Econlib

The Library

Other Sites

 Front Page arrow Titles (by Subject) arrow TO GEORGE WASHINGTON. - The Works of John Adams, vol. 8 (Letters and State Papers 1782-1799)

Return to Title Page for The Works of John Adams, vol. 8 (Letters and State Papers 1782-1799)

Search this Title:

Also in the Library:

Subject Area: Political Theory
Topic: The American Revolution and Constitution

TO GEORGE WASHINGTON. - John Adams, The Works of John Adams, vol. 8 (Letters and State Papers 1782-1799) [1853]

Edition used:

The Works of John Adams, Second President of the United States: with a Life of the Author, Notes and Illustrations, by his Grandson Charles Francis Adams (Boston: Little, Brown and Co., 1856). 10 volumes. Vol. 8.

Part of: The Works of John Adams, 10 vols.

About Liberty Fund:

Liberty Fund, Inc. is a private, educational foundation established to encourage the study of the ideal of a society of free and responsible individuals.


TO GEORGE WASHINGTON.

Quincy, 9 October, 1798.

Sir,—

I received, yesterday, the letter you did me the honor to write me on the 25th of September.2

You request to be informed, whether my determination to preserve the order of the three major-generals is final; and whether I mean to appoint another adjutant-general without your concurrence. I presume that before this day you have received information from the Secretary of War, that I some time ago signed the three commissions and dated them on the same day, in hopes, similar to yours, that an amicable adjustment, or acquiescence, might take place among the gentlemen themselves. But, if these hopes should be disappointed and controversies should arise, they will, of course, be submitted to you as Commander-in-chief, and if, after all, any one should be so obstinate as to appeal to me from the judgment of the Commander-in-chief, I was determined to confirm that judgment. Because, whatever construction may be put upon the resolutions of the ancient Congress, which have been applied to this case, and whether they are at all applicable to it or not, there is no doubt to be made that, by the present Constitution of the United States, the President has authority to determine the rank of officers.

I have been for some time prepared in my own mind to nominate Mr. Dayton to be Adjutant-General, in case of the refusal of Mr. North. Several others have occurred and been suggested to me, but none who in point of science or literature, political and military merit, or energy of character, appear to be equal to him. If you have any other in contemplation, I pray you to mention him to the Secretary at War, who may fill up his commission immediately, in case Mr. North declines.

I hope your own health and Mrs. Washington’s are perfect. Mine is very indifferent, and Mrs. Adams’s extremely low. Confined to the bed of sickness for two months, her destiny is still very precarious, and mine in consequence of it.1

With great respect, &c.

John Adams.

[2 ]Sparks’s Washington’s Writings, vol. xi. p. 304. A marked difference is visible in the tone and sentiment of this letter and of that addressed to Mr. Hamilton on the 14th of July. Vol. xi. p. 265. In the latter, General Washington clearly designates Mr. Pinckney as the next to him in command; in the former, he says he intended the rank to be in the order of the names on his list. In the one, he complains of any variation from his list as an infraction of the condition of his acceptance, in the other, he distinctly alludes to the President as having a right to use his pleasure in the last resort. One explanation of this change is to be found in the gradual action of third persons upon General Washington, by naming individuals, known to be much disliked by him, as likely to obtain appointments.

[1 ]This letter was probably the consequence of one addressed to Mr. Adams by Mr. Wolcott, on the 17th of the preceding month, wherein an earnest effort was made to heal a misunderstanding, which was widening into a breach, between the President and General Washington. On the 19th, Mr. Wolcott wrote to Mr. Hamilton, urging him to remain quiet, and expressing the conviction that “the embarrassment might have been entirely avoided.” In this Mr. Wolcott is doubtless correct, and by his more skilful tact Mr. Adams was ultimately induced to concede the point. But an imperfect draft of a letter, designed to be a reply to Mr. Wolcott, remains among the papers, which shows how accurately Mr. Adams understood the true position which General Washington had, at first, intended to occupy, and the uses that had been made of both. As explaining his views and feelings, the greater part of it is not without interest. Mr. Wolcott’s letter is printed in full in Mr. Gibbs’s work, vol. ii. pp. 93-99.

Quincy, 24 September, 1798.

