Board of War to George Washington, 1 May 1781
From the Board of War
War office [Philadelphia] May 1. 1781
Sir
There has been for some time past an Uneasiness among the Officers of Cavalry entitled to the Rank of Major if that Corps is on the same Footing with the Infantry with respect to Promotion & Number of Officers in the Construction of the 2d Section of the Resolve of the 3d of October 1780. Th⟨e⟩ Point is whether the Words “with the same Number of commissioned Officers as at present” refer⟨s to⟩ the Troop or the Regiment. The same Dispute will now arise in the Artillery as the Clause respecting that Corps is conceived in similar Terms.1 We are of Opinion that the Words refer to the Troop & that the Corps of Cavalry & Artillery should be on the same Footing as the Infantry as to the Number of Field Officers & of Course that a Regiment having only a Lieut. Col. Comt should have two Majors.2 But we did not choose to report the Matter to Congress without asking your Excellency whether you knew of any Reasons to the contrary especially as some Members of Congress who were concerned in forming the Resolve put a Construction upon it different from our Opinion.3 We have the Honour to be with great Respect & Esteem Your very obedt Servts
Richard Peters
By Order
ALS, DLC:GW.
1. See , 18:894; see also General Orders, 1 Nov. 1780.
2. The Continental army establishment passed on 27 May 1778 had set the number of field officers for an infantry regiment at one colonel, one lieutenant colonel, and one major (see , 11:538–43). A congressional resolution adopted on 21 Oct. 1780 added a second major if the regiment was commanded by a lieutenant colonel commandant (see , 18:959).
3. GW replied to the board on 8 May that he agreed with its interpretation (DLC:GW).