by a most despicable set of officers." At Bunker Hill officers of
this type shirked the fight and their men, left without leaders,
joined in the panicky retreat of that day. Other officers sent
away soldiers to work on their farms while at the same time they
drew for them public pay. At a later time Washington wrote to a
friend wise counsel about the choice of officers. "Take none but
gentlemen; let no local attachment influence you; do not suffer
your good nature to say Yes when you ought to say No. Remember
that it is a public, not a private cause." What he desired was
the gentleman's chivalry of refinement, sense of honor, dignity
of character, and freedom from mere self-seeking. The prime
qualities of a good officer, as he often said, were authority and
decision. It is probably true of democracies that they prefer and
will follow the man who will take with them a strong tone. Little
men, however, cannot see this and think to gain support by shifty
changes of opinion to please the multitude. What authority and
decision could be expected from an officer of the peasant type,
elected by his own men? How could he dominate men whose short
term of service was expiring and who had to be coaxed to renew
it? Some elected officers had to promise to pool their pay with
that of their men. In one company an officer fulfilled the double
position of captain and barber. In time, however, the authority
of military rank came to be respected throughout the whole army.
An amusing contrast with earlier conditions is found in 1779 when
a captain was tried by a brigade court-martial and dismissed from
the service for intimate association with the wagon-maker of the
brigade.

The first thing to do at Cambridge was to get rid of the
inefficient and the corrupt. Washington had never any belief in a