The Whiskey Rebellion

[NARRATOR] It was still dark outside on July 16. 1794 when John Neville woke to shouts and bangs outside of his home. Peeking out the window, he spied fifty men brandishing rifles and clubs. They claimed to be there to protect Neville and asked to be let in. But Neville knew better. These men were likely from the same groups that had been harassing Neville for months. 

Neville was a tax collector, and to the mob outside, he was the worst kind of tax collector—he was responsible for taking the duties on distilled spirits in the rural countryside outside of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

The crowds outside his window demanded that he return their money and burn the records of those who owned stills. Even more, they wanted him to resign.

Neville refused. The crowd grew more adamant. Neville rallied the enslaved men of his household and charged them with protecting his home. As the crowd swelled, a gunshot rang out from the house, mortally wounding a man. Suddenly, bitter black smoke engulfed the entire property as gunshots peppered the early morning gloom. Five protesters were wounded. One died.

The mob quickly fled.

But the next night, over 400 locals returned. Some say it was as many as 800. This time, Neville was ready. Eleven soldiers from Fort Pitt guarded his home. Once again, the situation escalated into violence. Two rioters and one soldier died. Many more were injured.

In a desperate attempt to save his life, Neville fled into the woods behind his home. As he hid within the dark trees, his path may have been lit by the blaze of his home behind him, as the rioters set fire one by one to all of the buildings.

Neville was not the only tax collector to be attacked. Since 1791, opponents of a new tax on whiskey and distilled spirits had escalated their demands. Violence had erupted before, but the attack on Neville’s home led to a new crisis.

Emboldened, protestors set their sights on a new target: the city of Pittsburgh. Their numbers swelled to 7,000. These rebels wanted not only the repeal of the excise tax but freedom from the limits of Federal authority. 

For Washington, the rebellion held echoes of the revolution of days past. Except this time, the rebellion was against his administration. And it wasn’t just Washington’s presidency in the crossfire but the entirety of the Federal government.

What were the limits of Federal Governments’ powers in suppressing domestic rebellions? And how would Washington prevent the so-called Whiskey Rebellion from erupting into a full-scale revolution?

This is Inventing the Presidency, Episode Four: A Pennsylvania Presidency

1791 was a year of change and upheaval for Washington. It was the year of St. Clair’s Defeat. It was when the whiskey tax passed and the first protests began.

It is also when the US capital made its big move.

After sixteen months in New York, the decision was made to move the capital to Philadelphia. This was a temporary measure. The passage of the Residence Act of 1790 determined that a new city would be built on the banks of the Potomac river that would officially serve as the capital city beginning in 1800. That gave the US government ten years to construct the city from scratch. In 1790, they called it the “Federal City,” but we know it today as Washington D.C.

In the meantime, the capital would move to Philadelphia.

Washington had been involved in choosing the new location of the permanent capital, although he himself would never live there. To Washington, the Potomac was the gateway to the West. It also didn’t hurt that the new Federal city would be roughly 15 miles from his Mount Vernon plantation. Other Virginians also applauded the decision. To Jefferson and Madison, it provided a location at the geographic heart of the nation that conveniently also happened to remain close to southern constituencies.

The contentious debate also aggravated tensions on the topic of slavery. Many from the south were pleased by the decision to place the Federal City on the Potomac River, where it would be bordered by Maryland and Virginia, which together held more than half of the enslaved population in the United States.

Not all were pleased. Philadelphia wanted the capital to remain there permanently; they even tried to build a grand presidential mansion in a bid to keep the capital. Washington refused to live there, believing it too lavish. He chose instead to reside in the home of wealthy merchant and former delegate to the Constitutional Convention, Robert Morris. As the largest city in the country and de-facto cultural capital of the young nation, the city also had certain clear advantages.

Meanwhile, Alexander Hamilton favored New York to the extent that some called the city “Hamiltonopolis.” New York was quickly growing powerful in the financial sector, and Hamilton wished to establish a national economy that would see the United States prosper. 

Moving the capital from New York wouldn’t slow Hamilton down, however.  

The United States now owed over $50 million in debts from the Revolutionary Wars, with an additional 25 million owed by individual states. This debt had been a leading contributor to the failure of the Articles of Confederation and a major topic at the Constitutional Convention. It was Hamilton’s idea to combine the state and federal revolutionary war debts into one debt to be paid off by the Federal Government, and in 1790, this idea came to fruition.

