Econlib

The Library

Other Sites

Front Page arrow Titles (by Subject) arrow TO WILLIAM DUER. - The Writings of George Washington, vol. VI (1777-1778)

Return to Title Page for The Writings of George Washington, vol. VI (1777-1778)

Search this Title:

Also in the Library:

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

TO WILLIAM DUER. - George Washington, The Writings of George Washington, vol. VI (1777-1778) [1890]

Edition used:

The Writings of George Washington, collected and edited by Worthington Chauncey Ford (New York and London: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1890). Vol. VI (1777-1778).

Part of: The Writings of George Washington, 14 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 WILLIAM DUER.

Sir,

I am favored with yours of the 16th instant, communicating the intelligence you had received respecting the scheme of investing this camp and cutting off its supplies. Your being unacquainted with our present position and the circumstance you mention of an intimation from General Sinclair of the possibility of such an event, very naturally occasioned Biddle’s insinuation to make the impression it did on your mind. But it is a project which appears to me totally impracticable with the enemy’s present force, or even with one much greater; and I believe the experiment will hardly be made. The extensive line or rather circle they must occupy, to keep up the communication from post to post, necessary to intercept our intercourse with the country, would be very little able to defend themselves at any given point, and would expose them to ruin in case of an attack from us. I am inclined to believe you must be under some misapprehension, with respect to General Sinclair’s observation; and that he alluded to something else than an investiture. I am &c.

P. S. We have one bridge nearly completed. Defects in the Quarter Master’s department have delayed it hitherto.1

[1 ]“I am exceedingly sorry to hear that a difference between the officers and men of the Continental troops and those of the militia should damp the exertions of the latter. It has been my constant endeavor since I had the honor to command the forces of the United States to prevent all animosities and jealousies between the troops of different States, whether regular or militia, by exercising the most impartial line of conduct towards all. I very well know that except there is a mutual confidence and good understanding between all the component parts of an army, that the service must be manifestly injured, and therefore you may depend that I will take particular care, when the army takes the field in the spring, and when we shall more than probable be obliged to call upon the Militia to act in conjunction with us, to endeavor to remove the causes of complaint. I hope the unhappy dispute that arose at the Sign of the Compass between a few officers of the Continental army and the Militia, will rather be looked upon as an accidental matter, than the effect of a general and fixed hatred between those two bodies of men imbarked in the same cause, and who ought to afford a mutual support to each other and to turn their arms against the common enemy rather than upon one another. I do hope that all prejudice upon the part of the country may be laid aside upon this occasion, and the most impartial enquiry made into this matter.”—Washington to Governor Wharton, 23 February, 1778.

A MS. in Washington’s writing contains some “Remarks” on a paper presented by Col. Bland in November, 1777. These remarks are of no little interest when viewed in the light of subsequent events:

“To abolish colonial distinctions, however desirable it may be, is next to impossible. Great pains in the early part of this war was used, in vain, to do this; but even in the New England States, where the sentiments and customs of the people have an exact similarity, it was found impracticable.

“The new modelling of the army, and reducing supernumerary officers is a very desirable matter, and ought, if possible, to take place; but quære, would not such a total change in our military system, as is proposed, occasion too great a convulsion? Would not the number of rejected officers promote discontent and disorder among the common soldiery? Nay, even mutiny and desertion.

“The allowance of Land to the disbanded officers may be proper enough—but will not half pay be attended with enormous expence? and would not this, and allowing half pay to the officers of reduced regiments at the end of the war, add such weight to a debt already, and probably will be, of such magnitude, as to sink the colonies under the load of it; and give a great disgust to the people at large?”