From George Washington to Brigadier General Jacob Bayley, 9 March 1780
To Brigadier General Jacob Bayley
Head Quarters Morris Town 9th March 1780
Sir
The severity of the Season having prevented the persons concerned from attending the Court Martial which was appointed to be held at this place the 20th January last,1 I have, for the conveniency of the parties ordered a Court to sit the 15th April next at Springfeild—You being charged by Mr Isaac Tichenor Dy Commy of purchases “With suffering a quantity of Beef at Coos to take damage thro’ your inattention and neglect—and contrary to your engagements and duty” You are desired to attend at the time and place before mentioned prepared to answer the said charge.2 I am Sir yr most obt Servt.
Df, in Tench Tilghman’s writing, DLC:GW; Varick transcript, DLC:GW. The following notation, in Tilghman’s writing, appears under the docket: “sent under to cover to Colo. [William] Smith Dy Q.M.G. at Springfeild with directions to forward it[.] duplicate sent by Colo. [Moses] Little” (see GW to Bayley, 15 March, DLC:GW).
On 7 March, Col. Moses Hazen wrote to Timothy Bedel regarding the trials of Bayley and Isaac Tichenor, which also involved Bedel (see Hazen to GW, 8 Feb.): “I saw the Commander in Chief yesterday on these matters; he desired me to inform Genl Bayley and yourself that you must come prepared to answer to the expenditure of provisions at Co’os which I dare say you can do without Difficulty” ( 4:358).
1. GW probably is referring to the court of inquiry he had ordered to investigate accusations of misconduct by the quartermasters and commissaries at the army post at Coos, Vt. (see GW to Jeremiah Wadsworth, 7 Dec. 1779, and GW’s second letter to Nathanael Greene of the same date).
2. The same court was also to try Tichenor (see GW to Joseph Cilley, Jr., and to James Gray, both of this date; see also Bayley to GW, 3 June, DLC:GW). The trials of Bayley and Tichenor were later separated. Bayley’s court-martial convened on 27 April at Charlestown, N.H., but no trial took place due to the lack of a prosecutor (see General Orders, 15 Oct.).