Although George Washington is best known for his hunting dogs, his journals and letters show that he had many types of dogs throughout his life, and that he had a real fondness for them.
He probably had about 50 or more dogs during his lifetime.
Records from 1786 reveal that our first president paid 12 shillings for a “coach dog” (a dalmatian) named Madame Moose. In August of the following year, he purchased a male coach dog to breed with her. He noted the event in his diary: “A new coach dog [arrived] for the benefit of Madame Moose; her amorous fits should therefore be attended to.”
Spaniels
Several years after the Revolutionary War, Richard Sprigg, a prominent Maryland lawyer, sent George Washington a young female spaniel puppy descended from an English spaniel that Washington had admired while visiting Sprigg’s Annapolis home.
An avid rider and hunter, Washington used spaniels both to flush out land birds from their hiding places and to retrieve birds after they had been shot.
Newfoundland
According to Martha Washington’s grandson George Washington Parke Custis, Washington also had a Newfoundland.
Custis wrote that Tom Davis, one of the slaves at Mount Vernon, hunted ducks for the Washington household and was often accompanied by a “great Newfoundland dog who was named Gurmer.”
Terriers
Terriers were also part of the Washington kennels.
In a letter to William Pearce, who managed Mount Vernon during his presidential term, “I hope Frank [the butler] has taken particular care of the Tarriers [sic]. I directed him to observe when the female was getting into heat, and let her be immediately shut up; and no other than the male Tarrier get to her.”
According to Mount Vernon records, terriers were useful on the plantation because they hunted and killed rats.
Foxhounds
Washington is widely known as the father of the American foxhound. He began to crossbreed big French hounds with his own black and tan hounds to create a new breed of hound. Today, the American Kennel Club recognizes our first president as the founder of the American foxhound.
Here are the animals Washington is thought to have had specifically during his time as president:
George Washington’s Pets
Samson, Steady, Leonidas, Traveller, Magnolia and other stallions
- Nelson and Blueskin, horses used during the American Revolution
- A horse given to Washington by Gen. Braddock
- Drunkard, Mopsey, Taster, Cloe, Tipsy, Tipler, Forester, Captain, Lady Rover, Vulcan, Sweet Lips, and Searcher, all hounds
- Five French hounds
- Rozinante, Nellie Custis’s horse
- A parrot belonging to Mrs. Martha Washington
More to the Story
One of our readers, in the comments section below this article, suggested there was a darker side to George Washington’s relationship with dogs.
Washington felt threatened by his slaves’ dogs, who were well trained and suspected of killing his sheep. Eventually, according to researcher Mary V. Thompson in an article for PBS Frontline, Washington ordered that most of his slaves’ dogs be hanged.
In addition, our nation’s first president drowned puppies. Yes, he drowned certain mixed-breed puppies that weren’t considered “true” — and this may horrify animal lovers today, but the practice wasn’t uncommon among breeders in Washington’s time. Even so, researcher John Ensminger puts it this way: “Washington was not a precursor of the cooing pet lovers that have since inhabited the White House.”
Well that’s pretty grand, but George Washington was known to falsely accuse his uber-skilled hunting slaves of rustling his sheep in order to keep the hunters intimidated. Then he’d execute their most prized dogs in front of the gathered slaves to show them who was in charge of Mt Vernon.
Bill. Really? I grew up on the org Mt Vernon Plantation and never heard such a thing. This is a strange action for a man that released all of his slaves upon his death. What is your source of information?
Thanks for pointing this out, Bill. We did uncover some information about this and have added it to our article.
Note: Washington owned both hunting land and farm land with farm animals. Hunting dogs could easily threaten farm animals, such as sheep. Similar to any employer today, the property of the business must be protected, even from employees.
Bill’s comment is both misleading and inaccurate. Only one dog was known to be executed. There is no evidence in the research presented here that they were falsely accused or otherwise. Rather than simply ‘intimidating’ the hunting slaves, Washington’s directions were undertaken as recorded, to protect the farm animals and his property.
This website has also taken the opportunity to malign Mr. Washington. The website uses the term ‘a darker side to Washington’s relationship with dogs’ which may be taken to indicate a darker side to his actions or character. Any executive, or even fellow employee of integrity today would be expected to protect the interests of their company against employee damages. Any responsible farmer or hunter or landowner would be expected to protect their property and means of providing. A shepherd’s role in particular throughout history has been to protect sheep from other animals, even by destroying aggressive animals if need be.
Here is the quote from the research from by Mary Thomas:
When the slaves’ entrepreneurial activities threatened Washington’s interests, his concern with their private lives came to the fore. In the fall of 1794, for example, he learned that Sally Green, the abandoned wife of one of his white carpenters and the daughter of his old servant, Thomas Bishop, was thinking of moving to Alexandria to open a shop. The president feared that with her long-standing ties to the Mount Vernon slaves, the shop would be “no more than a receptacle for stolen produce” from his farms, he told his manager, William Pearce. He asked Pearce to caution Green against dealing with his slaves, for if “she deals with them at all,” Washington thought, “she will be unable to distinguish between stolen, or not stolen things.” He warned that if she came under any suspicion of dealing in stolen goods, “she need expect no further countenance or support from me.”
His slaves’ ownership of dogs also troubled and economically threatened George Washington. They apparently trained the animals quite well. “It is astonishing to see the command under which their dogs are,” Washington commented to his manager Anthony Whiting in 1792. Although the slaves probably kept the dogs ostensibly for hunting, both men felt that they used the dogs during “night robberies” to round up Mount Vernon sheep, which they then sold to certain outside “receivers.” Washington and Whiting also feared that dogs might kill the sheep. Washington eventually ordered Whiting to decide which dog or dogs to keep on each farm, then kill all the others. Afterward, “if any negro presumes under any presence whatsoever, to preserve, or bring one into the family. . .,” Washington proclaimed, “he shall be severely punished, and the dog hanged.” Washington was not the only plantation owner to resort to such drastic measures; Thomas Jefferson, on at least one occasion, ordered the destruction of all dogs belonging to his slaves, while permitting his overseer to retain a pair for his own use. At least one of the condemned dogs was hung as a disciplinary warning to the Monticello slaves.
The turn of phrase, ‘a darker side’ is actually quite kind. If Washington drowned puppies today, he would be put in prison. Just because something doesn’t fit with your romantic ideas about history doesn’t constitute a malign. You are trying to excuse and ignore criminal conduct. Further I don’t see how murdering a single dog to terrorize your slaves is any better than murdering ten, but you’re also wrong. In your own quote, it says the order was to ‘kill ALL the others,’ not to ‘kill one dog and only one dog.’ ALL is a minimum of two, and could have been dozens. But again, I don’t see how the number of dogs killed changes the brutality or terror of those acts. It also doesn’t detract from Washington’s accomplishments, It gives us a fuller, more complete picture of who Washington was. I don’t know why you find that so threatening. But don’t posit a logical argument to distort what happened so that you feel more comfortable. That becomes a lie.
Thanks for your comment, Andrew. We’ve tweaked the text a bit and added more information we discovered during our research that we think readers would be quite interested to know. Thank goodness hanging or drowning dogs isn’t excused today in the way that it was way back then!