Savannah morning news. [volume] (Savannah) 1868-1887, 1882-09-09
GENERAL AND LTEUTENANT
GENERAL.
n Word of Explanation In Reply
40 Some Proposed Corrections.

ATLANTA, September Ca distinguished citi-
zen OF savannah, whose record at West Point
Military Academy, in the United States army
ana IN tne confederate service entities him to
the most profound respect, writes me a lone
le''er IN reply TO my article in yesterdays
MORNING NEWS, in which attempted to present
some historical facts as to the origin of the
grade OF Lieutenant General and General in
the United States army.
For tne benefit of any readers who NAV an
eSI ms view OF the subject, desire to state
tnat IL was not my purpose to 90 hack IN tbo
conelnental army, but to deal simply with the
OniIeo states army as it has existed since he
inauguration or the first President II is trne
as he claims. that Washington held fhe ranI,,
OF ueneral ana Commander-in-C Chief of an tbe
con mental armies, and duly exercised the
POwt5s BOY t; ana privileges of that high position.
put TINS TACT does not make Grant the seoo9,[;
General in the United States army
:, MY friend also claims that he title of I.ieut
Geheral, conferred on Washington on Nav
Sotn, mot March, as printed by mistake in NV
letter. 179S was an oversight on tba ,art -
resident Adams, as Washington had preVious
~ neld the higher rank Of General. SO he had
ana also the still higher one OF President. the
hlSneSG milltary authority in the land Con-
gress ana all the great men around the Presi-
dent could not have Intentionally made such a
olunder. 1t has always been customary for
oLncers OF nigh rank, in cases of reorganization
-
Inst previously held by them For example,.
tSls, RSLls, zen Thomas A. Smith. of Georgia, when
taS taS SaIy was reorganzed in 1915, was promo
St. eeo odcKward TO be Colonel, and was thereby
retained in the service To-day an tbronob
our army, can be seen Brigadier Generals and
MAJOR Generals serving as Lieutenants and
Captains as well as Majors and Coloneis Cen
tinentals and volunteers hold the me oIatSor
to the regular army
II any biunder was made. which do not ad-
NIT, congress and President ATams were a
NoCf
a Lieutenant General on MAJ 2S l7R3 and IN
was not until March 8, 1922 nearly a wear later
that they tried TO make him @ General NV
friend likewise assures me that Washington
never accepted either grade. but simply the
office of Commander in Chief of the army
must contend, however, that there is no such
rank or ofice-and never has been, as an inde-
pendent thing in itself-as Commander-in-
Chief. Why, even Chaplain, or a Surgeon,
or Paymaster, must have a rank or grade, he
cannot be simply a Paymaster or Chaplain.
Washington, according to the highest military
authorities and State papers that / have
studied, accepted the rank of Lieutenant Gene
raj, and died under it, having declined to ac-
cept the higher rank Of General. In the old
cOnIhental army he could hold that rank, but
nnuer 1 our new form Of government, with a
rEesiuehI hRher IN command than he his
the title or Lieutenant General
l cannot consent, therefore to make any
change in my previous article The GRADE of
Lieutenant General and General. although not
brought into active use, first originated
IN the United States army in the in
,erest of Washington. As Scott was
9nlY Brevet Lieutenant General. it
follows that Grant was the first officer of the
army to bring these grades into dctfUe service
rhe view taken by Washington was wise one,
and in these later times more than one conflict
las arisen between the General of the army
md the President, each claiming as his right
md privilege some exercise of power that in
1ther O avs was vested alone in the President.
lust now the grade of General is a superhuity,
md should be abolished. SIDNEY HERBERT