The Navy of the American Revolution : $b Its administration, its policy, and its achievementsPaullin, Charles Oscar
History
The Navy of the American Revolution : $b Its administration, its policy, and its achievements
Paullin, Charles Oscar
United States -- History -- Revolution, 1775-1783 -- Naval operations; United States. Navy -- History -- Revolution, 1775-1783
The Agent of Marine, like the Board of Admiralty, communicated with
Congress by means of written reports, which that body referred to
special committees of its own members. Accordingly, when naval
business was discussed in Congress, it usually came up in the form
of a “report of a committee on the report of the Agent of Marine.”
The subjects upon which the Agent of Marine reported were similar
to those dealt with by his predecessors in naval administration.
Not a few of his reports were concerned with the settling of marine
accounts, and the satisfying of claimants against the government,
which business was now insistent. During his tenure of the office
of Agent of Marine, Morris prepared the larger part of the naval
legislation of Congress. The changes or additions to his work which
were made by committees of Congress were unimportant.
The law that provides for a change in a governmental system is often
incomplete, and experience under the new order of business soon
suggests the need of supplementary legislation. This was the case
with the laws which transferred the naval business from the Board
of Admiralty to the Agent of Marine. Morris, in one of his first
reports, explained to Congress that he had no power to hold courts
of enquiry; thereupon, Congress, on November 20, 1781, revived the
law of February 8, 1780, on the holding of courts of enquiry and
courts-martial, which had lapsed with the passing of the Board of
Admiralty. Morris’s business-like care for the saving of time and
effort is well shown, when in this report he tactfully suggests that
Congress adapt their act not only to the Agent of Marine, but also
to the Secretary of Marine, so that when the latter is appointed,
“it may not be necessary for him to bring this matter again under
Consideration.”[286]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account