From George Washington to Colonel Daniel Brodhead, 14 March 1780
To Colonel Daniel Brodhead
Head Quarters Morris Town 14th March 1780.
Dear Sir
I have recd your favor of the 11th ulto. You will, I imagine, long before this time, have received mine of the 4th January, which acknowledges yours of the 10th and 22d Novemr and 13th December—What I hinted in that letter, respecting ⟨an exp⟩edition against the Natches and the English settlements upon the Missisippi, is now at an end, the Spaniards having already possessed those Posts.1
From the accounts which you have received of the enemy’s force at Detroit, and my Ideas of yours (having recd no late Returns) it ⟨is evident⟩ that you can make no attempt upon that place: But, if you think yourself competent to an excursion against any of the hostile tribes of Indians, you are at liberty, as I have mentioned in some of my former letters, to undertake it.2
In your next Return, be pleased to let me know the different terms of service of your own Regiment3 and of the 9th Virginia—and let the Returns, of late Rawlins’s and the independent Companies, not only specify the terms of service, but to what States the Men, who compose them, belong—This is necessary to enable me to give the States credit for their Men serving in detached Corps.4
I had, upon the 8th February, desired the Board of War to prepare a certain quantity of Ordnance and Stores for Fort Pitt, and recommended to them, to endeavour to send them up while the Snow was on the ground, if the⟨y⟩ should be of opinion that it would be possible to pass the Mountains at that season. I imagine it was deemed impracticable as they wrote me on the 4th instant, that the stores were ready, and would go off as soon as the Roads would permit—I have directed General Knox to detach an Officer of Artillery with a proper number of Men for the duty of the Garrison of Fort Pitt.5
I am under the necessity of disapproving the sentence against Lt Gordon on account of the irregular constitution of the Court. A General Court Martial can only be held by order of the Commander in Chief—or, of a General Officer commanding a separate departm⟨ent, or⟩ in any one of the States—But that justice may be duely administered, I enclose a power, by which, Mr Gordon may be brought to a new trial, as may any other prisoners, whose cases may require a General Court. I return the former proceedings.6
My apprehensions that the Boats would be lost, if they were suffered to be taken into employ, for common purposes, was the reason of my directing them to be carefully laid up, untill wanted. And I perceive, by your letter, that my fears were not groundless. The expence of the materials for Boat building, and the Wages of proper Workmen are at this time so enormous, that, as there is little or no prospect of any offensive operations, I shall not give orders for the number of Carpenters you mention. The Boats that have been saved are, I imagine, more than sufficient for the purposes of transporting Stores &ca from post to post.7 I have desired the Board of War to direct a few Armourers ⟨to be⟩ sent up.8
In one of your former letters you expressed a wish of coming down the Country to visit your family. Upon the prospect of matters at that time, I did not think it expedient for y⟨ou⟩ to leave the post: But I think in the prese⟨nt⟩ situation of Affairs to the Westward, you may take an opportunity of doing it. You will be the best judge of the matter when this gets ⟨to⟩ your hands, and will determine upon the prop⟨riety⟩ of the measure from circumstances. I take it for granted that Colo. Gibson will remain at the post should you come down, as I would not chuse that a place of such consequence should be intrusted to an Officer of inferior Rank.9 I am with great Regard Dear Sir Your most obt Servt
Go: Washington
LS, in Tench Tilghman’s writing, NNGL; Df, DLC:GW; Varick transcript, DLC:GW. The LS is docketed: “recd 22nd April 1780.” Obscured material on the LS is supplied in angle brackets from the draft manuscript.
1. For the Spanish capture of Natchez in September 1779, see Juan de Miralles to GW, 18 Feb., n.2.
2. See GW to Brodhead, 18 Oct. and 21 Nov. 1779.
3. Brodhead was colonel of the 8th Pennsylvania Regiment.
4. This requirement arose from a congressional resolution passed on 9 Feb. 1780 (see , 16:149–51, and Samuel Huntington to GW, 10 Feb., and n.1 to that document; see also Circular to the States, 20 Feb.).
5. GW’s direction took written form when his aide-de-camp Tench Tilghman wrote Brig. Gen. Henry Knox on 16 March: “Colo. Brodhead has requested a few Artillery Men to be sent to Fort pitt. His Excellency thinks this proper as an addition is lately made to the Ordnance and Stores in that department—An Officer and twenty Men at most will be sufficient. His Excellency leaves it with you to detach them from the Corps most convenient. … I hope Mrs Knox and the young Ladies are well after their dancing” (DNA: RG 93, manuscript file no. 29215).
6. For Lt. Arthur Gordon’s court-martial, see Brodhead to GW, 9 Oct., and GW to Brodhead, 21 Nov., both 1779. Gordon’s desertion prevented a new trial (see Brodhead to GW, 24 April 1780).
7. In his letter to GW written on 11 Feb. 1780, Brodhead complained that despite “the most pointed orders respecting the public Craft” he knew that “the greatest part is or will be carried away with the ice.” For GW’s orders calling for “particular care & attention to the Batteaux & Boats,” see the postscript of his letter to Brodhead dated 3 May 1779.
Brodhead elaborated on the lost boats in a letter written at Pittsburgh on 4 April 1780 to Capt. John Rogers of Col. George Rogers Clark’s Virginia militia regiment: “A great number of Water Craft having by negligence as well as by inevitable accident been drove off in high waters from the Garrisons of the United States, which I am informed are in the hands of Individuals down the River Ohio and upon the Mississippi, I have thought it proper to authorize you to seize all such water craft as you shall find belonging to the United States and to have them secured in such manner as your prudence and knowledge of these waters direct. And I request you will by every convenient opportunity forward such numbers as you may be enabled to this place” (
, 1st. ser., 12:217).8. See GW to Board of War, this date, postscript.
9. Brodhead declined this leave authorization (see his letter to GW, 24 April 1780). Plans for an expedition against Detroit had prompted GW to deny Brodhead’s initial request for leave (see Brodhead to GW, 26 Oct. 1779, and GW to Brodhead, 21 Nov. 1779).