Union Camp, and you will also send there two pieces of artillery, with cartridges for them. The necessary articles you will apply for to General Stevens. I shall write to you on Sunday.

HAMILTON TO MCHENRY.

PHILADELPHIA, December, 1799.

SIR:

A complete revision of the articles of war is desirable, as they require amendment in many particulars. But this would be so serious a work, that I fear it is not likely to be undertaken with a prospect of being speedily finished. Waiving the expectation of such a revision, there are some things which could be done that would be important improvements. You are aware of the great obscurity which envelopes the provisions of the existing articles respecting the power to appoint general courts martial. On one construction, it is inconveniently narrow, so as to occasion too great delay, as well in constituting courts, as in giving effect to their sentences. On another, it would be too much diffused, and would place in too many hands a trust no less delicate than important.

To attempt to attain the proper medium by a mere legislative definition of the characters who may execute the power would be attended with much difficulty, and might often not meet the new situations which are apt to occur in the infinite combinations of military service. The expedient which has appeared to me the most proper is, to give the President a discretionary authority to empower other officers than those designated by the articles of war to appoint general courts martial under such circumstances, and with such limitations as he shall deem advisable.

The provisions which refer to the President the determination on sentences affecting life and the dismission of officers must, no doubt, have been frequently attended with perplexity to him, and are inconvenient to the service. It is scarcely possible for

any but the military commander to appreciate duly the motives which in such cases demand severity or recommend clemency. To this an accurate view of all the circumstances of the army in detail is often necessary. On the other hand, the efficacy of punishment, when requisite, depends much upon its celerity, and must be greatly weakened by the unavoidable delay of a resort to the Executive. These reasons certainly render it expedient to enable the commanding general of an army to decide upon the sentences in question as in other cases.

The proper mode of treating the crime of desertion has been, in most cases, an embarrassing subject. In ours it is particularly so. The punishment of death, except in time of war, is contrary to the popular habits of thinking. Whipping is found ineffectual. I have a hope that confinement and labor would prove more effectual. Believing this punishment to be within the discretion of courts martial, I encourage its adoption. But as the matter now stands, the confinement would not exceed the term of service, and when this is nearly expired, it would be inadequate. Some auxiliary provisions are desirable to give a fair chance to the experiment. It is not, however, my idea to abolish death, which in some aggravated cases would be proper even in time of peace, and in time of war ought invariably to ensue. I incline even to the opinion, that the power of pardoning ought to be taken away in this case, certainly in every instance of desertion, or an attempt to desert to enemies or traitors.

HAMILTON TO TOUSSARD.

SIR:

PHILADELPHIA, December 22, 1799.

Agreeably to suggestions heretofore made, I request that you will forthwith commence, in conjunction with Major Hoops, the preparation of a system of regulations for the exercise of artillery, and for the police service of the corps of artillerists in camp,

quarters and garrisons. I forbear to enter into a particular detail of the course to be pursued, relying upon the indications of the subject, and the knowledge and experience of the gentlemen charged with it.

SMITH TO HAMILTON.

UNION CAMP, Dec. 24, 1799.

MAJOR-GENERAL HAMILTON:

I have spent this morning in putting the troops into the gen. eral exercise, and the different companies will be employed this afternoon, and to-morrow morning the battalions, and in the afternoon the whole line.

Our minds are deeply impressed with the circumstance, and mourn with our country the loss of our dignified chief; but, though strongly feeling the loss, we mourn not with despond ence, as those who have no hope, but we bow with reverence and solemnity to the dispensations of an overruling Providence, confident that a people thus raised will, under the care of the same Providence, have a sufficiently wise character pointed out to fill the vacant station. We feel grateful that he has been permitted to remain with us so long, and can, as soldiers, with firm. ness rely on the wisdom and talents of his successor.

HAMILTON TO COL. SMITH.

NEW-YORK, Jan. 3d, 1800.

SIR:

Your different letters of the 23d, 24th and 28th of December have been delivered to me.

It is always difficult in contracts to define the quality of the

articles which are to be furnished, and hence has arisen the silence of which you complain in the contract with the agent for New Jersey.

It is, however, implied in the nature of the transaction, that the articles be good, according to the common acceptation of the term; and when this is not the case, the agent violates his engagement, and the United States are at liberty to refuse the articles, provide them otherwise, and look to him for damages.

When bread is furnished in lieu of flour, it ought to be made of flour, and not of middlings. The bread should undoubtedly be made of the article for which it is given as a substitute. The attention which you have paid to this subject has my warm approbation. I shall write to the contractor pointedly respecting it, and you will make the idea contained in this letter your guide in your future transactions with him.

I am much pleased with your dispositions, and with the soldierly conduct of the troops in paying the funeral honors to our departed chief. I am likewise much pleased with your resolution of erecting a monument as a testimonial of reverence for his character, and only regret that I cannot make the expense a public instead of a private charge. No alterations occur to me as proper to be made in the inscription, except that I would submit. to you, whether a more dignified simplicity would not be given to it by leaving out the verses; although they certainly have merit, yet they appear to me to interfere with that simplicity which should be studied on such occasions.

It is true that I said nothing with respect to extra expense. This proceeded from the supposition that no expense would be necessary independently of the articles furnished by the public; and from a conviction, which experience has produced in my mind, of the extreme caution to be observed with respect to every object that involves an expenditure of money out of the regular course.

You will be pleased, however, to send me an account of the expenses that were incurred. Such of them as were necessarily incident to the celebration I will press the payment of with the Secretary of War, and to the rest I will give every attention in my power.

SIR:

HAMILTON TO MCHENRY.

NEW-YORK, January 15th, 1800.

The section of the Act of the 3d of March, 1797, to which you refer in your letter of yesterday, is so obscurely and indefinitely worded, that it is impossible to give it a precise, or even a very reasonable interpretation. On this ground it is that I have forborne to act upon it in my own case, though commanding a separate district.

But while I am at a loss for its true sense, I have thought that it would be too large a construction to apply it to occasional and variable commands, like those of officers superintending recruiting rendezvouses or encampments, and so I have answered when inquiry has been made of me.

I would say that the section applies only to such officers as exercise commands in their own nature permanently separate and distinct. Fortified posts are of this description. Perhaps a sepa rate territorial district will also give the right to the commanding general. This would certainly be within the reason of the provision, which is no doubt an indemnification for extra expense arising from situation.

Such a construction will comprehend General Pinckney and myself, and by a liberal extension, General Wilkinson, if a part of the clause does not more directly embrace him.

But in a matter in which I am personally interested, I should be unwilling that my opinion should govern. It seems to me a thing proper for the determination of the Secretary of War, after conference with the Secretary of the Treasury, and I would advise you to ask his direction. If you think good you may communicate my opinion.