Time was, any house where George Washington lived or visited was sacred ground. “George Washington slept here” is a promotional slogan more than a few roadside inns have used to punch up their business. A 1942 movie starring Jack Benny and Ann Sheridan was based on the theme; it depicted a couple who purchased “a dilapidated house in the countryside where George Washington was once rumored to have slept” – thinking the connection would make them rich, according to Rotten Tomatoes.
Those times, seemingly, are gone. A wall built on the site of the Presidents House in Philadelphia, a block away from Independence Hall, has become a hot spot, and not because the Father of Our Country lived there during his presidency. Rather, it has become a center of controversy because of signs that placed emphasis on the fact the nation’s first president owned slaves.
“Because he had brought several slaves north to live in the Presidents House, National Park Service signs had characterized his actions as ‘deplorable,’ ‘profoundly disturbing,’ and having ‘mocked the nation’s pretense to be a beacon of liberty,’” Jeffrey Anderson wrote in National Review magazine May 26. “Those signs, produced during the Obama presidency, accused Washington and other founders of ‘injustice’ and ‘immorality.’” 
The signs, as we noted in a Feb. 13 editorial, were strongly opinionated but not inaccurate. Mr. Anderson, who visited the site while preparing an essay for the Claremont Review of Books, wrote: “The site essentially ignored the watershed events that took place there during America’s first two presidencies, and it discussed slavery without any nuance or even-handedness. In the left’s simplistic oppressor-versus-oppressed narrative, the ‘Father of His Country’ was an oppressor – meriting condemnation, not celebration.”
President Trump’s administration proceeded to tear down the signs. The president described them as “demeaning (to) our brave Founding Fathers who set the brilliant road map for the greatest country in the world.” Mr. Trump was aware, of course, that large throngs of Americans and foreign visitors will converge on Philadelphia in July to celebrate the nation’s 250th birthday. It’s understandable that he wanted to deliver a more positive message.
With Independence Day a month away, the status and the message of Independence Park, where the Presidents House stood until 1832, remains in doubt. That’s because the city of Philadelphia sued the National Parks Service for removing the signs, and a federal court ordered them restored. Some were put back up, but Mr. Trump’s administration filed an appeal, and the Third Circuit Court of Appeals issued a stay, “ordering that no further signs be hung until that court hears oral arguments on June 2,” Mr. Anderson wrote. “That court’s verdict will determine whether the excellent and attractive replacement signs that the Park Service has produced – but hasn’t yet been allowed to hang – will greet visitors on the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence this July 4, or whether they’ll see signs condemning the man most responsible for winning that independence.”
Our Feb. 13 editorial found fault with the administration for pulling down the signs, asserting “The urge to scrub away people, deeds and events we’d rather forget should be resisted, always.” Yet the point raised by Mr. Anderson is also valid. He noted the new signs devised by the NPS have not been installed, pending a court ruling.
Why not present both perspectives? The American heart is big enough to honor good men and women while acknowledging some of what they did was less than good, even “deplorable,” by modern standards. Instead, we are duty bound to recognize that much of what our leaders do today, with our tacit or even enthusiastic acceptance, will be seen by future generations with the same shock and dismay we feel when learning our ancestors committed acts we view as disreputable. Our understanding of our country’s history demands nothing less.