George Washington to James McHenry on the issue of rank and pay in the army - American History 1493-1945 - Adam Matthew Digital

Keyboard Shortcuts

The full content of this document is only available to subscribing institutions. More information can be found via www.amdigital.co.uk

Field name	Value
Collection Reference Number	GLC00204
From Archive Folder	Documents Relating to 1799
Title	George Washington to James McHenry on the issue of rank and pay in the army
Date	5 May 1799
Author	Washington, George (1732-1799)
Recipient	McHenry, James
Document Type	Correspondence; Government document; Military document
Content Description	Marked private. In response to McHenry's private letter of April 29, which was a response to Washington's letter of April 23. Washington, commander of the Provisional Army created in 1798 in response to French aggression, wrote to McHenry, Secretary of War in the Adams Administration, on the issue of rank and pay in the army. Officers who lived farther away from the capital received their commissions later than those who lived closer. Since rank was calculated by time of acceptance, those living farther away felt slighted. He agrees with the solution that McHenry suggested to the President and hopes it is approved. Mentions Charles Fenton Mercer, who pressed Washington for a commission and then twice declined the offer when he realized it would hurt him politically in Virginia. Says "I am glad he has refused it." Offers suggestions to fill the vacancy.
Subjects	President Military History Quasi-war France Soldier's Pay Office Seeker Politics Government and Civics
People	Washington, George (1732-1799) McHenry, James (1753-1816)
Place written	Mount Vernon, Virginia
Theme	The Presidency; Government & Politics
Sub-collection	The Gilder Lehrman Collection, 1493-1859
Additional Information	Notes: Fitzpatrick, Writings of Washington, 37: 201-202. Signer of the U.S. Constitution.
Copyright	The Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History
Module	Settlement, Commerce, Revolution and Reform: 1493-1859
Transcript	Show/hide Mount Vernon 5. May 1799 Private My Dear Sir, Your private letter of the 29. Ulto. was received yesterday, and require but a short reply. From an observation of yours, in answer to my letter of the 23d. Ulto, I perceive my meaning with respect to the settlement of relative Rank, has been misunderstood; or, if taken properly, I must adhere to the opinion I gave of the injustice which would be inflicted upon the Officers of States remote from the Seat of Government; if those in the vicinity of it are to Rank before them, because they were on the spot to announce the acceptance of their Appointments at an earlier day. Rank & Pay are distinct things; the Officer who [inserted: may have] received the latter to day, sustain no injury from him who received it yesterday but if the commencement of Rank in the same grades, is to be regulated (under the circumstances I have mentioned) [inserted: from the dates of their acceptances] it will have injustice stamped on the face of it: for in that case those [2] who are most remote, not by any act avoidable in themselves, but from the nature of things, become in almost every instance juniors; when perhaps many of them, in consideration of former Services, or other weighty pretensions might, justly, be entitled to Seniority. The mode which you have suggested to the President for settling the Rank of the field Officers, is, certainly the best that could be offered to his consideration; and I trust will be approved by him. Let the vacancy, occasioned by the non acceptance of Mr. Mercer be filled by whomsoever it may, I am glad he has refused it. But, in the name of common modesty, what did this young Gentleman expect? The command of the Regim[ent]? Upon the principle w[hi]ch governed the Board of General Officers in assigning the present addition to it, I think it would be injudicious to fill the Vacancy from a quarter that did not occasion it; Nor can it be better filled, I believe, than with the appointment of Turner, or Randolph, the first of whom [inserted: is] spoken of as possessing talents peculiarly adapted to this Service. What is the determination of Watts? [3] With very great esteem and regard I am - My dear Sir Your Most Obedient and Affectionate Hble Servt. Go: Washington James McHenry Esqr. 5 May 1799 Go: Washington Acknowledged The 9th May. James McHenry Esq. Private

Previous Item Next Item