Explains Nominations who did not Pass
Document 1799Encloses list of names submitted by the General to the Senate. Comments on several men who have not accepted the nomination or were not approved. Intends to follow guidelines for ranks by schedule.
No human transcription currently available for this document.
This transcription was generated by machine using Anthropic's Claude Code (a mix of sonnet and opus models). It may contain errors or inaccuracies. Please verify against the document image. Learn more about our generative AI methodology.
War Dept 21 Jany 1799
Sir
The Inclosed [strikethrough: schedule] [strikethrough: in a list] changing 1d the names contained in the list made out by the Generals [strikethrough: which were] not sent to the Senate. 2 The names of those postponed by the Senate & 3 0 One name negatived by the Senate.
I have not had an opportunity of learning from the Senators their reasons for putting a negative on the nomination of Nathaniel Childs.
Bradbury Cilley, declined. Caleb Gibbs was very seriously objected to by Mr Goodhue Mr Oles Mr Lewall Mr Dwt Foster & Mr Isaac Parker. 1 As deficient in capacity for the command of a Regiment. 2 As being of Boston from [undecipherable] Town or its vicinity, it was inexpedient to take both [undecipherable: Commanders]. 3 because there were men who would accept in other parts of the State, as were better qualified to command a Regiment, more respectable in Society and whose influence would be more extensively felt in the recruiting service and within the community. [undecipherable: nearly?] [undecipherable]
John [undecipherable: Woolley?] a [undecipherable] presented by the [undecipherable: brig?] of the [undecipherable] of the [undecipherable: Senators] has been [undecipherable: accused] of misconduct in office that an investigation of the subject
is in train & that he has either neglected to collect judgements on revenue bonds, or has collected & detained or misapplied public money.
John Chipman would not accept of a Majority nor James Sawyer of a Captaincy. They are said to be well qualified for superior grades.
[strikethrough: George Woodward would not want would not [undecipherable] their ranks respectively accepted of [undecipherable: being?] [undecipherable: them?]]
Wm Sertzer & [undecipherable: monal?] approved them.
Richard Motley would not accept an Ensigncy.
[strikethrough: The [undecipherable: Jona?]]
The Observation of some on the Massachusetts arrangement is, that too great a number are selected from Boston & that the residue are not well proportioned to different parts of the State — that of the officers arranged for the District of Maine are from Mr Parkers district part of the Country which it is said does not contain 1/5 of the Population.
Hermanus P Schuyler was withdrawn upon his own letter [strikethrough: representing] that a change in his views had rendered him not [undecipherable: acceptable?].
John McDougal Lawrence, not [undecipherable: agreed?] at the instance of his father.
Wm d. Feles postponed by the Senate for further information.
George Taylor would not
accept.
Thomas Swearingen Thd Ralston [undecipherable: recommended?] Elisha P Barrows & Edward Nicholas — Antifederal
Peter Jacquett, represented to nobody.
Wm S Wallam opposed to the Government and of French principles.
Davd C. Heath of Delaware.
Some Davis — not [undecipherable: any?] [undecipherable: though] of sound principles.
Wm K. Blue — was an associate of Zacharia Coxe —
George State — anti government & of French principles.
[strikethrough: Thomas Spee dead] — &
Gerrard Roberts postponed by the Senate for information.
I have just recd your letter of [undecipherable] respecting the rank of Dr Brodie. One gentleman in the order on the schedule educated has made out higher than officers, stands the 4 Lieutenant. Frances Garden of N Hampshire is marked for the 1st Lieutenant, & Robert Overing of [undecipherable: New Isl?] for the 2d. I have informed him, writing upon [undecipherable] representation, that he should take the place of Overing who I understand [strikethrough: in [undecipherable]] is a young man without experience, and if [undecipherable: upon inquiry] he could not [undecipherable] be placed [undecipherable] it should be done, [undecipherable]
The list as it appears in the News-papers silled nothing and it was so expressed in a note at the bottom of the
appointments, which I suppose you did not see. I intend to be guided by the relative ranks as established in the schedule, unless cogent reasons, which the general officers were unacquainted with, shall render deviations proper and necessary.
[strikethrough: [undecipherable: See dissertation on the] [undecipherable: for the location for the order of the?]]
[rotated, verso:] to Genl Hamilton 21 Jany 1799
Gen Hamilton
Type
Autograph Draft Letter
Description
Encloses list of names submitted by the General to the Senate. Comments on several men who have not accepted the nomination or were not approved. Intends to follow guidelines for ranks by schedule.
Date
01/21/1799
Author
Recipient
Sent from
War Department
Repository
Collection
Document number
1799012100401
Page start
1
Notable persons
Alexander Hamilton
James McHenry
Senate
George Washington
Nathaniel White
Bradbury Cilly
Caleb Gibbs
Mr. Goodman
Mr. Sewall
Dick Foster
Isaac Parker
John Hobby Marshall
John Chipman
James Sawyer
George Woodward
Hermanus P. Schuyler
John McDougal Lawrence
William B. Peters
George Taylor
Thomas Swearington
Thomas Ralston
Elisha P. Barrows
Edward Nicholas
Peter Jacquet
William S. Dallam
Daniel C. Heath
Samuel Davis
William K. Blue
Zachariah Cox
George Hite
Thomas Opie
Gerrard Roberts
Dr. Brindley
Francis Gardner
Notable locations
War Department
Boston
Delaware
Rhode Island
New Hampshire

