The history and legal effect of brevets in the armies of Great Britain and the United States, from their origin in 1692 to the present time

Front matter

BOUGHT WITH THE INCOME PROM THE

_SAGE ENDOWMENT FUND

THE GIFT OF

Preface

Commissions by brevet have lost much of -their value in this country ; indeed, it is now only in the case of an assignment to duty by the President according to " brevet rank," that the brevet takes practical effect. This has been the result of legislation, which has deprived this kind of military appointment of the powers and privileges which, by the common law military, attached to it. It has also, as a consequence of its indiscriminate bestowal, ceased to be a distinguishing mark of honor ; nevertheless, the subject is not without its interest, even to us. It is, of course, possible that the brevet may hereafter be re-vitalized, but, independently of this consideration, it has become a subject of historical interest. In England, the brevet has been known since the days of William the Third, and has formed so important an ingredient in the military orgaiTization, that it is impossible to arrive at a correct understanding of the military institutions of that country, unless familiar with its precise position and effect. It has there largely affected the whole system of promotion, and has been made the subject of several parliamentary inquiries. With us, it was resorted to in the early days of the Revolution, and from that time to this, has had a place in our history ; it is, therefore, as a matter of historical interest that the subject seems to claim attention. Regarding it in this light, I have embodied in these pages, and arranged chronologically, all the matter which iv PREFACE.

I have collected. I have aimed at establishing no particular theory, but have simply given the facts and authorities as I have found them. As some of these have not heretofore been published, and as many have been gathered from sources not easily attainable, I am led to hope that the labor of those interested in the study of English and American military institutions will be facilitated by this historical presentation of the subject of brevets.

Promotion by brevet has very recently been considered by a commission of the British Government. Since this work went to press, a London publication — " The Wellington" — in an article upon the general labors of this commission, remarks as follows :

" One o£ the questions, and by no means the least important, submitted for the consideration of the late commission, was that of brevet promotion, upon which subject many officers gave much interesting advice. In no other European army is there anything resembling this system of reward ; and there are many experienced ofScers in our army who would entirely abolish the practice. Thus, Lieutenant-General S. J. Hodgson, in his evidence, described the brevet system as ' one of the most fatal systems that our army has almost ever seen,' and declared his opinion that everything done by it in the way of pushing forward deserving officers, might be better done through the system of unattached promotion, or through the system of direct promotion to a vacancy in another regiment. Many experienced officers would have substituted for brevet promotion a decoration with a pecuniary reward for distinguished service. On the other hand there are many officers who consider that the advantages of the system outweigh its disadvantages and anomalies. H. R. H. the Duke of Cambridge, while wishing he could say that the system of brevet is not essential to the service, does not see how it is to be got rid of. Pressed upon the point, the Duke expressed himself as follows : ' Some have thought, and I think myself, that in many cases if you had a larger power of giving good service rewards, no doubt that would take the place of brevet in some respects. Say £,\Qia j year additional pay, or £^o additional pay to a captain, and so on. That would to a certain extent take the place of brevet, but that would not give the man the pull that he has in army rank, because of course the advantage in army rank is very great. Take the case of an officer who has recently distinguished himself very much. He had very good luck, and he knew how to avail himself of it, but he was only a substantive major when he was promoted to general officer,.

PREFACE. V

and if he had not had the army rank that he had by brevet he never would have been where he is at this moment. Therefore, if you do away with brevet, I do not think that a good many m;n could ever come to the front at all.' Asked again as to whether his opinion is that brevet is a measure of getting deserving officers forward into a position in the army which enables the state to supply them in high commands, the Duke of Cambridge replie d : ' That is exactly what I mean, and I think it much less objectionable than the selection of men for a higher substantive rank, which I think would be very hurtful to miny officers, whereas, this system does not injure the officers at all, and yet puts such a man forward. I do not think that giving a good service pension, which has been suggested, could in any way affect the advantage which a man gains by brevet in the mode which I have described.' After duly considering the evidence laid before them, the commissioners came to the conclusion which must, on reflection, be considered a sound one, and which it is as well to give in thsir own words, as follows : — ' With regard to the' subject of pronjtioi by b-evet,' they say, 'it has been stated to us as nearly the universal opinion of thoia whoie evidence W2 have taken, that of late years promotion by brevet for distinguished service has been much too lavishly bestowed ; at the same tima, it is, at present, almost the only way of rewarding zeal and efficiency on active service, with the exception of unattached promotion, the objections to which last are, that it encuml)ers the half-pay list, and often removes the deserving officer from active service and his regiment at the very moment when he is distinguishing himself in it. We are not prepared, therefore, to recommend that the practice of brevet promotion for distinguished service should be discontinued, but rather that it should be much more sparingly applied, and under som; well defined rules and conditions, which should be uniformly adhered to, and should practically restrict the number so promoted. By way of supplement to it, we think the grant of some decoration, accompanied by a small pension in the nature of brevet pay, would probably be acceptable to the army, and serve to mark your Majesty's approbation."

