 |
| George Washington said, '...so help me God.' |
220 years isn't much of an age – for a country.
On 30 April, 1789 the first inaugural oath of office was taken on a balcony in New York City. Nobody was quite sure what to do: they fumbled, they fidgeted, and one eyewitness was even embarrassed for the President who, he felt, should be 'first in everything'. Somehow they got through it, following the instructions laid out in a Constitution whose ink was hardly dry. The new country was now organised, it was legal, and it had a leader: George Washington, the 'indispensable man'1.
Washington was indispensable because the one important thing the new republic needed was the orderly transfer of power. Without this, it had been feared by the Anti-Federalists that the new, experimental nation would degenerate into what is now referred to as a banana republic, ruled by a corrupt elite and marred by coups and revolutions. Somebody had to be President for four years, eight years or longer2, and then that somebody had to give it up, retire, write his memoirs and go fishing.
Washington was the man to do this because he had already proven he could. In 1783, having thoroughly trounced the Evil Empire of his day, Washington stood at the head of a victorious army. Some thought he might have become king. Instead, this modern-day Cincinnatus addressed his troops in a farewell speech and retired to Mount Vernon. He had gained power and then given it up – he could be trusted.
As with any exercise of power, trust is a major issue. So is 'getting it right': performing the ceremony with exactitude, imbuing the moment with gravitas. Washington was by all accounts extremely nervous, and so, apparently, were President-Elect Barack Obama and Chief Justice John Roberts when their turn in the spotlight came. On 20 January, 2009 a mistake was made by the Chief Justice, and the President-Elect3 followed suit - out of politeness, one may suppose.
The question is: did it actually matter? Did it affect the orderly transition of power?
