1. The Philadelphia directory for 1796 lists a merchant other than Eddowes at this address, but that city’s 1797 directory lists Eddowes, an “ironmonger,” at “67, north third st.” (Philadelphia Directory, 1797 description begins Cornelius William Stafford. Philadelphia Directory, For 1797. … Philadelphia, 1797. description ends , 63; see also Philadelphia Directory, 1796 description begins Thomas Stephens. Stephens’s Philadelphia Directory, For 1796 . . . . Philadelphia, [1796]. description ends , 66).

2. The enclosed packet for GW has not been found. The letter to Eddowes also has not been identified. However, Eddowes may have enclosed a copy of abolitionist Edward Rushton’s undated letter to GW, which Rushton evidently already had transmitted GW the previous summer, and which was later published under the title Expostulatory Letter to George Washington, of Mount Vernon, in Virginia, on his Continuing to be a Proprietor of Slaves (Liverpool, 1797). In the Expostulatory Letter to George Washington, Rushton begins by extolling GW’s actions during the Revolutionary War: “It will generally be admitted, Sir, and perhaps with justice, that the great family of mankind were never more benefited by the military abilities of any individual, than by those which you displayed during the memorable American contest. … after performing the most conspicuous part in that blood-stained tragedy, you again became a private citizen, and unambitiously retired to your farm. There was more of true greatness in this procedure than the modern world at least had ever beheld; and while public virtue is venerated by your countrymen, a conduct so exalted will not be forgotten.” After lauding GW’s public actions and roles that helped create a prosperous nation, Rushton’s letter transforms into a scathing critique of GW’s private character and actions, specifically as a slaveholder: “Yes! you, who conquered under the banners of freedom—you, who are now the first magistrate of a free people, are, (strange to relate) a slave-holder. … you, an enlightened character, strongly enamoured of your own freedom, … that you, I say, should continue to be a slave-holder, a proprietor of human flesh and blood, creates in many of your British friends both astonishment and regret.” Familiar with the claims that GW’s slaves were well-treated, Rushton countered: “That I deny—man never can be well treated who is deprived of his rights. They are all well cloathed, well fed, well lodged, &c… yet, what are these, if liberty be wanting? You took arms in defence of the rights of man—Your negroes are men—Where then are the rights of your negroes? … It has been said too by your apologists, that your feelings are inimical to slavery, and that you are induced to acquiesce in it at present merely from motives of policy; the only true policy is justice, and he who regards the consequences of an act, rather than the justice of it, gives no very exalted proof of the greatness of his character. But if your feelings be actually repugnant to slavery, then are you more culpable than the calous-hearted planter … because he believes slavery to be justifiable; while you persevere in a system which your conscience tells you to be wrong. If we call the man obdurate who cannot perceive the atrociousness of slavery, what epithets does he deserve who, while he does perceive its atrociousness, continues to be a proprietor of slaves.” Rushton exposed the hypocrisy of GW and others who had fought for liberty and against British tyranny while simultaneously owning slaves: “For seven years you bravely fought the battles of your country, and contributed greatly to the establishment of her liberties; yet you are a slave-holder! … A majority of your countrymen have recently discovered that slavery is injustice, and are gradually abolishing the wrong, yet you continue to be a slave-holder! … In the name of justice, what can induce you thus to tarnish your own well earned celebrity, and to impair the fair features of American liberty, with so foul and indelible a blot? … Now, Sir, are you sure that the unwillingness which you have shewn to liberate your negroes, does not proceed from some lurking pecuniary considerations? If this be the case, and there are those who firmly believe it is, then there is no flesh left in your heart; and present reputation, future fame, and all that is estimable among the virtuous, are, for a few thousand pieces of paltry yellow dirt, irremediably renounced.” According to an introductory statement printed in the Expostulatory Letter and dated at Liverpool on 20 Feb. 1797, Rushton had sent GW the text of his letter in July 1796. In the 1797 statement, Rushton added: “a few weeks ago it was returned under cover, without a syllable in reply. … To offend was not the intention of the writer; yet the president has evidently been irritated.” The Time-Piece; and Literary Companion (New York) for 19 June 1797 announced the Expostulatory Letter for sale at the price of one shilling. The advertisement described the publication as “Just Imported.”

Edward Rushton (1756–1814) of Liverpool served during his youth as a mate on slave ships; this firsthand experience with the brutality of slavery led him to a career as a poet and abolitionist.

Liverpool merchant and philanthropist William Rathbone (1757–1809) also was a participant in the anti-slavery movement and became an ardent abolitionist. A Quaker in his youth, Rathbone later questioned the religious practices of that sect and became embroiled in controversies over doctrine. He engaged in political causes, advocating against war with France in the 1790s and in favor of freedom of trade with the United States. Though Rathbone occasionally attended Unitarian religious services, he was laid to rest in a Liverpool Quaker burial-ground.

3. GW had been at Mount Vernon since late September. He returned to Philadelphia on 31 Oct. (see GW to Alexander Hamilton, 2 Nov., and n.1 to that document).