To pay off this debt, the Federal government needed a strong form of income. This meant, of course, taxes. In 1791, after some initial resistance, Hamilton successfully convinced Congress to pass a tax on distilled spirits. Hamilton believed that this would simply be a luxury tax, easily absorbed by businessmen on a product unessential to daily life. But he was wrong. 

Patrick Spero, Executive Director of the George Washington Presidential Library, explains this so called “whiskey tax”:

[PATRICK SPERO] This tax was extremely controversial, especially in Western areas.  You have to understand how whisky operated in these areas. Whiskey was, you know, it was a drink that everybody had, but it's also a means of economic growth and opportunity. There were small farmers who might have a still, and they would use their excess wheat to produce whiskey that they can then bring to market. And so they had saw this tax as it really a direct tax on them.

[NARRATOR] An excise is a tax placed on manufacturers of a product, not on the sale or consumption of the product. Producers of whiskey had to pay the tax even if they were not selling the whiskey for profit. Even small home stills could be taxed. And since the tax could only be paid in cash, poor rural farmers were at a loss if they were using the whiskey as a form of barter. 

Additionally, small producers were hurt by another aspect of the tax. A distiller in a “city, town, or village” would pay the rate based on how much whiskey or other spirits they produced. There were even tax breaks if they paid the fees upfront.

But rural producers were not as lucky. They paid based on how much they theoretically could produce based on the size of their still. Most farmers never produced anywhere near as much whiskey as this limit allowed. In practice, poor farmers in the west often ended up paying up to twice as much tax per gallon as their wealthy eastern counterparts. And there was no guarantee that they could make that money back by selling it – if they even sold it at all. 

With up to 25% of domestic whiskey and spirits production occurring in the farmyards and outbuildings of Western Pennsylvania, many interpreted the new law as a direct attack on these poor rural farmers. And because Federal agents had the authority to enter their homes searching for stills, they saw the enforcement of the tax as a clear violation of their liberties. 

Resistance to the tax occurred not just in Pennsylvania but across rural areas in the United States. But it was in Pennsylvania where the resistance would mobilize into acts of defiance. Rural Pennsylvanians formed committees, and many refused to pay the tax. Others erected liberty poles topped with the red cap of liberty–just as they had done during the Revolution. 

As is probably no surprise, Americans have a famous mistrust of taxes on internal goods imposed by distant governments. The Stamp Act, which inspired the rousing cry of “No taxation without representation,” had been rejected by colonists who had no say in the laws being passed in London. Nor would it be the first time that the American debt had led to unrest. In 1787, protests against oppressive debt collection practices and unpaid Revolutionary War wages led to a violent insurrection in Massachusetts known as Shay’s Rebellion. 

Many who resisted this new Whiskey Tax saw themselves as taking on the mantle of a decades-long struggle against unfair taxation and the overreach of government. 

Patrick Spero explains more:

[PATRICK SPERO] So here we are, in 1791, having fought a Revolution.  A Revolution that in many respects, began with Colonists protesting against taxes imposed on them by a distant remote government in London. And here in 1791, George Washington, the person who led the fight against the British Empire is now proposing to impose taxes on these very people who had fought a Revolution rejecting taxation.  And what's interesting about the Whiskey Rebellion is Washington's arguments for it, and the protests against it. It really sounds like it's the American Revolution happening all over again.

Washington argues that this tax is necessary for the Union. They had the United States have taken on an enormous amount of debt after the American Revolution, over $70 million, they had to pay off. And Washington believed that this debt was a national debt and so he assumed the debts of the states along with that the Confederation Congress had taken on, and then they had to confront how to pay for it. And this is the exact same issue that the British Empire was confronting after the Seven Years War in 1763, that led them to pass the Stamp Act, and all the other taxes that followed it, like the Townsend duties and the like. And what Washington said is we need this tax in order to pay off our debt and to maintain our Union. And then in fact, as citizens, you should want to help pay off this debt and those in the West could not believe that this was being passed on them. To them, this was a direct tax, one that really struck at the at their livelihood. And I think what bothered the most of all was a sense of unfairness in it.  A sense that those in the East were passing this tax on them, these small farmers, cash strapped, had to pay an Excise Tax for a part of their community in an economic life that was was essential to them.

