Was he busy or was it a congress only kind of thing? Or was he not in the picture yet?
http://usgovinfo.about.com/bldecind.htm
2006-11-16 06:42:14 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities ➔ History
Washington was a delegate to the Second Continental Congress, just as he had been at the First Continental Congress in 1774. He had been active in Virginia politics for years.
In the summer of 1775, Washington was appointed commander of the new Continental Army, them besieging Boston. He served as commander until 1783, and so did not attend the Congress again as a delegate.
At the time the Declaration was being written and debated in Philadelphia, Washington was in New York preparing to defend it against the British. He certainly agreed with the sentiment of the document; he had it read publicly to his entire army.
2006-11-16 07:16:54 · answer #1 · answered by derek1836 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Most of your respondents display a gross lack of historical knowledge. Washington was NOT a general before the Revolution. In fact, he was a surveyor, and he was coaxed to take over the Continental Army when the war began. He didn't want to but felt he had to put duty before personal preference. He didn't sign the Declaration because at the time he was not an activist.
Chow!!
2006-11-16 08:07:04 · answer #2 · answered by No one 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
George Washington at the time was not a representative degligate but a general!
2006-11-16 07:03:04 · answer #3 · answered by namazanyc 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
the_lipsiot he wasn't in mass at that time u are thinking of a 1175 the siege of Boston and he was into politics at that time he was part of the congenital congress. so to say he wasn't into politics is untrue or he wouldn't have never taken command of the army
now to answer your question the reason why he wasn't one of the signers of the declaration was because he was in NY watching Howe amass the largest invasion fleet up until d-day in ww2. so he had no choice he had to fortify ny to try to stop the british from takeing ny that why he didn't sign the declartion
2006-11-16 07:54:41 · answer #4 · answered by ryan s 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
In 1776, when the Declaration was signed, Wasington was Commander-in-Chief of the Continental Army operating around Massachusetts. He was not, at that point, very involved in the country's politics.
It was not until 13 years lated that he was elected as the USA's first president.
*********
I do wish people would read things properly before they start criticising.
I stated that the Continental Army operated around Massachusetts - that's where it originated and where Washington took command of it - not necessarily where it was at the time of the signing.
I also stated that he was not involved in the "country's" politics at the time - meaning that he was not a member of the group deciding national policy - I was well aware of his involvement locally in Virginia, but this is not relevant to the question.
2006-11-16 06:49:08 · answer #5 · answered by the_lipsiot 7 · 4⤊ 2⤋
He was busy being General George Washington and wasn't available to sign it.
2006-11-16 06:49:41 · answer #6 · answered by Lori 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Washington Sign
2017-03-02 16:27:46 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Leave Ol' Georgie boy alone!
2006-11-17 13:49:36 · answer #8 · answered by ?born2lose? 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
He was an English Officer (a General) in the service of the King of England in the King's Colonial (not continental)Army. If he had signed such a document he would have been guilty of high treason.
2006-11-16 06:53:22 · answer #9 · answered by Barabas 5 · 1⤊ 5⤋
He was fighting in the American Revolution.
2006-11-16 06:43:20 · answer #10 · answered by The Cannon!!! =D 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