To George Washington from Azariah Dunham, 6 June 1780
From Azariah Dunham
Morris Town June 6. 1780
Sir
The Legislature of this State, require that the Receipts given by the Officers for Provision taken for use of the Army, previous to your Excellency’s Requisition for a Supply to the Magistrates, should be certified by you, or some Person of your Appointment; as may be seen by said Law, Section the 5th.1 Many of these Receipts had been presented me for payment before this Law was pass’d; and more are daily offering, which am oblidg’d to put off untill such Person be appointed. If agreeable to your Excellency, would wish that some One near this, might be approv’d of, for the conveniency of those who apply.2 Conceive no great Difficulty in this Business, as most of the Certificates either mention the weight of the Provisions or are valued by indifferent Persons, so that the certifying of them seems only a Matter of Form to answer such Law. Your Obedt humble Servant
Az. Dunham S.P.
ALS, DLC:GW.
1. Dunham, superintendent of purchases for New Jersey, enclosed a printed copy of “A supplemental Act to the Act, intitled, An Act for procuring Provisions for the Use of the Army, and other Supplies for carrying on the War; and for settling the publick Accounts of this State,” passed by the New Jersey legislature on 18 March. The fifth section of the act, referring to GW’s requisition of supples in the state the past winter, reads in part: “WHEREAS at or about the Time of the said Requisition large Quantities of Cattle, Sheep, Swine, and other Provisions, were taken or seized by the Officers and Soldiers of the Army, for which it is reasonable that the Owners or Proprietors should be paid in like Manner as for the Produce furnished under the said Requisition; BE IT ENACTED … That the same shall be paid for in like Manner by the Contractors of the Counties wherein such Seizures have happened … PROVIDED ALWAYS, That no Certificates … shall be paid by the said Contractors, unless the same shall be certified under the Hand of His Excellency the Commander in Chief of the Army, or of some other Person by his Order” (DLC:GW). For GW’s requisition of provisions in New Jersey, see Circular to the New Jersey Magistrates, 7 Jan.; see also GW to William De Hart, 8 January.
2. No reply from GW has been found.