[NARRATOR] The excise tax was passed in March 1791. In August, the United States military lost at St. Clair’s Defeat.

Confidence in the Federal government plummeted. Those in the western territories no longer believed that the government could protect them against raids by Native Americans, and with the tax, many believed that the Federal government did not have their best interests at heart. 

These fears spoke to a larger ideological divide that was widening between Americans. 

At this point in American history, there are no formal political parties. There is, however, a growing partisanship between the so-called Federalists and anti-Federalists. The public faces of this divide were Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson, both members of Washington’s cabinet.  

Sandra Moats explains:

[SANDRA MOATS] Hamilton and Jefferson, largely over the decision to pay off the Revolutionary War debts, they end up with two very different interpretations of the Constitution. And so the Hamilton view, which is, again, it's a strong national government, the executive is the President is the leader of the government, pro trade pro Britain. Okay. That becomes the Federalist coalition. It's more ideological than it is organizational. These tend to be people from the northeast, they tend to be more elites, they tend to be business people, people involved in the Atlantic trade, things like that. They also tend to be in some cases, wealthy slave owners. So it's not the sectional divide that we'll get later. It's just people whose economic and political outlook prefers that stronger, top down authority, the government playing an active role in promoting the economy and things like that.

On the other hand, you have Jefferson, and Madison's response, which is, the Congress should be the engine of the US government, not the executive, that states and the national government should balance authority, that, again, if it's not specifically stated in the Constitution, you can't do it at the kind of strict interpretation, and that we should become an agrarian Republic, we should become a nation of farmers. And lastly, France is our best friend. So as you might guess, if the democratic Republicans are the nation of the party of farmers, you're going to have more common people. Again, people who see the nation's future through agriculture. Again, like something like 93% of Americans at this time, work in farming. So you can also see that the Democratic Republicans are also going to do better politically long term because more of the country matches them. Secondly, most of the country prefers a smaller national government. It's more of the common man, people who work with their hands, artisans, farmers, people like that people who want a small national government, only when it's absolutely necessary.

[NARRATOR] In the early years of Washington’s presidency, Federalist and anti-federalist denoted a loose-knit system of political beliefs. No real consensus existed on either side, nor were there any formal organizational structures for those who held similar opinions with one another. 

Tensions between Federalists and Anti-Federalists would intensify, however, as the protests against the Whiskey tax continued into 1792 and 1793. 

In the Western territories, particularly in Western Pennsylvania where opposition to the whiskey tax was strongest, sentiment against the Federal government was growing, although not all who protested the excise tax held anti-federalist beliefs. In their perspective, the Federal government restricted the growth of their settlements, refused to provide adequate protection against Native raids, and now levied heavy taxes that seemed to target their agrarian lifestyle.

A convention of dissenters met in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania on September 7, 1791. Just a few weeks later, the resolutions of the meeting were printed in newspapers across Pennsylvania.

[NEWSPAPER] “Resolved, that having considered the laws of the law Congress, it is our opinion that in a very short time hasty strides have been made to all that is unjust and oppressive.…It is insulting to the feelings of the people to have their vessels marked, houses painted and ransacked, to be subject to informers gaining by the occasional delinquency of others. It is a bad precedent, tending to introduce the excise laws of Great Britain… Resolved, that in the opinion of this committee the duties imposed by the said act on spirits distilled from the produce of the soil of the United States, will eventually discourage agriculture, and a manufacture high beneficial to the present state of the country. That those duties which fall heavy, especially upon the western parts of the United States, which are for the most part newly settled and where the aggregate of the citizens is of the laborious and poorer class, who have no means of procuring the wines, spiritous liquors, etc. imported from foreign countries.”[1]

[NARRATOR] Just a few days later, on September 11^th, violence broke out. Alexander Hamilton would later report on these events to Washington:

[HAMILTON] The Opposition broke out in an act of violence upon the person & property of Robert Johnson Collector of the Revenue for the Counties of Alleghany & Washington.

A party of men armed and disguised way-laid him at a place on Pidgeon Creek in Washington county—seized, tarre,d and feathered him cut off his hair and deprived him of his horse, obliging him to travel on foot a considerable distance in that mortifying and painful situation.

