What if George Washington doesn't die in 1799?

I did a search on the forums, and it doesn't appear that someone has asked this question before.

George Washington passed away in 1799 as a result of a sudden illness. He was only 67 at the time of his death. It is possible he could have lived to his early 80s like Franklin and Thomas Jefferson, or even in his 90s like John Adams. In other words, he could've lived to 1815 (83 years old) or even to 1822 (90 years old). I would imagine that he would stay out of politics and stay on his farm for most of his life. However, a question that does spring to mind is what happens when the War of 1812 breaks out? I can't imagine him not wanting to protecting the Union in some way. For example, maybe he will donate some of his money and slaves for the war effort? Maybe he will command Virginia's militia against the British (When they march on Washington)? Washington would be in his 80s at the time, so it is hard to say if he could command troops at that age. However, I would imagine that even the word that Washington was coming to join the fight might've prevented the Americans from losing the Battle of Bladensburg or even having the White House burn to the ground. For example, the American troops might hold the ground in the hopes that Washington could relieve them from the British attack.

What are your thoughts? What impact, if any, would George Washington have on the War of 1812?
 
If Washington can rally support for the war in New England, that removes a pretty big obstacle to America doing well. If the Northeast puts more effort into the war instead of resisting it, the US will probably see a lot more success that IOTL. A side effect of this is that the lack of a Hartford Convention results in a much, much stronger Federalist Party and thus possibly an earlier centralization of power in the federal government.
 
If Washington can rally support for the war in New England, that removes a pretty big obstacle to America doing well. If the Northeast puts more effort into the war instead of resisting it, the US will probably see a lot more success that IOTL. A side effect of this is that the lack of a Hartford Convention results in a much, much stronger Federalist Party and thus possibly an earlier centralization of power in the federal government.

A most interesting point Kirook. But I doubt
even Washington could have done this. He
was, after all, a Virginian, & by 1812 New
England had become pretty much quite
anti-Virginia(remember, one of the Hartford
Convention's biggest complaints was that
Virginia was monopolizing the Presidency).
Thus the Hartford Convention would probably have turned out much as it did IOTL, & the end of Federalism cannot be
butterflied away.
 
First question is, does this affect the Election of 1800? If not, does it have any affect on the next decade? If no chance to either of these, then we can talk about the War of 1812.
 
First question is, does this affect the Election of 1800? If not, does it have any affect on the next decade? If no chance to either of these, then we can talk about the War of 1812.
This is the crux of the matter. Washington being alive and active may be a check on Hamilton's poor political sense. John Adams nearly won reelections. Washington publicly supporting Adams may make a difference.
 
A most interesting point Kirook. But I doubt
even Washington could have done this. He
was, after all, a Virginian, & by 1812 New
England had become pretty much quite
anti-Virginia(remember, one of the Hartford
Convention's biggest complaints was that
Virginia was monopolizing the Presidency).
Thus the Hartford Convention would probably have turned out much as it did IOTL, & the end of Federalism cannot be
butterflied away.
All that is true, but he’s George Washington. If any Virginian could get through to New England and get them on side it would be him. It’s definitely still possible, probable even, that they don’t listen and things go as OTL—but I think he has a chance.
 
This is the crux of the matter. Washington being alive and active may be a check on Hamilton's poor political sense. John Adams nearly won reelections. Washington publicly supporting Adams may make a difference.

To be fair, while he was politically sympathetic to the Federalists and privately may and likely give advice here and there in the TTL.... Washington more than ANYONE wouldn't openly support anyone in particular, to keep both his reputation and national stability intact.
 
All that is true, but he’s George Washington. If any Virginian could get through to New England and get them on side it would be him. It’s definitely still possible, probable even, that they don’t listen and things go as OTL—but I think he has a chance.

Maybe he could have been able to enlist the
help of his old Vice President, John Adams.
Maybe- just MAYBE- New England would have listened to the two of them.
 
If Washington was alive who would he have sided with Thomas Jefferson or Aaron Burr during the Election of 1800
 
If Washington was alive who would he have sided with Thomas Jefferson or Aaron Burr during the Election of 1800

Boy that's a toughie, as I don't think he liked either one! My best guess though, is that since Jefferson was a fellow Virginian, & it is my impression that Washington did not altogether trust Burr, that he would have backed Jefferson.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, when you have Adams AND Hamilton by that point supporting Jefferson, it's no doubt who the other founders preferred.
 
To quote (with slight changes) an old soc.history.what-if post of mine:

***

That leading Federalists opposed to Adams did not consider the [no-third-term] rule absolutely binding is evident from their attempt in 1799 to persuade Washington to accept a third term..." Richard P. McCormick, *The Presidential Game: The Origins of American Presidential Politics* (New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press 1982), p. 245.

