John Witherspoon, a name synonymous with Princeton University and the American Revolution, left an indelible mark on both institutions and the nascent United States. When John Witherspoon Died on November 15, 1794, America lost not only a distinguished clergyman and educator but also a pivotal figure in its founding narrative. His death marked the end of an era for Princeton, where he served as president for over a quarter of a century, and for the nation he helped forge. To truly understand the significance of John Witherspoon’s death, we must explore the rich tapestry of his life, his contributions, and the complex legacy he left behind.
A Life Dedicated to Principle: From Scotland to Princeton
Born in Gifford, Scotland, on February 5, 1723, John Witherspoon’s early life was steeped in religious and intellectual pursuits. His education at the University of Edinburgh culminated in a defense of his Latin dissertation on the “Immortality of the Mind,” foreshadowing a lifelong dedication to intellectual rigor and theological inquiry. Ordained as a minister, Witherspoon served in two Scottish churches, first in Beith and then in Paisley, gaining prominence as a compelling preacher and author of theological works.
His life took a transformative turn in 1768 when he accepted the presidency of the College of New Jersey, later known as Princeton University. At the time of his arrival, Princeton was a struggling institution. However, Witherspoon’s dynamic leadership revitalized the college, attracting students, bolstering its finances, and establishing it as a leading center of learning in the burgeoning American colonies. He was known for his energy, teaching prowess, and firm disciplinary approach, qualities that were instrumental in Princeton’s survival and rise to prominence.
An Animated Son of Liberty: Witherspoon and the American Revolution
Beyond the academic sphere, John Witherspoon became a fervent advocate for American liberty. As tensions escalated between the colonies and Great Britain, Witherspoon’s voice grew increasingly influential. His powerful sermon, The Dominion of Providence Over the Passions of Men, delivered in May 1776, is considered a pivotal moment in the lead-up to independence, galvanizing support for revolution.
Alt Text: Bronze statue of John Witherspoon standing outside Firestone Library at Princeton University, commemorating his presidency and contributions.
In July 1776, Witherspoon solidified his commitment to the revolutionary cause by signing the Declaration of Independence, the only clergyman to do so. This act was not without personal cost. His outspoken support for independence made him a target of British animosity. Princeton was disrupted during the war, and Witherspoon himself was forced to flee. The conflict touched him deeply, with the tragic loss of his son, James, at the Battle of Germantown in 1777.
Despite these hardships, Witherspoon remained steadfast in his dedication to the new nation. He served in the Continental Congress, contributing to critical committees and shaping the Articles of Confederation. His influence extended to the drafting and ratification of the Constitution, and he continued to serve in various legislative roles, advising prominent figures like Washington, Adams, and Jefferson. His impact on the founding generation was profound, educating a cohort of leaders who would shape the future of the United States.
Witherspoon and Slavery: A Complex and Contested Legacy
The legacy of John Witherspoon, like many figures of his era, is intertwined with the complex issue of slavery. While he is celebrated for his contributions to liberty and education, his stance on slavery presents a more nuanced and often debated aspect of his life.
It is undeniable that John Witherspoon owned slaves. Tax records indicate he owned one slave starting in 1780 and two slaves from 1784 to 1786. His will, written in 1793, also lists “2 Slaves supposed to be worth until they are 28 years of age” among his assets. This fact has led to calls for the removal of his statue at Princeton, with critics arguing that his slave ownership overshadows his other achievements.
However, a closer examination of Witherspoon’s views and actions reveals a more intricate picture. While not an abolitionist in the modern sense, Witherspoon’s position on slavery was arguably more nuanced and forward-thinking than many of his contemporaries, including some of the most revered Founding Fathers.
Baptizing James Montgomery: A Case of Contested Freedom
An early example of Witherspoon’s engagement with slavery is the case of James Montgomery in Scotland in 1756. Montgomery, an enslaved man from Virginia, was brought to Scotland by Robert Shedden. When Shedden attempted to return Montgomery to slavery, Witherspoon baptized Montgomery and provided him with a certificate of Christian conduct. This action, while debated in its intent, was interpreted by Montgomery’s legal counsel as supporting his claim for freedom, arguing that Christian baptism was incompatible with enslavement.
Alt Text: Historical document excerpt detailing the James Montgomery case, referencing John Witherspoon’s baptism and certificate of conduct for the enslaved man.