Sometime in October 1791 an unhappy man of the name of Wilson, a stranger in the county, and manifestly disordered in his intellects imagining himself to be a Collector of the Revenue… was so unlucky as to make inquiries concerning the Distillers who had entered their stills; giving out that he was to travel through the UStates to ascertain & report to Congress the number of Stills &c. This man was pursued by a party in disguise, taken out of his bed, carried about five Miles back to a Smith’s Shop, stripped of his Cloaths which were afterwards burnt, and after having been himself inhumanly burnt in several places with a heated Iron was tarred and feathered—and about day light dismissed—naked wounded and otherwise in a very suffering condition.[2]

[NARRATOR] More incidents followed. Mobs tarred and feathered tax collectors. Instigators threatened witnesses. In 1792, Captain William Faulkner was ambushed on the road and threatened until he agreed to no longer allow the excise collectors to use his home as an office. Faulkner resorted to publishing the following notice in local newspapers to ensure locals that he was no longer harboring a tax collector:

[FAULKNER] Notice is hereby given, as an inspection office has been kept by General Nevill, at my house in Washington [County], I hereby inform the public that it shall be kept there no longer. Those who are uneasy and making threats, may give themselves no further trouble.[3]

[NARRATOR] The events in western Pennsylvania, along with protests in other states, begin to tarnish Washington’s once sterling reputation. 

[SPERO] Washington isn't sure of what to do. He knows that he has to enforce this tax and he's frustrated that those in the West don't see it's important to the Union. But at the same time, this is again, a moment where the foundations of the government are very, very fragile. And he's also very concerned about the committees that they're forming, and that these committees seem to be extra legal and perhaps even illegal bodies in his mind.

[NARRATOR] The resistance poses a conflict for the Federal Government. If they bowed to the demands, it would not only weaken Federal authority but make it even more difficult to pay off the country’s debts. But they also couldn’t ignore the demands of their own people. 

[SPERO] But what they try and do is, is take a middle path, they're not trying to stir things up or escalate the situation. In fact, they revise the excise tax in 1792 in a way that they hope will be more acceptable to those in the West, none of that works. And as time goes on, and this is a, you know, the Rebellion's in 1794, but it really is a long term development. And there are a number of things that Washington tries and doesn't work. You know, he sends, basically, you know, emissaries out there to try and negotiate with the Western settlers.  There's a part of the tax that Western settlers find particularly odious.  It requires that every still has to get registered, which to many of them this is, you know, you know, an invasion of their rights in itself. And then they have to pay a tax on the amount that they produce, which then is a double invasion. And if they don't comply, if the distilleries don't comply with the law, and they're caught, and they're arrested, they have to go to a Federal courthouse in Philadelphia to be tried. So this is 300 miles to the East to get tried.

And so Washington is at this moment where he sees Federal authority, really  under threat. And I think it this has been building up in years and years and years. And the Whiskey Rebellion, I think was the moment where he realized I have to really assert Federal authority here to establish the Federal Government. I can't continue to kind of try and take half measures and soft pedal things, which he had been doing beforehand, because he didn't want to perhaps escalate things too much. The Whiskey Rebellion, I think, was the moment where he said, "This is it, we've got to assert Federal authority."

[BREAK]

[FEMALE VOICE] Are you enjoying Inventing the Presidency? Do you want to help other listeners find our show and learn about early American history? Then consider leaving us a review on your favorite podcast app. We would love to hear your thoughts. From everyone here at the George Washington Presidential Library at Mount Vernon, Thanks for Listening.

[MUSIC]

[NARRATOR] In 1792, following the Congressional inquiry into St. Clair’s defeat and the violence in Western Pennsylvania, Washington was tired.  His term was coming to an end in 1793, and he looked forward to a potential retirement. At this point, Washington was 61 years old. He still yearned to return to his farming at Mount Vernon, and the stresses of office had worn at his health. 

Washington doubted whether he should take a second term as president. In November of that year, he confided his concerns to his close friend, Elizabeth Powel.  Powel was alarmed by the suggestion that Washington might retire. She feared, like many in Philadelphia, that Washington’s departure would tip the scales of power towards those who sought to disempower the government Washington and others had worked so hard to build. 

