Profiteering from Regimental Uniforms

[farmgirl]

I have piece of text I have read over and over but still can't make good sense of it, if anyone can interpret it better:

"That Colonel Bladen's father desired to make use of his name in an Assignment, made by Colonel Bladen bearing date 10th March 1709/10, of the off-reckonings of his Regiment, till the sum of £2839 should be paid which he granted, but never furnished any cloathing or received any money, or gave receipts on accompt of the said assignment, that he afterwards assigned over the said assignment and thinks it was to Colonel Bladen's father."

The above was a deposition given to a committee enquiring into officers (like Marlborough) profiteering from clothing of regiments which apparently was normal practice at the time. But I can't get my head round the specific detail. What would off-reckonings be a reference to? And does the above wording mean he took the £2839 but failed to supply clothes, or took clothes up to that value and then failed to give receipts?

A fresh perspective on something I've re-read too many times would be helpful?

[kiterunner]

Well, for a start, Chambers dictionary defines off-reckoning (usually in plural) as "a deduction; an account between army officers and governments concerning the men's clothes etc (obsolete)."

[kiterunner]

Who is the "he" in the text, farmgirl, please? Is it a third person, not Colonel Bladen or his father?

[farmgirl]

So far as I can tell, any references to "he" would be Martin Bladen as he was the one being called to account.

Something I perhaps did not make clear is that, it is Colonel Martin Bladen who is being grilled about his regiment's expenditure, yet his father Nathaniel's name creeps into the discussion. You wouldn't think, in modern terms, that anyone's father would have any input into his son's military activities, but clearly Nathaniel the father did.

Off-reckonings as deductions is interesting. So I'm guessing a lump sum was allocated to a regimental officer to provide his troops with kit and they would perhaps draw off sums as needed. Perhaps the father was withdrawing up to the full amount. Then later the Commission saw the full sum being taken but wanted paperwork for it.

I don't know, the more I try to work it out, the further away from the answer I get.

[Phoenix]

Nathaniel probably paid for his son's promotion, so he doubtless thought that perks were part of the package.

[farmgirl]

Hi Phoenix,
Not really. The promotion came about because the son wrote a gushing dedication to Marlborough in a book he published which was brought to Marlborough's attention by his secretary. Though of course many commissions were purchased in such a way.
I'd still like to find out how the profit from soldier's uniforms actually worked though.