It will be observed that this article says " in no other European army is there anything resembling this system of rewards."

Chapter 2 (pages 47 to 50) of this work gives the practice in this regard of the principal armies of Europe, and it will be seen from that chapter, that in several of them there are promotions in the nature of brevets, and that the brevet system of Sweden is quite similar to that practised in the British army and in our own.

J. B. F.

New York, February ist, 1877.

Chapter I

Definition of Brevets, with general remarks on their history in the Army of the United States; purposes for which they were called into operation, &c., 9 to 13.

Chapter II

Derivation of the terra Brevet, 14 ; Early history of Brevets in the armies of Europe, particularly those of Great Britain and France, 14; Brevet appointments in the French Consular service, 1 5 ; Forms of commissions and. of brevet commissions in the British Army, and inthe Army of the United States, 15 to 19; Difference between corps commissions and brevet commissions considered, 19; General Scott's comments upon system of brevets in the British Army, 20 to 24; System of promotion and retirement, with schedule of pay in the British Army, 25 to 29; British regulations of the present day in regard to brevets, 29; Lieutenant General Fitzroy Somerset's testimony on the subject of brevet ranl<, 29 to 46 ; Present system of brevet rank in the armies of Germany, Austria, Hungary, France, Russia, Italy, Belgium, Sweden and Spain, 46 to 49.

Chapter III

Brevets introduced into the Continental Army in 1776, 50; Resolutions of the Continental Congress conferring brevet commissions, 50 to 55 ; First brevet conferred, November 19th, 1777 : rapid bestowal of them thereafter, 55 to 60 ; General brevet conferred by Resolution of September 30, 1783, 60-61 ; Difficulty of providing for the many gentlemen from France desirous of entering the American Armv, and General Washington's letters to Congress in relation thereto, 61 ; General Wilkinson's brevet ; his resignation of it, 61 ; McPherson's brevet, and the dissatisfaction it occasioned ; General Washington's letter to Generals Wayne and Irvine on the subject, 62 to 66; Proclamation of October 18, 1783, disbanding the Continental Army, 66 to 67 ; Peace establishment fixed by Resolutions of June, 1784, and April, 1785. 67 ; Harmar brevetted Brigadier General and placed on duty as General-in-Chief; Harmar's the only brevet conferred between 1783 and adoption of Constitution in 1789, 67.

Chapter IV

Brevets, from adoption of the Constitution in 1789, until the war of 1812, 67; Washington's nominations of officers on the peace establishment, 68 ; Har-

4 CONTENTS.

mar the only ofiScer holding a brevet until 1790, 68 ; Washington's message of May 31st, 1790, recommending Mr. de Poiery, late Secretary to the Marquis de Lafayette, for a brevet Captaincy, 63 ; Mr. Poiery's nomination confirmed by the Senate, being the first under the Constitution, 69 ; The question of Generals Butler and Harrison's brevets, 70 to 71 j Powers of the 24th Article of War during the revolutionary struggle, 72 ; Code of 1806, and change of 24th Article of War of 1776 into 6ist article of 1806, 72-73 ; 62d Article of War, resume of the results which sprang from it, 73 ; Staff and line rank considered, 74.

Chapter V

Act of July 6, 1812, authorizing the bestowal of brevets, and the powers of the President under it, 75 to 76; Macomb's pamphlet of 1825-6, on the subject, 76 to 77. ; Scott's views as to brevet and other commissions, 77 ; Force of brevets when conferred bv President alone, and when confirmed by Senate, 77; Secretary of War Porter's opinion, 77 ; War of 1812,78; Cases of Generals Swartwout and Burbeck, Brigadiers by brevet, 78-80 ; Regulations of 1814 and 1816 in regard to rank and, command, 80 to 82 ; General Order of March 6, 1816, explaining the meaning of the term " detachment " as used in the 6ist Article of War, 82; The words "regiments " and " corps " as used in 6ist article held to be synonymous terms, 83 ; Action of Congress in regard to pay and emolume.its of officers holding brevet commissions, 83 to 87 ; Act of April 16, 1818, regulating pay and emoluments of brevet officers, 88 ; Regulations of 1821 and 1825, 89-go.