The Whiskey Rebellion was far from the only thing on Washington’s mind at this point. The British were at war with France and were seizing American ships carrying goods into French territories in the West Indies. They were also building new forts along the Miami River, not far from the site of St. Clair’s Defeat. The Yellow Fever epidemic raged in Philadelphia, forcing Washington to temporarily move his office once again—this time to Germantown, PA. We’ll discuss all of this in more detail next episode. 

With all this and more in the background, Powel knew that the United States needed Washington more than ever. And she made it her mission to convince him of the same. So Powell put pen to paper and wrote to Washington:

[POWEL] My dear Sir, After I had parted with you on Thursday, my Mind was thrown into a Train of Reflections in Consequence of the Sentiments that you had confided to me. Your Resignation would elate the Enemies of good Government and cause lasting Regret to the Friends of humanity. The mistaken and prejudiced Part of Mankind, that see through the Medium of bad Minds, would ascribe your Conduct to unworthy Motives. The Antifederalist would use it as an Argument for dissolving the Union. Will you withdraw your Aid from a Structure that certainly wants your Assistance to support it? Can you, with Fortitude, see it crumble to decay? I know you cannot you will not. But you will say that there are Abilities and Virtues in other Characters equal to the Task. I will venture to assert that, at this Time, you are the only Man in America that dares to do right on all public Occasions.[4]

[NARRATOR] Washington likely understood the fragile status of the US government at that moment. So he agreed to stand for a second term, and for the second time, he was elected unanimously. His second term began on March 4, 1793, and he gave what remains the shortest inaugural address in American history. In about 135 words, Washington thanked his countrymen for the honor and promised to uphold the Constitution.

It was a simple speech that belied a complicated political realm. Powell’s fears of the “Antifederalist” seemed increasingly relevant in the following years. In 1793, the formation of so-called Democratic Republican societies began to disturb staunch Federalists like Powell. 

These societies had no formal relationship to each other and indeed, most did not even refer to themselves as “Democratic Republic.” But they generally shared a loose set of common anti-Federalist beliefs, including opposition to a national bank and the excise tax. 

The very first of these organizations formed in Pennsylvania in May of that year, and over the next three years, 40 such societies cropped up across the country.

To Washington, these societies directly challenged the authority of the Federal Government. In September 1793, he wrote to Henry Lee:

[WASHINGTON] Among the many symptoms of this wicked combination no one affected me more than the establishment of a society in Philadelphia called the democratic society. This was intended as a standard for the people to rally under, and menaced from its very nature the destruction of the constitution & government under which we live.[5]

 [NARRATOR] There were many reasons why Washington disliked these societies. Fundamentally, Washington tended to sympathize with Federalists, and Democratic Republicans leaned towards anti-federalist beliefs. At the same time, Washington was quickly coming to loathe partisanship in politics. He believed that it created division within the union that threatened the foundations of the American nation. 

Washington’s beliefs that such societies stoked discontent became fully realized the following year when John Neville’s plantation was attacked. 

John Neville was not a popular man in Western Pennsylvania. But he didn’t need to be. He was among the wealthiest landholders in the region. He owned over 1000 acres of land and enslaved 18 people. He was also the regional inspector of the federal excise tax on distilled spirits. This meant that it was his job to collect the unpopular whiskey tax. He was also a distiller himself, but his operations were large enough that he did not suffer the same penalties as the small-scale local brewers.

Positions like tax collector or county sheriff were often granted to men of means. The average citizen did not have access to these positions of power, and many felt victimized by what they saw as a conspiracy of the wealthy elite against the humble tenant farmer.

Tensions continued to brew. Many distillers had refused to pay the tax. A crowd burned effigies of Neville in the summer of 1793. In November, another tax collector by the name of Benjamin Wells also suffered an attack on his home. Washington offered a $200 reward for anyone who could provide information about the assailants.[6] It appears to have done little good.

On July 15^th, 1794, Neville left to serve papers to the rioters and non-compliant distillers when thirty or forty armed men surrounded Neville and his companions on the road. It was reported that a few of the assailants had shot off their guns in warning. Fortunately, no one was injured in this incident. It was not the first time, however, that Neville had encountered resistance on the road, but the protests were clearly escalating.

