled at the Epoch at which it is directed to take place; without evasion, neglect or delay, after the Crops which may then be on the ground are harvested, particularly as it respects the aged and infirm; seeing that a regular and permanent fund be established for their support so long as there are subjects requiring it; not trusting to the ⟨u⟩ncertain provision to be made by individuals.
Washington clearly anticipated that his heirs might choose to ignore his will and keep the slaves despite his wishes, so he did everything in his power to make clear those wishes. His priorities, though, show up in the clause “after the Crops which may then be on the ground are harvested”—the farm and its income always come first.
A common occurrence in 18th century Virginia was the freeing of slaves in a will for their exceptional service, which was permitted under the old Virginia statute. Washington adhered to this tradition by freeing William (Billy) Lee, his old valet, who had served him long and well as a personal servant.
And to my Mulatto man William (calling himself William Lee) I give immediate freedom; or if he should prefer it (on account of the accidents which ha⟨v⟩e befallen him, and which have rendered him incapable of walking or of any active employment) to remain in the situation he now is, it shall be optional in him to do so: In either case however, I allow him an annuity of thirty dollars during his natural life, whic⟨h⟩ shall be independent of the victuals and cloaths he has been accustomed to receive, if he chuses the last alternative; but in full, with his freedom, if he prefers the first; & this I give him as a test⟨im⟩ony of my sense of his attachment to me, and for his faithful services during the Revolutionary War.
Lee chose to stay at Mount Vernon until his own death in 1810 or 1828, history isn’t clear. Lee had broken both kneecaps in separate accidents in 1785 and 1788, rendering him a cripple. He went with Tobias Lear to New York in 1789 to serve as the new President’s valet but collapsed on the way and was fitted with braces before being sent on to the President’s home. He lasted there only a few months before being sent back to Mount Vernon, where he was tasked with making shoes. His injuries prompted a drinking habit as well, according to reports of visitors to Mount Vernon.
How did all this play out after Washington’s death? Edna Greene Medford’s article “Beyond Mount Vernon: George Washington’s Emancipated Laborers and Their Descendants”, in the collection Slavery at the Home of George Washington, edited by Philip J. Schwarz, details as much as is known about the disposition of the Mount Vernon slaves.
There were 317 enslaved people at Mount Vernon when Washington died. He owned 124 outright, leased 40 from Penelope French, and had the use of 153 dower slaves. Martha Washington did not wait for her own death to free her husband’s slaves; she did so on January 1, 1801, a year after his death. Various sources document Mrs. Washington’s concern that the only thing between the slaves and their freedom was her death, and that others advised her to rid herself of the problem sooner rather than later. The account in the book Never Caught: The Washington’s Relentless Pursuit of Their Runaway Slave, Ona Judge, by Erica Armstrong Dunbar, summarizes the known facts well (pages 175-176), with references.
The meticulous efforts in the Medford article document what is known about the fate of the freed and dower slaves, which is quite varied. The details of the search for information in that article reveal quite a lot about the way the antebellum South documented slaves and freemen and why it is very difficult to develop genealogies for the descendants of slaves. Some of the freed slaves chose to stay at Mount Vernon or the nearby areas. By 1833, the total expense for taking care of them had reached over $10,000.
All this seems quite complicated, but the complications come from the intricacies of British and Virginian slavery and estate laws, not from Washington’s intentions. Of all the founding fathers that owned slaves, Washington was the only one that considered or accomplished their manumission. It was, simultaneously, the least he could do for them and the most.