Chapter VI

Army reduction of 1821,91 ; Case.s of Macomb, Towson, Bernard; Jones, D. S. Townsend and other.s, under the operations of the reduction, gi to 95; Controversy between Scott and Gaines, 96; The struggle for precedence in rank, 97 ; Arguments adduced in support of the rival claims, 98 ; Proceedings of a board of officers convened to decide claims of Scott and Gaines, 99-100 : Gaines' pamphlet and Scott's letter of denunciation, 100 ; Anonymous opinions, loi ; Death of Major General Brown and appointment of Macomb to the command of the army, 103; Scott's protest, 104 ; his refusal to recognize Macomb as General-in-Chief, 104 ; he is relieved from command, 1(7 j memoralizes Congress, bu that body does not adopt his views, 117-1 23 ; Jackson elected President ; he relieves Scott from suspension from command and grants him a leave of absence, 123 ; Scott visits Europe, 123; Visits General Lafayette and receives from him some sound advice, 123-124 ; Scott returns to America and accepts the situation, 124; is assigned to the command of the Eastern Department, 125-126; Death of Macomb, and Scott appointed the Major General of the Army, 127 ; Further efforts by Gaines fiir the supremacy, 128 ; End of the struggle on the question of brevet rank, 128 to 131.

CHAPTER VIL

Re-organization of .the Army in 1821-22,132; Important que.stions growing out of brevets, 132; General Order of June i6th, 1827, on command according to brevet commission, T 32-3 ; Opinion of Attorney-General Berrien, 133; Aides-de-camp to bre>/et general officers, 133-4; Proposition in Congress to abolish brevets, 134 ; Secretary of War Porter's views, 134-5; General Orders of 1829 and 1830 in regard to regimental commissions and commissions by brevet, 135. -

CONTENTS.

Chapter VIII

Staff brevets as compared with brevets for service, 136-7 ; Case of Adjutant General Jones, 137 ; General Scott's opinion of staff brevets under act of 1813 as compared with brevets conferred under act of :8i2, 138 ; Attorney General Rush's opinion concerning them, 138; General Order of September 7, 181 5, in regard to commissions in the Staff, 13S; Re-organization of April 24, 1816, 139; Proceedings of a Board of Olficers which convened at Philadelphia in March, 1830, to consider propriety of restoring, to their places in regiments, officers of the staff, 139-40; Reduction of 1821,140; Staff rank by brevet disappears from 1821 to 183S ; is again introduced in 1838 in the Adjutant General's Department ; totally abolished in 1861 , 140-41; Official reports in regard to staff brevets, &c., 141-143; Brevet rank in the Marine Corps, 143 ; Acts of 1814 and 1817, 143 ; Attorney General's opinions, 143-44; Case of Captain Wainwright of the Marine Corps, &c., 144; Reduction of 1815: bestowal of brevets upon officers reduced in grades ; this species of brevets termed " Razee," 144 ; The method of operation, 144 : Cases of Atkinson, Bradford and Dallibi " razeed officers," 144-5 i ^'^^ °f March 3, 1853, giving to Lieutenants of Engineers and Ordnance promotion for 14 years' continuous service as lieutenants, MS- CHAPTER IX.

Brevets for " 10 years' service in any one grade," under act of July 6, 1812, 145-6; Opinions of Attorney-General Wirt, 146; Discussion as to whether "brevets on brevets" could be conferred under the act, 146-7 ; Report of Adjutant-General Jones to the Secretary of War in regard to officers who had served lo years in one grade, 147-48 ; Action of the Senate in regard to the confirmation of brevets, 148; Law authorizing brevets for to years' service repealed in 1834, 151 ; Efforts of Colonel Jones to have the law restored in favor of certain officers, 152 ; Memorial of several officers in favor of the law, 152 ; Failure to get the law restored, r52-3.