Perhaps because of this incident, Neville may have anticipated what was coming next. The next morning on July 16^th, a mob formed outside of his home. Most of the men in the crowd belonged to the Mingo Creek Militia, which had rallied just a few days before to help fight against Native forces in the ongoing Northwest War. 

The only people in the house were Neville and a few of his enslaved household members, whom he armed and tasked with protecting the house. As the crowd grew more rowdy, someone from the household shot at the mob, sparking an exchange of gunfire. One of the protesters–a man named Oliver Miller–was killed, and the crowd quickly dispersed. 

But they would return the next night, bigger and stronger.

Accounts vary as to the size of the mob that night. Some said it was 400. Others claim it was as high as 800. Many of them blamed Neville for the death of Oliver Miller the night before.

This time, Neville would not be taken by surprise. Using his old Revolutionary War contacts, he assembled a small detachment from Fort Pitt, commanded by Major James Kirkpatrick, to defend his home. But the eleven or so soldiers he had gathered paled next to the hundreds that surrounded his home.  

The protestors, led by popular Revolution hero John McFarlane, made the following demands: that Neville would resign his post and never again take another as a tax collector. But Kirkpatrick claimed that Neville had already left the house. He offered to allow no more than six men to enter the home and search it so that they could take the papers they wanted destroyed. McFarlane agreed on one condition: that the soldiers abandon the house and give up their arms. Kirkpatrick saw this as an obvious trick; he believed that the goal of the protestors was to destroy the house in its entirety.

Kirkpatrick refused. And the battle began. For an hour, the two sides exchanged gunfire. According to some accounts of that evening, McFarlane either heard or saw a sign of parley coming from the house. Believing that Kirkpatrick was ready to negotiate, he ordered his men to cease fire. He then emerged from the trees from which he had been hiding.

Within seconds, he was dead, shot by Kirkpatrick’s soldiers.

The militiamen went into a frenzy. From their perspective, Kirkpatrick had tricked McFarlane into giving up his position so that they could murder him. In response, they began to set fire to the entire property. Eight outbuildings went up in flames. The heat of the inferno was so intense that Kirkpatrick and his men were forced to surrender before the house itself burned.  

That night, as fire consumed the last of Neville’s buildings, the protestors carried the soldiers off, where they forcibly held them for several days.

The success of the Mingo Creek Militia paired with the despair at McFarlane’s death reinvigorated efforts to protest the whiskey tax. The fervor quickly spread to the surrounding counties, and plans were made for a new assembly at Braddock’s Field in August. This assembly would precede a march to Pittsburgh, where they planned to overtake the city’s garrisons. 7000 rebels attended the assembly at Braddock’s Field. 

Hugh Henry Brackenridge, a close compatriot of George Washington and other Founding Fathers since the war, had gained much political prominence in Pittsburgh and published the Pittsburgh Gazette, which had become a major bulletin for the rebellion’s call to action. Brackenridge became tentatively involved in the Rebellion, and he was present at Braddock’s Field. This is his account of the events there: 

[BRACKENRIDGE] The ground where Braddock fought; is on the east side of the Monongahela, and on the same side with the town of Pittsburgh. The militia from Washington [County] had therefore to cross the river in order to come upon the ground. They had arrived in great numbers, at the same ford where he did; and were now upon the ground. They were amusing themselves with shooting balls at marks, and firing in the air at random. There was a continual discharge of guns, and constant smoke, in the woods, and along the bank of the river.

In the course of the day, a great subject of conversation had been the taking the garrison. The query, everywhere, was, “Were we to take the garrison?” I answered always, that we were. The query then was, “Could we take it?” It was answered, “No doubt of it.” But at a great loss? Not at all; not above a thousand killed, and five hundred mortally wounded. This loss, to the more thinking part, appeared very serious.

Various modes were proposed of taking it: Some thought of providing stakes, with sharpened points, and rushing up with those, and putting them in the port holes, obstruct the firing from them; while others were cutting away the pickets. In the meantime, others with their rifles taking off the men at the guns, in the block-houses of the bastions, as the Indians took off the artillery men, in St. Clair's expedition. I was asked, what was my plan of taking it? I suggested the undermining and blowing up a bastion: but they would fire upon the diggers; besides, it would waste powder.

