Many of the Founders, including George Washington, believed that one weakness of the Articles of
Confederation was that the federal government could not deal firmly with domestic uprisings such as
Shay's Rebellion. George Washington, always aware that as the new nation's first President, his every
action would be "drawn into precedent," conducted himself both deliberately and decisively when
farmers across the US resisted a new federal excise tax on liquor.
The Constitution, ratified in 1789, created a strong central government. To
support federal power to enforce the law, Congress passed the Militia Law of
1792. This law allowed Congress to raise a militia to "execute the laws of the
union, (and) suppress insurrections." At the same time, to avoid the financial
problems experienced under the Articles, the Constitution allowed the federal
government to collect certain kinds of taxes. In 1791, Congress placed an
excise tax of 25 % on the sale of whiskey and other liquor. The tax—ranging
from 7 to 18 cents per gallon—was a direct tax on the people who made and
sold whiskey. The tax was intended to help shift resources from individuals to
national programs, such as building roads and establishing post offices, as well
as supporting a western defense.
Farmers west of the Appalachian Mountains (from Pennsylvania to
Georgia) bitterly opposed the whiskey tax. These farmers were unable
to move their grain to far away markets and still make a profit, so
instead they distilled their grain into whiskey. Jugs of whiskey could be
traded for supplies locally, and therefore the liquor was actually used
as a form of currency, as money was often scarce. Moreover, the jugs
of whiskey were more easily exported over the mountains to profitable
markets in the east.
Some farmers called for the abolishment of the tax because they
believed it was imposed unfairly on people in only one part of the
country. Others thought of themselves as patriots for refusing to pay taxes, in the same way that the
American colonists had refused to pay taxes to England. And, many Americans along the frontier
resented the tax from a distant legislature in the east. There were outbreaks of opposition, and in rural
areas where no one was willing to serve as tax collector, the taxes went unpaid.
By July of 1794, the tension had reached a breaking point. Tax collectors were harassed, tarred and
feathered in many small towns; one collector’s home was burned. In Western Pennsylvania, the rebellion
was intense. Reports told that six thousand people were camped outside Pittsburgh threatening to march
on the town.
Washington believed he had to act. He and his cabinet members met with Pennsylvania officials. They
decided to present evidence of the violence to Associate Justice of the Supreme Court James Wilson. After
reviewing the evidence, Wilson certified that the situation could not be controlled by civil authorities
alone. A military response could proceed.
On August 7, Washington issued a proclamation commanding all “insurgents” to “disperse and retire
peaceably to their respective abodes.” He cited his authority under the 1792 Militia Act. But the rebellion
continued. September 25, 1794, he issued another Proclamation which read in part,
“… I, George Washington, President of the United States, in obedience to that high and irresistible duty
consigned to me by the Constitution ‘to take care that the laws be faithfully executed,’ … do hereby declare
and make known that… a militia…force which…is adequate to the exigency is already is motion…”
Washington recruited militia members from Pennsylvania as well as nearby Maryland and New Jersey. In
total, there were almost 13,000 men—about as many as had served in the entire Continental Army that
defeated the British. Washington personally led the troops into Bedford—the first and only time a sitting
US President has led troops into the field.
By the end of November, more than 150 people had been arrested; most
were later freed due to lack of evidence. Two were convicted of treason,
but Washington later pardoned them. Washington’s strong response to
the Whiskey Rebellion became, as future-President James Madison put it,
“a lesson to every part of the Union against disobedience to the laws.”
Whiskey Rebellion Flag
Washington was always aware that as the first president he was establishing precedents, or examples
that would set a path forward toward the future. He knew that he could not allow such a blatant
disregard for the rule of law. He believed that if any group was permitted to disobey the law, “there is an
end put at one stroke to republican government, and nothing but anarchy and confusion is to be expected
thereafter.” Later that year, Washington commented on the rebellion in his Sixth State of the Union
Address:
It has demonstrated that our prosperity rests on solid foundations; by furnishing an additional proof that
my fellow-citizens understand the true principles of government and liberty; that they feel their
inseparable union; that, notwithstanding all the devices, which have been used to sway them from their
interest and duty, they are now as ready to maintain the authority of the laws against licentious
invasions, as they were to defend their rights against usurpation. It has been a spectacle, displaying to the
highest advantage the value of republican government….
Please answer the following questions:
1. What federal law was the focus of protests in the Whiskey Rebellion?
2. Why did President Washington consider using military force against the protestors?
3. How did Washington involve other branches and levels of government in his decision?
4. The Constitution assigns the President the responsibility to “take care” that laws are “faithfully
executed” and makes him or her commander in chief of the military. How did Washington
understand these duties?
5. Do you feel Washington was right in using military force? Why or why not?