I have received your favor of the 17th, and read it over and over again, with all the attention I am master of. The long continued dangerous sickness of my best friend, and her still precarious destiny, have thrown my mind into a state of depression, agitation, and anxiety, which will not admit of a full discussion of the various points on which you and I appear to differ in opinion. I will hint at a few things, which I see in a different light from that in which you have placed them.

In the first place, I am under no apprehension at all for the honor, personal influence, or character of the chief of our nation, whether he places General Knox first or General Hamilton. If he thought for one moment that both those generals together could hurt his honor, diminish his personal influence, or injure his character, he would resign his office at once. This point, therefore, I hope is settled between you and me forever.

You are perfectly correct in your opinion, that General Washington has never disclosed a wish to interfere with any of the powers constitutionally vested in the President. However perfect the concert between the President and Commander-in-chief, it will remain for time to discover, whether such jealousy, rivalry, and animosity will not be produced by the conflicting passions of powerful individuals, as no authority in this country can possibly compose. That is to say, in other words, it is a problem whether our Constitution can possibly command an army and conduct a war.

Whether General Washington was, or was not, nominated to command the armies without any previous consultation or notice, is nothing to the present questions, nor has any one, that I know of, any motive or authority to inquire into this point. I had evidence enough to convince me that he expected it, that he wished it, and that he would accept it. Otherwise I never would have nominated him.

That General Washington formed a list out of names that I had committed to paper to be laid before him, is true; that after mature deliberation he settled the rank, which, in his judgment, the officers in question ought to enjoy, I do not admit and cannot believe. It was never the advice of General Washington, as I understood it, that the Inspector-General should be the first Major-General. He never expressed any such idea to me. His list contained no such idea. When Mr. McHenry proposed to me to nominate him to the Senate as first Major-General, I positively refused to do it. On the contrary, in the letter from General Washington to General Hamilton, which Mr. McHenry showed to me and which has never escaped my memory, General Washington’s expectation and inclination, that General Pinckney should be the first Major-General, was not equivocal. And besides, he expressly says: “After all, the whole must depend upon the President.”* Not one circumstance ever indicated that General Washington’s advice or wish was that General Hamilton should be first Major-General. On the contrary, his expectation and desire were clear to me that Pinckney should be first.† As to the expectation of the public, I have had longer experience and better opportunities to know both than you have, and I am not so clearly of your opinion.

General Washington’s list gave no command to Hamilton, but as Inspector-General. The Commander-in-chief might occasionally give him command. It was plain to me from his list, that General Washington meant to leave the rank to be settled by friendly agreement among the gentlemen, or by subsequent orders of the Lieutenant-General, or by a subsequent appeal to the President. I am persuaded that no personal considerations, distinct from the public interest, have influenced General Washington, and I know that none have influenced me. General Knox is no favorite of mine, any more than General Hamilton. I have no kind of attachment to him or affection for him, more than for Hamilton. He never was my intimate nor my friend, and he has no kind of attachment to me, more than Hamilton. If you are not informed, I am, that Knox never served my interest, fame, or promotion more than Hamilton. Nay, further, I know he has opposed me more than ever Hamilton did, although in the earlier part of his life I contributed more than any man, perhaps, to recommend him, merely on public principles, to General Washington, Lee, &c., who first promoted him so rapidly. Knox, however, went through the war with honor and dignity; and he is universally acknowledged to be brave, cool, attentive, and able at all times, and good humored, as well as alert, active, and undaunted in the day of battle. I know not why such an officer should be disgraced or degraded.

The resolutions of the old Congress are not the only grounds, nor the principal ground, of my opinion, that, as matters now are circumstanced, Hamilton is the last in rank of the Major-Generals. The office of Inspector-General gives no rank. The rank of Major-General, given him in his nomination and commission, will give him rank before Brigadiers, but after every Major-General commissioned on the same day. The rank of Major-General, and the office and command of Major-General, are different things. As the case now stands, Hamilton will rank after Lee and Hand as well as Pinckney and Knox. This is not my intention. This may be remedied by dating the commissions of Lee and Hand after that of Hamilton, it is true; but if something is not done, you will find the pretensions of Lee and Hand set up.

I have seen more of General Washington’s letters upon this subject than you have, or Mr. McHenry; and in my opinion it would be more discreet to say less about him upon this occasion than has been said.*

I am not of your opinion, that either Knox or Hamilton will refuse, whatever may be their relative rank.† If I were sure that both would refuse, it should make no alteration. For, be assured, I stand in no awe of either.