To some complaining, that called out so hastily, they were not well furnished with provisions, I proposed starving out the garrison; but these were apprehensive they would starve out themselves.[7]

[NARRATOR] Back in Philadelphia, Washington was facing one of the largest threats yet to the unity of the United States.

[SPERO] So the Whiskey Rebellion was one of the biggest crises Washington faced and this is a Presidency that faced what seemed like an endless stream of crises. Well for me, the part of the Rebellion that is the most striking and I think the one that shows how much things have escalated, were the battles that happened in Western Pennsylvania.  The Federal Marshals who were trying to enforce the tax, got into armed conflicts with the rebels and two rebels were killed. This was a extraordinarily tense situation. And I think everybody involved realized or felt that the future of the Union was at stake.  This was an armed conflict within American Society. And even though Western Pennsylvania feels like it's far away. It's not Kentucky, it's not the Mississippi, it's a couple of days trip from Philadelphia. So this was pretty close to the heart of the Federal Government as well.

[NARRATOR] Washington gathered his cabinet and pondered over what to do. There was no question that strong action was needed to quell the resistance. But Washington was mindful of the limits of his office. In August 2, 1794, Washington and his cabinet met with Pennsylvania Governor Thomas Mifflin, Chief Justice Thomas McKean, Attorney General Jared Ingersoll, and secretary of the Commonwealth Alexander Dallas. Disagreements arose about the best way to settle the increasing violence. 

[MALE VOICE] The President declared his determination to go every length that the Constitution and Laws would permit, but no further; he expressed a wish for the co-operation of the State Government, and he enquired whether the governor could not adopt some preliminary measures under the State Laws, as the measures of the General Government would be slow…

[NARRATOR] Washington wanted to use the military to quell the rebellion before it had a chance to start, but he knew that he could not proceed without everyone on board. And not everyone was on board.

[MALE VOICE] The intention of proceeding against the rioters being declared by the President, the Chief Justice expressed it as his positive opinion that the judiciary power was equal to the task of quelling and punishing the riots, and that the employment of a military force at this period would be as bad as anything that the rioters had done—equally unconstitutional and illegal.[8]

[NARRATOR] For now, Washington held back. The use of force was controversial. Edmund Randolph wrote to Washington shortly after the Conference begging him not to rush to put down the Rebellion. 

[RANDOLPH] If measures, unnecessarily harsh, disproportionately harsh, and without a previous trial of everything, which law and the spirit of conciliation can do, be executed, that indignation will give way, and the people will be estranged from the administration, which made the experiment. One motive, assigned in argument, for calling forth the militia, has been, that a government can never be said to be established, until some signal display has manifested its power of military coercion. This maxim, if indulged, would heap curses upon the government. The strength of a government is the affection of the people.[9]

[NARRATOR] Washington knew that he needed to convince Governor Mifflin and others first that all peaceful options had been taken. Washington sent a team of commissioners to negotiate with the rebels. They even offered complete pardons for all criminal behavior should the rebels promise to stop organizing.

But before these peace talks fully concluded, Washington became skeptical that they would work. He and Hamilton began planning for the worst of all contingencies: war.

Hamilton led the efforts to raise a military force. He reached out to the governors of Virginia, Pennsylvania, Maryland, and New Jersey to request soldiers.  They eventually managed to rally 12,950 men. These troops would gather in Carlisle, Pennsylvania and Hagerstown, Maryland and stand ready should peace talks fail.  

They didn’t need to wait long. By the end of September, fears of a rebel march spread. Liberty poles were mounted in towns across Western Pennsylvania. The Federal Government had refused to repeal the excise, and thus the commissioners had failed to convince the rebels to lay down their arms.

As the Federal government’s troops gathered in the towns of Carlisle and Hagerstown, Washington knew that he could not stand back and watch. On October 4, he arrived in Carlisle to greet his new army. He then rode out to Maryland to meet the rest of the soldiers.

Washington had no way of knowing it, but this was already an extraordinary action in American history. Washington remains the only President to oversee the command of troops while sitting in office. Washington’s visit invigorated the troops and boosted morale.  Still, he was uncertain of whether or not he would march out with the troops to Pittsburgh. 