Chapter X

Black Hawk war in 1832, 153; Florida war 1835-42, 153; Brevet rank exercised by the Commanding Generals, 153; Regulations of 1835 and 1838, 153 ; Numerous recommendations for brevets for Florida war, 154; Secretary of War Wilkins' letter of January 31, 1845, to General Scott, and Scott's reply, 154-59 ; Views of the Senate on brevets, 160 to 61 ; Regulations of 1841 and 1847, 161-2 ; General Taylor's letter of October 9, 1845, to Adjutant-General as to the rights of brevet rank, 162-63 ! Adjutant-C5eneral Jones' reply of November 17, 1845, to General Taylor, giving General Scott's views on the subject of brevet rank, 163-165 ; the celebrated " Corpus Christi Memorial" of December 11, 1845, 165-179; Memorial not acted on by Congress, 180; Subject disposed of by General Order of March 12, 1846, 180; Case of General Worth, 181 ; Questions of precedence between h'm and Colonel Twiggs, 181 ; Worth's claim to precedence on account of his brevet, 181 ; Taylor's decision in favor of Twiggs, 182 ; Worth's refusal to be governed by it, 182-3 ! ^^ tenders his resignation and asks for leave until its acceptance, 183; goes to Washington,i87 ; General Scott's remarks on the case, 187 ; the battle of Palo Alto, l88 ; Worth recalls his resignation, and asks to be permitted or ordered to return to the field of operations, 188 ; he returns to Texas and resumes the command he had relinquished, 188 ;

6 CONTENTS.

Brevets of graduating cadets, 189 ; War with Mexico breaks out, 190 ; Promotion of General Taylor, 190 ; Acts of June 29, 1846, and March 3, 1847, increasing number of General Officers, iga-91 ; Close of Mexican war, 191 ; Liberal bestowal of brevets, 191 ; Volunteers in war with Mexico, 191-92 ; Appointments of General Officers, 192; Two volunteer Generals receive brevets in the regular army, 192 ; Rights and privileges of brevet officers, 192 ; Secretary of War Crawford's report, 192-197 ; Board of officers convened in November, 1850, to consider subject of rank, 197 ; Report of Board, 197-201 ; General Order of January 18, 1851, in case of brevet Lieutenant-Colonel Cooke, 202; Revoked in 1855,202; Case of Captain Ketchum, 202, 203 ; Regulations of 1857, and General Scott's objections thereto, 203-208; Scott's brevet of Lieutenant-General in 1855, 208 ; Joint resolution of Congress, 208 ; Scott's claim for pay of brevet Lieutenant-General from March 29, 1847, 208 ; Antagonism of Jefferson Davis, Secretary of War, 208 ; Bitter correspondence between Davis and Scott, 208 ; Scott's triumph, 208, 209 ; Cases of Johnston and Andrews, 210 ; Their brevets as officers of additional regiments raised during the Mexican war, 210; Ruling of the War Department, 210; Johnston's protest, 210, 211 ; Adjutant-General Cooper's views in the case, 211, 213 ; Stability of brevet rank, 213 ; Staff brevets and brevets for service, 213 ; Case of Captain Henshaw, 214 ; Brevets in the Marine Corps, 215 ; Case of Captain Wainwright, 217-218; General review of the whole subject of brevet rank, 218-223; Case of J. C. Fremont, 223. ,

CHAPTER XL

War of the Rebellion, 1861-5, 223 ; Condition of the army at its commencement, 223 ; Organization of volunteer forces, 224 ; Brevets overwhelmed and lost sight of, 224; Close of the war and re-appearance of brevets, 224 ; Lavish bestowal of them, 224 ; Boards of officers convened at Washington and St. Louis, to establish system in the bestowal of brevets, 225 ; Reports of Boards of Officers, 225-229 ; Dissatisfaction and confusion in the army from the numerous brevets, 230 ; Act of March 3, 1869, forbidding precedence or command to brevet rank except by special assignment, 230 ; Brevets only to be conferred in time of war, 230 ; Brevets to staff officers, 230-231 ; Act of July 15, 1870, forbidding officers to wear, on duty, uniform of brevet grade, 231 ; Practical disappearance of brevets from the army, 231 ; Case of Colonel Hunt, under the act of March 3, 1865, 231 ; Opinions of Court of Claims and Supreme Court of U. S., 232-234 ; Volunteer forces organized during the rebellion, 234 ; Act of March 3, 1863, authorizing bestowal of brevets upon volunteer officers, 234 ; Probable origin of the act, 234, 235 ; Act of March ■/., 1867, 235 ; Case of Private Stowe, Connecticut Volunteers, brevetted a 2d Lieutenant, 236; Acts of July 12, 1862, and March 3, 1863, authorizing bestov/al of " Medals of Honor," 236.