You seem to consider the affair as a measure of finance, and if I was fully convinced that the appointment of Hamilton would produce economical regulations of any great consequence, it would have great weight with me. For, be assured, there is not a democrat in the world who affects more horror than I really feel, at the prospect of that frightful system of debts and taxes, into which imperious necessity seems to be precipitating us.

If I should consent to the appointment of Hamilton as second in rank, I should consider it as the most responsible action of my whole life, and the most difficult to justify. Hamilton is not a native of the United States, but a foreigner, and, I believe, has not resided longer, at least not much longer, in North America, than Albert Gallatin. His rank in the late army was comparatively very low. His merits with a party are the merits of John Calvin,—

  • “Some think on Calvin heaven’s own spirit fell,
  • While others deem him instrument of hell.”

 

I know that Knox has no popular character, even in Massachusetts. I know, too, that Hamilton has no popular character in any part of America.

I have given so much attention to your representation, that I have dated the commissions to Knox, Pinckney, and Hamilton, all on the same day, in hopes that under the auspices of General Washington the gentlemen may come to some amicable settlement of the dispute. The rank of the other Major-Generals, as well as of the Brigadiers, must be settled by the date of their commissions. I shall do all in my power to persuade Knox to accept.

This hasty letter, written in deep affliction, is fit only to be private and confidential; but I hope it will appear wherever yours appears.

[1 ]This letter was probably the consequence of one addressed to Mr. Adams by Mr. Wolcott, on the 17th of the preceding month, wherein an earnest effort was made to heal a misunderstanding, which was widening into a breach, between the President and General Washington. On the 19th, Mr. Wolcott wrote to Mr. Hamilton, urging him to remain quiet, and expressing the conviction that “the embarrassment might have been entirely avoided.” In this Mr. Wolcott is doubtless correct, and by his more skilful tact Mr. Adams was ultimately induced to concede the point. But an imperfect draft of a letter, designed to be a reply to Mr. Wolcott, remains among the papers, which shows how accurately Mr. Adams understood the true position which General Washington had, at first, intended to occupy, and the uses that had been made of both. As explaining his views and feelings, the greater part of it is not without interest. Mr. Wolcott’s letter is printed in full in Mr. Gibbs’s work, vol. ii. pp. 93-99.

Quincy, 24 September, 1798.

I have received your favor of the 17th, and read it over and over again, with all the attention I am master of. The long continued dangerous sickness of my best friend, and her still precarious destiny, have thrown my mind into a state of depression, agitation, and anxiety, which will not admit of a full discussion of the various points on which you and I appear to differ in opinion. I will hint at a few things, which I see in a different light from that in which you have placed them.

In the first place, I am under no apprehension at all for the honor, personal influence, or character of the chief of our nation, whether he places General Knox first or General Hamilton. If he thought for one moment that both those generals together could hurt his honor, diminish his personal influence, or injure his character, he would resign his office at once. This point, therefore, I hope is settled between you and me forever.

You are perfectly correct in your opinion, that General Washington has never disclosed a wish to interfere with any of the powers constitutionally vested in the President. However perfect the concert between the President and Commander-in-chief, it will remain for time to discover, whether such jealousy, rivalry, and animosity will not be produced by the conflicting passions of powerful individuals, as no authority in this country can possibly compose. That is to say, in other words, it is a problem whether our Constitution can possibly command an army and conduct a war.

Whether General Washington was, or was not, nominated to command the armies without any previous consultation or notice, is nothing to the present questions, nor has any one, that I know of, any motive or authority to inquire into this point. I had evidence enough to convince me that he expected it, that he wished it, and that he would accept it. Otherwise I never would have nominated him.

That General Washington formed a list out of names that I had committed to paper to be laid before him, is true; that after mature deliberation he settled the rank, which, in his judgment, the officers in question ought to enjoy, I do not admit and cannot believe. It was never the advice of General Washington, as I understood it, that the Inspector-General should be the first Major-General. He never expressed any such idea to me. His list contained no such idea. When Mr. McHenry proposed to me to nominate him to the Senate as first Major-General, I positively refused to do it. On the contrary, in the letter from General Washington to General Hamilton, which Mr. McHenry showed to me and which has never escaped my memory, General Washington’s expectation and inclination, that General Pinckney should be the first Major-General, was not equivocal. And besides, he expressly says: “After all, the whole must depend upon the President.”* Not one circumstance ever indicated that General Washington’s advice or wish was that General Hamilton should be first Major-General. On the contrary, his expectation and desire were clear to me that Pinckney should be first.† As to the expectation of the public, I have had longer experience and better opportunities to know both than you have, and I am not so clearly of your opinion.

