Washington D.C.: The City of Magnificent Intentions or Magnificent Conflictions?

While delving into what is chapter six of Andrea Wulf’s “Founding Gardeners” I came to realize what conflicts surfaced upon the creation of what is today my favorite city in the United States. From the location of the capital to the type of republic it would portray, the founding fathers of this great nation faced choices with heated conflicting opinions.

“I cannot consider our Presidents as very unfortunate men, if they must live in this dwelling.”

­-Oliver Wolcott

            I think that by opening up the chapter with this quote, Wulf further reinforces the high regard that our founding fathers placed on beauty as our nation was coming together. While this has been a common theme in the novel thus far, I think it is important to note that beauty, though important in the eyes of many of the founding fathers, came almost second while creating the nation’s capital. Wulf noted that there were two main issues pressing on congress during the summer of 1790- where the seat of the nation was to be situated and how the debts would be handled. Jefferson helped facilitate decisions on both of these things with his “Dinner Table Bargain” between Madison and Hamilton- the seat of the capital was to be on the Potomac River along the MD and VA border only if Hamilton’s plan to take all the Revolutionary War debt from the 13 colonies and assume it to the federal government.

            Now that these two issues were resolved, Washington and Jefferson were able to come to an agreement on how the nation’s capital was to be planned out and situated. Little did they know the discrepancies between how each thought the capital should be laid out were political disagreements as opposed to situational.

Jefferson: Believed that the capital should be small and spreading out from its center - a very republican city.

Washington: Believed that the strong central government should be shown through elaborate plans and dominant architecture.

I agree with Wulf in that I feel that the personalities of each of these men are the reason that Washington’s plan was originally commissioned as opposed to Jefferson’s. Jefferson was never a headstrong individual- he wouldn’t speak up and openly oppose the plans that Washington set forth for the capital. He was a simple Republican man with a simple plan for the capital and central government respectively, but would not force his ideas on anyone. When he finally came to his presidency in 1800 (after Adams has lost the race and Washington had died) he finally could set his plans into motion. Interestingly enough this was simply doing nothing at all. By making no more progress on the elaborate plans Washington had failed to carry out due to lack of money and retirement from the presidency, Jefferson was in a sense creating his vision of the perfect republican capital.

It was not until about six years after being in office that he made headway on a plan for a garden at the White House. This was peculiar to me because Jefferson was such an agronomy motivated individual. I think this attests to the practical side of republican Jefferson, the side of Jefferson that put beauty second to developing his country. By the time he was ready to set his plans for the garden at the White House, he realized that funds were not going to be able to be allocated to fulfill his vision. Instead of implementing his plans in D.C., Jefferson instrumented them at Poplar Forest in his retirement. Jefferson finally was able to take solace in nature at Poplar Forest, something that time, money, and the desire to develop his country did not allow for him to do fully while in charge of at the seat of the capital, Washington D.C..