APPENDIX, f

A. — Definition and explanation of the term Rank, 239 ;

B. — Extracts from reports of Commissions appointed by the British Government (in 1840), to inquire into Naval and Military promotion and retirement ; Evidence of Lieutenant-General Blakeney, 240-246;

C. — Royal warrant of October 6, 1854, establishing rules for promotion and retirement of officers in the British Army, 247-253 ;

D.— Resolution of Congress, of November 24, 1778, establishing rules as to rank and promotion in the Army of the United States, 254-256 ;

CONTENTS. 7

E. — General Washington's letters to Congress during the revolution, 257 to 262;

F Debate in February, 1751, on a clause in the (British) mutiny bill respecting half pay cificers, 260 ; Views o£ Sir George Littleton, 263-266 ;

G. — Royal Warrant of October 30, 1871, regulating first appointments, Regimental promotion, exchanges, &c., 267-274 ; Explanatory memorandum of November i, 1871, accompanying Royal Warrant, 274-277 ;

REGISTER.

Names, rank, Sec, of all officers of the United States upon whom brevets have been conferred, with the nature of the services for which conferred, from the beginning of the Revolutionary War of 1776, until the present time — alphabetically arranged, 279-576. ^ f

The following table of Errata is issued by the publisher to accompany General J. B. Fry's " History of Brevets." It is due to the author, and to the publisher, to state that none of the errors in the Register, and but few of those in the text, appeared in the proof sheets of the work. After the proofs had / been returned to the printer, he, apparently for the purpose of securing uniformity in the" face of the type, took out right letters and introduced wrong ones, or none at all.

PageiOjInlast line of note, for " hierarchiquimente, " read " hierarchiquement. " Page 49, In note, for "Colonel Von Hylander, " read " Colonel Von Xy-

lander."

Page 53, In last line but one, for " was," read " as." Page 55, line 25, for " Setwart, " read "Stewart." Pages 56 and 58, for " Norimont." read " Noirmont." Pages 57 and 59, for " Majastram, " read " Mafastram." Pages 62 and 63, The first three lines of page 63 should properly appear as the

first three lines of page 62.

Page 174, Use 30, for "induce," read "include."

Page 220, line 27, for "rate," read " fate."

Page 214, line i, for "servitce," read " service." Pcge 293, (Register), for "Abbott, Henry L." read "Abbot, Henry L." Page 340, " for "Chaffee, Adna A. R." read "Chaffee, AdnaR." Page 370, " for " Dunstea, Edward S. " read " Dunster, Edward S." Page 372, " for " Eckerton, Theodore J." read "Eckerson, Theodore J."

Page 381, " for " Frllett, Frederick M." read " FoUett, Frederick M." Page 391, " for " Giddinas, Grotius R." read " Giddings, Grotius R." Page 422, " The date of "original entry into service" of Bernard J. D.

Irwin should read "August 28th, '56 " instead of "August 28th, '66." Page 423, " for " Jenni gs, Gilbert S." read "Jennings, Gilbert S." Page 443, " for "Loosley, Dalien," read " Loosley, Daniel." Page 461, " for "McKenzie, Thom sG." read " McKenzie, Thomas

G."

Charles P. "

Page 542, " forThorapso James," read " Thompson, James." Page 571, " for "Wood, El=a= D." read "Wood, Eleazer D." Page 575, " for " Wyse, Francis P." read "Wyse, Francis O." New York, D. VAN NOSTRAND,

March 8th, 1877. Publisher.

Chapter I

A brevet under the existing laws affecting the regular military service of the United States may be defined as a commission conferring upon an officer a grade in the army additional to and higher than that which, at the time it is bestowed, he holds by virtue of his commission in a particular corps of the legally established -militaty organization.

It makes him eligible, with the rank it confers, for assignment to duty by the President in the army at large, but not in his own corps. In that corps he receives promotion only according to seniority, and performs duty only under his commission therein.

Without such assignment by the President, a brevet has no effect on the officer's status. The brevet held by an officer in the United States Army, is bestowed in conformity with express law. It is in due form signed and sealed, and like other commissions, expresses the rights it confers and the obligations it imposes. The quality of being incident to some other military grade is not an inherent characteristic of it, but is only a feature which it derives from the Act of 1812.