No doubt it is extremely unlikely that Washington would accept--but suppose his health had been better, and the Hamiltonians had persuaded him: "General, this is different from 1796. This time only you can save the nation from the
Jacobins [i.e., Jefferson]. Yes, we know you said in 1796 that you would not be a candidate again, but [anticipating TR in 1912] when a man says at breakfast in the morning, 'no thank you, I will not take any more coffee,' it does not mean that he will not take any more coffee to-morrow morning, or next week, or next month, or next year." https://books.google.com/books?id=fTciAQAAIAAJ&pg=PA251

So Washington once again reluctantly decides he must accept his country's call. What next? Obviously he is not going to get the office without bitter opposition. After Jay's Treaty, viewed by Republicans as a sell-out to the British, Washington was anything but a non-controversial, non-partisan national hero; one Republican toast in 1796 was "A speedy death to General Washington." In his retirement, he endorsed the Sedition Act, no doubt largely because of resentment of the Republican slanders about him. Still, he *is* George Washington, and has far more prestige than any other possible Federalist candidate, including Adams...
 
Yeah, when you have Adams AND Hamilton by that point supporting Jefferson, it's no doubt who the other founders preferred.

I
To quote (with slight changes) an old soc.history.what-if post of mine:



***

That leading Federalists opposed to Adams did not consider the [no-third-term] rule absolutely binding is evident from their attempt in 1799 to persuade Washington to accept a third term..." Richard P. McCormick, *The Presidential Game: The Origins of American Presidential Politics* (New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press 1982), p. 245.

No doubt it is extremely unlikely that Washington would accept--but suppose his health had been better, and the Hamiltonians had persuaded him: "General, this is different from 1796. This time only you can save the nation from the
Jacobins [i.e., Jefferson]. Yes, we know you said in 1796 that you would not be a candidate again, but [anticipating TR in 1912] when a man says at breakfast in the morning, 'no thank you, I will not take any more coffee,' it does not mean that he will not take any more coffee to-morrow morning, or next week, or next month, or next year." https://books.google.com/books?id=fTciAQAAIAAJ&pg=PA251

So Washington once again reluctantly decides he must accept his country's call. What next? Obviously he is not going to get the office without bitter opposition. After Jay's Treaty, viewed by Republicans as a sell-out to the British, Washington was anything but a non-controversial, non-partisan national hero; one Republican toast in 1796 was "A speedy death to General Washington." In his retirement, he endorsed the Sedition Act, no doubt largely because of resentment of the Republican slanders about him. Still, he *is* George Washington, and has far more prestige than any other possible Federalist candidate, including Adams...

A VERY interesting senario David T! I think
the big question here is- what would John
Adams have done? He was a prickley(to say
the least)character & I just don't see him
meekly stepping aside for anyone, even
George(who he was not terribly fond of any-
way). I doubt he would have cared in the
least that he would split the Federalists
right down the middle- IOTL, in 1800, he
did exactly this by re-opening peace talks
with France over the opposition of most
Federalists(& it was the right thing to do,
as it averted a war the US just wasn't
ready for).
 
George lives for another decade.
Let's say George Washington somehow reigns Alexander Hamilton in, Alex doesn't go after Adams or Burr as he had. Adams squeaks by for the win, but the Federalist lose both houses of the 7th Congress.

Hard times make hard men, hard men make easy times, easy times make soft men, and soft men make hard times. The 1801 - 1805 Presidential Term is going to be an easy time because of the preceding terms of Washington and Adams. Congress will probably repeal the Sedition Act and may get the various Alien Acts too. I expect the strictness of the Naturalization Act of 1798 to be moderated. Washington would take the opportunity to extend the Olive Branch between Adams and Jefferson over a Lewis and Clarke Expedition (Jefferson trained the Expedition from his personal library). The Navy will be stronger, and the Barbary Pirates still get it. I expect that Adams will get a second Jay Treaty through and this might just keep things calm enough to prevent the War of 1812. The Democratic-Republican Congress will force Adams to reign in the national debt a little. May still get the XII Amendment. Aaron Burr will run off to God knows where. Washington

Coming away from this Jefferson won't likely run for a third time. So we are left with the following Presidential candidates:
Democrat-Republican: Monroe, Madison, George Clinton, DeWitt Clinton, Elbridge Gerry, or Henry Dearborn
Federalist: John Jay, John Marshall, Thomas Pinckney, Charles Pinckney, Rufus King, or Alexander Hamilton
*For propriety's sake John Q Adams will not run the next two terms.

Whoever wins (and it may be another mixed government) is going to have to deal with Burr & Wilkinson's shenanigans, the problems with Florida, another Northwest Indian War, the growing Georgia-Cherokee Conflict, the abolition of the international slave trade, the Napoleonic Wars, and the brewing sectarian troubles. They will also get the opportunity to send out some really cool expeditions as follow-ons to Lewis and Clarke! You probably have the memory of Adams and Jefferson leading a principled discourse hounded on their heels by the extremists Hamilton and Randolph. Let's hope Adams' successor does well.
 
Top