General Washington’s list gave no command to Hamilton, but as Inspector-General. The Commander-in-chief might occasionally give him command. It was plain to me from his list, that General Washington meant to leave the rank to be settled by friendly agreement among the gentlemen, or by subsequent orders of the Lieutenant-General, or by a subsequent appeal to the President. I am persuaded that no personal considerations, distinct from the public interest, have influenced General Washington, and I know that none have influenced me. General Knox is no favorite of mine, any more than General Hamilton. I have no kind of attachment to him or affection for him, more than for Hamilton. He never was my intimate nor my friend, and he has no kind of attachment to me, more than Hamilton. If you are not informed, I am, that Knox never served my interest, fame, or promotion more than Hamilton. Nay, further, I know he has opposed me more than ever Hamilton did, although in the earlier part of his life I contributed more than any man, perhaps, to recommend him, merely on public principles, to General Washington, Lee, &c., who first promoted him so rapidly. Knox, however, went through the war with honor and dignity; and he is universally acknowledged to be brave, cool, attentive, and able at all times, and good humored, as well as alert, active, and undaunted in the day of battle. I know not why such an officer should be disgraced or degraded.

The resolutions of the old Congress are not the only grounds, nor the principal ground, of my opinion, that, as matters now are circumstanced, Hamilton is the last in rank of the Major-Generals. The office of Inspector-General gives no rank. The rank of Major-General, given him in his nomination and commission, will give him rank before Brigadiers, but after every Major-General commissioned on the same day. The rank of Major-General, and the office and command of Major-General, are different things. As the case now stands, Hamilton will rank after Lee and Hand as well as Pinckney and Knox. This is not my intention. This may be remedied by dating the commissions of Lee and Hand after that of Hamilton, it is true; but if something is not done, you will find the pretensions of Lee and Hand set up.

I have seen more of General Washington’s letters upon this subject than you have, or Mr. McHenry; and in my opinion it would be more discreet to say less about him upon this occasion than has been said.*

I am not of your opinion, that either Knox or Hamilton will refuse, whatever may be their relative rank.† If I were sure that both would refuse, it should make no alteration. For, be assured, I stand in no awe of either.

You seem to consider the affair as a measure of finance, and if I was fully convinced that the appointment of Hamilton would produce economical regulations of any great consequence, it would have great weight with me. For, be assured, there is not a democrat in the world who affects more horror than I really feel, at the prospect of that frightful system of debts and taxes, into which imperious necessity seems to be precipitating us.

If I should consent to the appointment of Hamilton as second in rank, I should consider it as the most responsible action of my whole life, and the most difficult to justify. Hamilton is not a native of the United States, but a foreigner, and, I believe, has not resided longer, at least not much longer, in North America, than Albert Gallatin. His rank in the late army was comparatively very low. His merits with a party are the merits of John Calvin,—

  • “Some think on Calvin heaven’s own spirit fell,
  • While others deem him instrument of hell.”

 

I know that Knox has no popular character, even in Massachusetts. I know, too, that Hamilton has no popular character in any part of America.

I have given so much attention to your representation, that I have dated the commissions to Knox, Pinckney, and Hamilton, all on the same day, in hopes that under the auspices of General Washington the gentlemen may come to some amicable settlement of the dispute. The rank of the other Major-Generals, as well as of the Brigadiers, must be settled by the date of their commissions. I shall do all in my power to persuade Knox to accept.

This hasty letter, written in deep affliction, is fit only to be private and confidential; but I hope it will appear wherever yours appears.

[* ]The words are: “For after all, it rests with the President to use his pleasure.” See the whole letter, Sparks’s Washington, vol. xi. pp. 263-267.

[† ]See page 586, note, for a summary of the evidence on this point.

[* ]This seems to imply a knowledge of General Washington’s letters to General Knox of the 16th July and the 9th of August, in which the former clearly shows that the appointment of Hamilton, to be second, was not his original purpose. See Sparks’s Washington, vol. xi. pp. 268, 282.

[† ]In this he proved mistaken. General Knox did decline to serve under Hamilton.