With this commission alone, officers have, in numerous cases, exercised command, received and disbursed public funds, administered law as members of general courts-martial, and drawn the pay and allowances in full of the grades which they held by brevet alone.

The terms "full" rank,* "actual" rank, — "effective" rank, " real ' raiik, " ordinary " rank, etc., often used in contradistinction to brevet rank, are apt to produce confusion, as all are " full," " actual," " effective," " real," and " ordinary." Yet it is convenient, if not necessary, to distinguish in brief terms between the grade in a regiment or corps and that in the army at large. Regiment and corps were long ago pronounced synonymous in this connection. Perhaps the desired distinction may be best made by using the terms corps grade and brevet grade.

The difference between the two may be thus presented : — In

• For an explanation o£ the word Rank, see Appendix A. 2 lO HISTORY AND LEGAL EFFECTS

evefry army there is a system of grades. In the military establishment of the United States the grades of general and lieutenant-general exist now, but expire as soon as vacated by the present incumbents. The permanent commissioned grades* are :

1. Major-general.

2. Brigadier-general.

3. Colonel.

4. Lieutenant-colonel.

5. Major.

6. Captain.

7. First lieutenant.

8. Second lieutenant.

But in each grade there are different offices. For example, in the grade of major there are the offices of major of infantry, major of cavalry, major of engineers, major and assistant adjutant-general, etc. These offices are held by virtue of corps commissions. But besides these, there is also, in the grade of major, the office of major in the army at large, — in other words the office of major by brevet. Originally this office was as substantive and perfect in itself as the office of major in a corps. But in the military service of the United States, its substantive and independent character has been abridged by legislation. The very fact, however, that its powers and privileges have been modified in this manner, is proof that they originally existed, and that they remain subject to such restrictions only as are imposed by the statutes.

Under the law the brevet office can no longer be held by a person not already in the military service by virtue of a corps commission, but it still retains its character as an office, and may be called into active life by the President. Until this happens, the duties and privileges of the office are suspended. When it happens, it supersedes the corps office and that in turn becomes suspended.

Reveniy Johnson, speaking of General Scott's brevet of lieutenant-general, says : " It was not only an honor, but as a compensation, that the office was to be conferred," and Attorney-general Gushing says, on the same subject, " General Scott holds, by lawful appointment and commission, the office of lieutenant-general by brevet in the Army of the United States."

Brevets being commissions in the army conferred under express law, they can only be annulled in conformity with law.

• The French call this system of grades " La Hierarchic," and instead of speaking, as we do, of transmitting a paper " through the proper military channels," they use the expression "suivant les degrfe de la hierarchic," or "transmis hierarchiquimente."

From the very origin of the United States army, more than a hundred years ago, to the present day, brevet rank, though its powers and privileges have changed from time to time, has preserved its hold upon the military system. During all of this long period its advantages and disadvantages have been matters of earnest discussion. At the headquarters of the army and at the war office it was for years an all-absorbing question.

Its extravagant claims after the war of i8 12-14 brought about lifelong hostility and discord between the two brigadier-generals who were continued in service after the army reductions which in due time followed that memorable contest. The failure of the claim set up in 1828 to the permanent command of the entire army by virtue of it, very nearly drove from the public service one of the ablest and most distinguished military leaders that the United States have ever produced, and in deference to it a distinguished officer, in whose memory a monument now stands conspicuously in New York city, unwittingly turned his back upon Palo Alto and Resaca, — battle fields upon which one-half of the victorious army was commanded by his rival and the other half by his successor. The code of army regulations, promulgated in 1857 by Jefferson Davis, then secretary of war, opened with the impressive announcement that " Superiors of every grade are forbid to injure those under them by tyrannical or capricious conduct or by abusive language" Yet the brevet of lieutenant-general held by General Scott gave rise to a quarrel between him and the secretary of war, which for the ingenuity and bitterness of its " abuse " is unsurpassed in the annals of official military correspondence. But while General Scott had to defend his own high brevet of lieutenant-general, as he years before defended that of major-general, he was compelled, as Washington had been before him, to deal also with grave questions involving the' rights of brevet second lieutenants.

The subject of brevet rank embraced in the first articles of war for the army of the United States which were copied almost literally from the British and adopted by the Continental Congress, June 30, 1775 — has not only remained in the articles through all of their changes, but has been the subject of many special acts of Congress. It has engaged the attention of the attorney-general, the secretary of the treasury, and the President, and has been before the court of claims and the supreme court of the United States.