After reviewing the troops and speaking with other military leaders, Washington determined that he was not needed. His presence in Carlisle and Hagerstown had already sent shockwaves through the rebellion, and he was satisfied with the quality and training of the American soldiers sent to calm them. Assured that the Rebellion would crumble without need for excessive violence, Washington entrusted the command to General Henry Lee, better known as Light-Horse Harry Lee. He returned to Philadelphia. 

Just a few days later, the troops marched to Pittsburgh, ready to meet with the rebels. Few knew what would greet them as they entered the heart of rebel territory. Would a new war break out? Would the army be forced to violently put down a civilian insurrection?

Fortunately for the United States, the answer was no. Washington’s appearance in Carlisle and Hagerstown may have demoralized the rebels. And if that didn’t do it, the 12,000 men marching towards them certainly did. During the march, the troops saw occasional displays of defiance as liberty poles continued to crop up in the countryside around them, but they encountered no violent resistance.

The rebellion was over.

The troops did eventually arrest over 150 people in connection with the rebellion. Only two were ever convicted, and in 1795, Washington granted both of them pardons.

The Whiskey Rebellion had escalated for three years, and now it had fallen apart in a matter of days. Washingtons’ leadership during this time promoted the strength and unity of the Federal Government against challenges to its authority. By delaying a show of force, Washington made a good faith effort to attempt a peaceful solution. At the same time, by preparing to march out with the troops, he also demonstrated the strength and conviction of the Federal Government.

But Washington was aware that the divisions that underscored the Whiskey Rebellion remained prevalent in the young Republic. He was wary of the growing partisan divide that he saw as directly responsible for the escalation to violence. 

Washington wrote to Henry Lee: 

[WASHINGTON] I consider this insurrection as the first formidable fruit of the Democratic Societies; brought forth I believe too prematurely for their own views, which may contribute to the annihilation of them. That these societies were instituted by the artful & designing members (many of their body I have no doubt mean well, but know little of the real plan,) primarily to sow the Seeds of Jealousy & distrust among the people, of the government, by destroying all confidence in the Administration of it.[10]

 [NARRATOR] 1793 would prove to be one of the most difficult years of Washington’s presidency. The Whiskey Rebellion would test the mettle of his presidency. But these were not the only crises Washington would face that year. 

For amidst this violence and insurrection, there was another threat to the American union. In 1793, a stranger would appear on the shores of South Carolina that would launch the United States into a new crisis, one which would result in the resignation of one of Washington’s most vocal members of the Cabinet and which would nearly embroil the young nation in a European War.

Next time, on Inventing the Presidency:  War erupts in Europe, and George Washington must defend American neutrality, lest the United States become swallowed up in the conflict.

Partisan lines become drawn, and Washington loses a crucial ally as criticism of his presidency mounts.

Notes

[1] “Pittsburgh,” Mail; or, Claypoole's Daily Advertiser (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania), no. 99, September 23, 1791: [2].

[2] “From Alexander Hamilton to George Washington, [5 August] 1794,” Founders Online, National Archives, https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Hamilton/01-17-02-0017.

[3] "From the Pittsburg Paper of August 15." General Advertiser (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania), no. 605, September 4, 1792: [3].

[4] “To George Washington from Elizabeth Willing Powel, 17 November 1792,” Founders Online, National Archives, https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Washington/05-11-02-0225.

[5] “To George Washington from Henry Lee, 17 September 1793,” Founders Online, National Archives, https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Washington/05-14-02-0071.

[6] “A Proclamation by the President of the United States of America,” Gazette of the United States (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania) V, no. 65, February 26, 1794: [2]. 

[7] Hugh Henry Brackenridge, Incidents of the insurrection in the western parts of Pennsylvania, in the year 1794. By Hugh H. Brackenridge. (Philadelphia: Printed and sold by John M'Culloch, 1795): 52-57

[8] Harold Coffin Syrett and Jacob Ernest Cooke, eds. “Conference Concerning the Insurrection in Western Philadelphia,” The Papers of Alexander Hamilton (Columbia University Press, 1972): 10, 12.

[9] “To George Washington from Edmund Randolph, 5 August 1794,” Founders Online, National Archives, https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Washington/05-16-02-0362.

[10] “From George Washington to Henry Lee, 26 August 1794,” Founders Online, National Archives, https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Washington/05-16-02-0418.