[Footnote 1:  Magazine of American History, 1880, p. 158.]

[Footnote 2:  For some expressions of Washington’s opinions on slavery, see Sparks, viii. 414, ix. 159-163, and x. 224.]

After this digression let us return to the Virginian farmer, whose mind was not disturbed as yet by thoughts of the destiny of the United States, or considerations of the rights of man, but who was much exercised by the task of making an honest income out of his estates.  To do this he grappled with details as firmly as he did with the general system under which all plantations in that day were carried on.  He understood every branch of farming; he was on the alert for every improvement; he rose early, worked steadily, gave to everything his personal supervision, kept his own accounts with wonderful exactness, and naturally enough his brands of flour went unquestioned everywhere, his credit was high, and he made money—­so far as it was possible under existing conditions.  Like Shakespeare, as Bishop Blougram has it, he

  “Saved money, spent it, owned the worth of things.”

He had no fine and senseless disregard for money or the good things of this world, but on the contrary saw in them not the value attached to them by vulgar minds, but their true worth.  He was a solid, square, evenly-balanced man in those days, believing that whatever he did was worth doing well.  So he farmed, as he fought and governed, better than anybody else.

While thus looking after his own estates at home, he went further afield in search of investments, keeping a shrewd eye on the western lands, and buying wisely and judiciously whenever he had the opportunity.  He also constituted himself now, as in a later time, the champion of the soldiers, for whom he had the truest sympathy and affection, and a large part of the correspondence of this period is devoted to their claims for the lands granted them by the assembly.  He distinguished carefully among them, however, those who were undeserving, and to the major of the regiment, who had been excluded from the public thanks on account of cowardice at the Great Meadows, he wrote as follows:  “Your impertinent letter was delivered to me yesterday.  As I am not accustomed to receive such from any man, nor would have taken the same language from you personally without letting you feel some marks of my resentment, I would advise you to be cautious in writing me a second of the same tenor.  But for your stupidity and sottishness you might have known, by attending to the public gazette, that you had your full quantity of ten thousand acres of land allowed you.  But suppose you had really fallen short, do you think your superlative merit entitles you to greater indulgence than others?...  All my concern is that I ever engaged in behalf of so ungrateful a fellow as you are.”  The writer of this letter, be it said in passing, was the man whom Mr. Weems and others tell us was knocked down before his soldiers, and then apologized to his assailant.