[Endorsement: 22^d Aug: 1798 / To Gen: Knox / explaining ideas of / relative ranks. / War Department / James McH:] [Left margin notation, rotated: Copy Charles Cotesworth [undecipherable] May 6^th 184[undecipherable]] [(116) letter referred to in 117] War Department 22^d Aug 1798. Sir An answer of your letter of the 5^th instant, has been delayed, by some degree of ill-health, on my part. The general disposition it marks, accords well, with the patriotic sentiments, you have so constantly manifested. It is extremely regretted, that any circumstance should induce you to hesitate about the acceptance of an appointment, in which it is not to be doubted, your services would be eminently useful. The paragraph of my letter of the 25^th ulto. which you quote, explains to you, my conception of the relative rank of the Generals in question, as resulting from the order of the nominations, and appointments. This conception however, cannot affect the claim of either [undecipherable] there be any subsisting binding [undecipherable] in our military code, which will arrange the priority of rank, between officers nominated on the same day, according to their relative stations in the late army. This will necessarily be the subject of future decision, in some proper mode. It is not understood, that there has been any formal repeal of the rule to which you allude; but did it require this? It remains then, for you to determine whether you will or not accept the appointment with the reservation of a claim to the benefit of that rule. With very great esteem, I have the honor to be Sir, your most obedient and very humble servant, James McHenry [Major Gen^l. } Huntington]