What he said here was more or less typical of his whole life.  Sunday was always the day on which he wrote his private letters,—­even prepared his invoices,—­and he wrote to one of his overseers that his letters should be mailed so as to reach him Saturday, as by so doing they could be answered the following day.  Nor did he limit himself to this, for he entertained company, closed land purchases, sold wheat, and, while a Virginia planter, went foxhunting, on Sunday.  It is to be noted, however, that he considered the scruples of others as to the day.  When he went among his western tenants, rent-collecting, he entered in his diary that, it “being Sunday and the People living on my Land apparently very religious, it was thought best to postpone going among them till to-morrow,” and in his journey through New England, because it was “contrary to the law and disagreeable to the People of this State (Connecticut) to travel on the Sabbath day—­and my horses, after passing through such intolerable roads, wanting rest, I stayed at Perkins’ tavern (which, by the bye, is not a good one) all day—­and a meetinghouse being within a few rods of the door, I attended the morning and evening services, and heard very lame discourses from a Mr. Pond.”  It is of this experience that tradition says the President started to travel, but was promptly arrested by a Connecticut tithing-man.  The story, however, lacks authentication.

There can be no doubt that religious intolerance was not a part of Washington’s character.  In 1775, when the New England troops intended to celebrate Guy Fawkes day, as usual, the General Orders declared that “as the Commander in chief has been apprised of a design, formed for the observance of that ridiculous and childish custom of burning the effigy of the Pope, he cannot help expressing his surprise, that there should be officers and soldiers in this army so void of common sense, as not to see the impropriety of such a step.”  When trying to secure some servants, too, he wrote that “if they are good workmen, they may be from Asia, Africa, or Europe; they may be Mahometans, Jews, or Christians of any sect, or they may be Atheists.”  When the bill taxing all the people of Virginia to support the Episcopal Church (his own) was under discussion, he threw his weight against it, as far as concerned the taxing of other sectaries, but adding: 

“Although no man’s sentiments are more opposed to any kind of restraint upon religious principles than mine are, yet I must confess, that I am not amongst the number of those, who are so much alarmed at the thoughts of making people pay towards the support of that which they profess, if of the denomination, of Christians, or to declare themselves Jews, Mahometans, or otherwise, and thereby obtain proper relief.  As the matter now stands, I wish an assessment had never been agitated, and as it has gone so far, that the bill could die an easy death; because I think it will be productive of more quiet to the State, than by enacting it into a law, which in my opinion would be impolitic, admitting there is a decided majority for it, to the disquiet of a respectable minority.  In the former case, the matter will soon subside; in the latter, it will rankle and perhaps convulse the State.”