The Massachusetts spy. [volume] (Worcester [Mass.]) 1821-1823, 1821-10-03


Before proceeding to a statement of facts
relating to the charge against him, it is of i'm
portance to ascertain what that charge specif-
cally is. BY the order Of March 9th, 1920. the
Commandments Of the several Regiments and
separate Battalions ofthe Militia, was required
to make duplicate returns. BY the order of the
18th of March last, it appears that such returns
were not made by the Commanding officers
in this Brigade, and those Commandments from
whom it thus appeared no such returns
were made, were censurcd and reprimand-
ed in said aforementioned order. By a re-
cent general order accompanying the dis
charge of the Brigade Major, the blame or
censure thus laid TO the Commandants is who'll
ly imputed to the Brigade Major; and this is
simply and specifically the charge made a.
gaiast him. From a view of the following
facts, however, the publick will decide how far
the Brigade Major does, or does not, deserve
censure.
The general orderof March 9th, 1920, was du-
ly received and sesonably distributed. Blanks
were subsequently, received and seasonably
distributed to the Commandment of each Regi-
ment and separate Battalion, to enable them
to- make duplicate returns as the order requir-
edit is not pretended that any blame rests
on the Brigade Major on this score. The or
der of the 9th of March was clear and explicit.
1t needed no explanation from the Brigade
Major, nor did the duties of his Office require
him to make any. 1t was his duty only to dis
tribute it, He faithfully performed it. 1t was
the duty of the Commandments of the several
Regiments, to make their duplicate returns to
the Brig, Gen. or Brigade Major, that one of
them might be returned to the Adiutant Gen
eral. Ii from misconception or ignorance of
their duty, the Commandments did not make
duplicate returns, as the order required, then
surely no blame ought or can rest upon the
Brigade Major for not making them to the
Adjutant General. 1t is then asserted as a
fact, that the Brigade Major received no du-
phcate returns from any of the COMMANDMENTS,
excepting from Col. Williams, and from Col.
Wheeler; and those from Col. Williams were
defective, either not being signed, or counter
signed, which is not now distinctly recollected.
1t may be said, that the Brigade Major ought
to have gone round to the several Command
ants, and required of them to make out their
duplicates, IN compliance with the order,
This, however, is begging the question. The
duties OF his office required of him no such
course /; and the officers would have consider
ed 1t as reproach to their Understandings to
have been reminded oil the discharge of duty
so obvious to the view of every man who reads
And besides, neither the Commander in Chief,
or the Legislature, ought or could reasonably
expect that Brigade Majors, with the pay they
then and now received, viii perform any duty
not strictly enjolned upon them by the tenure
OF Their office and the strict letter of the law.
II IS also tact, that in a conversation be-
tween the Adj0tant General and the Brigade
Major, relative to the returns. the Brigade
A1aio inf 4
duplicate return with the exception aforemen-
toned had been made to him. The Adiutant
General then remarked, that he must have the
returns, and that it was too late to think of OBJ
tanning them from the several Commandment
that In lieu of the regular returns, if the Brig
ade Major would make out attested copies of
the returns he had received, he would get
along with them as well as he could. The
Brigade Major accordingly made out such cop
les, and transmitted the same, together with
the two duplicates aforesaid, 10 the Adiutant
Generals Office; and it was not then OF at any
other time ever suggested to him, that he was
IN fault because the returns required were not
regularly made.
1t is likewise fact, that the Brigade Major
of the First Brigade of this Division did not re-
ceive duplicates in the first instance, nor until
he had notified the several Commandments of
Regiments OF their omission. They had prob
ably either not noticed, or had forgotten the
additional requisition made upon them by the
Order OF the 9th of March, and probably would
have made no duplicates bat for the timely
admonition of the Brigade Major. These facts
are not mentioned as reproach to the officers
OF that Brigade, but only to shew that they, and
probably the officers of this Brigade, from some
cause or other, did not fully comprehend or
recoiect the duties enjoined upon them.
That part of the late General Order which
refers to representations Of facts made by the
officers implicated, and the declaration of the
conviction OF the Brigadier General, which sat
ished the Commander in Chief of the Brigade
Majors guilt, deserves some further notice.
What these representations were, the Brigade
Major has not been apprized, nor can he even
conjecture. Whether true or false, the Com
mander III Chief Gt is with Difference said)
could not with certainty decide. If true, why
Were they made so secretly9 And why was
not the othcer upon whom blame was thus to
be attached, made acquainted with their pur-
port! And what was 1t that constrained the
Brlgadier General to declare it as his convic-
ton that the Brigade Major was alone to
blame 1t does not appear upon what facts,
II any, that conviction was founded. And is
military officer to be pronounced guilty
merely because some others undertake to rep
resent him as such, and another undertakes 10
declare it as his conviction that he is so If
such be the precarious tenure of military
character, then military honours are not worth
possessing.
The late Brigade Major has now completed
a term OF service in the militia of twenty-eisht
years, twenty of which he has been in COM
mission. Such has ever been his military