While Shedden maintained that Witherspoon clarified to Montgomery that baptism did not negate his duty to obey his master, the act of baptism itself, and the provision of a certificate, suggest a degree of support for Montgomery’s cause, even if cautiously expressed within the societal norms of the time.
Educating Black Men: Private Instruction at Princeton
As President of Princeton, Witherspoon extended educational opportunities to free Black men. In 1774, Bristol Yamma and John Quamime, formerly enslaved men who had purchased their freedom, became special students under Witherspoon’s personal instruction. Years later, John Chavis, a free Black Revolutionary War veteran, also sought out Witherspoon for private tutoring at Princeton in 1792. These instances demonstrate Witherspoon’s willingness to educate Black men, even within a society deeply entrenched in racial inequality.
Views on Abolition: Gradualism and Eventual End
Witherspoon’s public statements and writings on slavery reveal a belief that while the practice itself was inherently wrong, immediate abolition was impractical and potentially harmful. In his Lectures on Moral Philosophy, he argued against the morality of enslavement, stating it was “unlawful to make inroads upon others, unprovoked, and take away their liberty by no better right than superior power.” He acknowledged the argument that slavery could improve the lives of “barbarous nations” but countered that this did not justify the practice if it was against their will.
In 1790, as chairman of a committee considering abolition in New Jersey, Witherspoon did not oppose abolition. Instead, he argued that existing laws were sufficient and that slavery was already on a path to eventual extinction in America. He, like many of his contemporaries, underestimated the economic forces that would entrench slavery further, particularly the rise of cotton production fueled by the cotton gin.
His perspective aligned with the Presbyterian Synod of New York and Philadelphia, which in 1787, with Witherspoon’s likely influence, approved of the “general principles in favor of universal liberty” and advocated for the eventual abolition of slavery. The Synod’s statement emphasized gradualism, education for enslaved people, and preparing them for future freedom, reflecting Witherspoon’s own cautious yet forward-looking approach.
New Evidence and Slave Ownership Duration
Recent examination of New Jersey tax ratables provides further insights into Witherspoon’s slave ownership. While records confirm he owned slaves in the early 1780s, they also show that from 1788 until his death in 1794, Witherspoon is listed as owning zero slaves. This suggests that his period of slave ownership was shorter than previously understood and ceased several years before his death.
Intriguingly, the tax ratables also reveal the presence of a “Negro” Witherspoon, named Forton, listed as a householder with property from 1792 to 1794. This individual, possibly a formerly enslaved person connected to Witherspoon, further complicates the narrative and suggests a more nuanced relationship with enslaved people in his later years.
The mention of “2 Slaves supposed to be worth until they are 28 years of age” in Witherspoon’s will could indicate an intention to manumit these individuals at that age, mirroring Pennsylvania’s 1780 gradual abolition law. This, combined with the tax ratable data, suggests a potential shift in Witherspoon’s practice of slave ownership towards the end of his life.
A Legacy of Influence: Witherspoon’s Enduring Impact
John Witherspoon’s death in 1794 marked the passing of a significant figure in American history. His contributions to Princeton University were transformative, establishing it as a cornerstone of American higher education. His role in the American Revolution, as a signer of the Declaration of Independence and a dedicated statesman, cemented his place among the Founding Fathers.
Alt Text: Close-up of John Witherspoon’s signature on the Declaration of Independence, highlighting his commitment to American liberty.
While his ownership of slaves remains a point of contention and necessitates critical examination, it is crucial to consider the totality of his life and views within the historical context of the 18th century. His actions, such as baptizing James Montgomery, educating Black men, and advocating for gradual abolition, demonstrate a more complex and arguably more progressive stance on slavery than many of his contemporaries.
His connections to figures like John Newton and William Wilberforce, prominent evangelical abolitionists, further illuminate the nuances of his position. The honorary degree bestowed upon Newton by Princeton under Witherspoon’s leadership and the high regard both Newton and Wilberforce held for Witherspoon’s theological writings suggest a shared alignment, at least in principle, against the slave trade and towards eventual abolition.
In conclusion, when John Witherspoon died, America lost a multifaceted figure whose legacy is both celebrated and debated. To fully appreciate his contributions and grapple with his complexities, we must engage with the entirety of his life, acknowledging both his achievements and his shortcomings, and understanding him within the context of his time. Rather than simply tearing down statues, perhaps a more meaningful approach is to engage in a deeper understanding of history, confronting its complexities and learning from the past as we strive for a more just future.
