Comparing Jefferson And Washington

Jefferson and Washington’s adherence to political pragmatism, therefore, are more similar than not. In these separate instances, both political leaders acknowledged the uselessness and impracticality of any emancipationist legislation passing, as the elected officials were not yet ready to begin the process of manumission. Still, Jefferson and Washington acknowledged that legislative authority reigned supreme over radical measures of emancipation. This clearly reflects their ideological belief in a democratic republic government. However, it also reflects their realistic understanding that the path towards emancipation and social change could only ever occur through the legislature given the republican government, and that radical emancipation

However, the American republican model of governance that gave power to individual states exasperated the impracticality of emancipation, and prevented Jefferson from pursuing more radical forms of emancipation. Secretly drafted by Thomas Jefferson, The Kentucky Resolution reflects Jefferson’s ideological inclination towards confederalism and strong state rights. In his early draft, Jefferson wrote “that the several states composing the U.S. Of America are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their general government but… the residuary mass of right to their own self-government” However, many of the colonial planters who were elected to hold office and represent the interest of the states refused to support emancipationist legislation to secure their own economic interests, and those who depended on plantations for profit. Carolina Senator John C. Calhoun, for example, defended slavery in a public speech. He noted that “we of the South, will not, cannot, surrender our institutions” Wanting to prevent a federalist tyranny, Jefferson prioritized the autonomous supremacy of the states. Yet in doing so, Jefferson gave a disproportionate amount of power to state representatives, and, ironically, prevented enslaved laborers from obtaining their freedom. In effect, Jefferson’s steadfast philosophy of republicanism and a

In his Farewell Address, Washington said “the basis of our political systems is the right of the people to make and alter their constitutions or government” In an address to Congress, Washington reiterated his support for the concept of popular sovereignty when he said that to succumb to a large judiciary branch would be to “violate the fundamental principle of our Constitution which enjoins that the will of the majority shall prevail” These statements, which reveal Washington’s belief in the concept of popular sovereignty, mirror Washington’s earlier statements about the importance of emancipation passing in the legislature. Washington, therefore, not only supported democratic emancipation legislation for pragmatic reasons but because it reflected the will of the people. Washington confirmed this ideological sentiment in a letter to John Francis Mercer, writing that emancipation was one of his “first wishes” but only if it was a plan “adopted by the legislature…by which slavery…may be abolished in slow, sure, & imperceptible degrees” This, importantly, illuminates an important facet to Washington’s individual paradox. Namely, the synthesis of his two predominant ideologies: republicanism and pragmatism. Washington overwhelmingly wanted realistic plans for gradual emancipation, precisely because his