"If I Had It in His Hand-Writing I Would Burn It": Federalists and the Authorship Controversy over George Washington's Farewell Address, 1808–1859

Alexander Hamilton did much to put his affairs in order in the days leading up to his duel with Aaron Burr on July 12, 1804, but he did not leave instructions on how his papers should be handled. Scattered amongst those papers were letters and drafts that documented Hamilton's role in helping to write George Washington's presidential Farewell Address. In life, Hamilton kept his involvement a secret, but in death the decision was no longer his to make. In 1808 or 1809, Philadelphia attorney William Lewis began circulating a rumor that a complete draft of the Farewell Address in Hamilton's handwriting had been discovered, and that this draft proved that Hamilton was the true author of Washington's Farewell Address. The circulation of Lewis's rumor set off an authorship controversy surrounding the Farewell Address that would take more than fifty years to fully resolve.* 1The Hamilton authorship rumor set off alarm bells for Federalists. After Thomas Jefferson's Revolution of 1800, Federalists throughout the United States claimed Washington as a Federalist leader and used this connection as a central feature of their campaign to regain voter confidence and political influence. A critical part of that campaign was Washington's Farewell Address. Federalists argued that they were the true defenders of Washington's principles and that the Republicans had turned their backs on the Farewell Address. If the Hamilton authorship rumor proved to be true, Federalists feared that the authority of the Farewell Address would be diminished and its influence in the Federalist cause greatly weakened. When Federalists began to meet renewed success at the polls in 1808, at least in part due to their Washingtonian rhetoric and principles, their need to preserve the established narrative that the Address was solely Washington's work led them to do everything they could to quash the Hamilton rumors. Federalist needs conflicted with the desire of Hamilton's family to see their patriarch receive the credit they believed he was due, and when the Federalists passed from the scene in the late 1820s it was Washington's heirs who extended the controversy for an additional three decades. The authorship controversy revealed the importance the Federalists placed on Washington and his Farewell Address as an expression of their political beliefs and their renewed electoral relevance.Recognizing his limitations as a writer, George Washington frequently relied on his closest advisors to help him compose important correspondence and messages. During the American Revolution, members of his staff, including Alexander Hamilton, helped draft his messages to Congress and the states. After the war, Washington hired Tobias Lear and David Humphreys to assist him in managing his correspondence. As president he sought advice from a host of advisors, but especially James Madison and Hamilton. When Washington resolved in spring 1796 to retire from the presidency, he asked Hamilton to help him tum an emotional and reactionary first draft of a retirement address into a dispassionate and persuasive valedictory. An analysis of the complete documentary record has enabled historians to develop a deep understanding of Washington's collaboration with Hamilton, which was carried out entirely through letters and exchanges of mailed drafts. The original plan and core ideas were Washington's, but Hamilton brought those plans to life. Hamilton introduced some innovations and improvements into Washington's design, but they conformed to Washington's original intentions; and it was Washington who retained final approval of what was included and what was not. The Farewell Address in its final form would not have been possible without the efforts of both men, but the document can accurately be called Washington's.2When David C. Claypoole's American Daily Advertiser published Washington's Farewell Address on September 19, 1796, the American people did not have access to the documentary record. …