Subsequently, did Washington send his second in command as a slight to Cornwallis?
Gen. Charles Cornwallis, 1st Marquess and 2nd Earl Cornwallis, surrendered to American forces on October 19th, 1781 after two days of a ceasefire. It came after a week of fighting where British troops failed to advance or make any dent in the American and French forces who had surrounded them and were well-fortified. The loss was quite shocking, with over 8,000 British troops being captured by the Americans. The negotations for the surrender were held by Cornwallis' subordinates, which was not unsusual for 18th century warefare. What was unusual is that Gen. Cornwallis did not attend the surrender ceremony, claiming an illness prevented him from coming.
Brigadier General Charles O'Hara was the office in charge and led the British army onto the field. Reports say that Gen. O'Hara attempted to surrender to French General Jean-Baptiste Donatien de Vimeur, comte de Rochambeau , who refused to address O'Hara, and and pointed to Washington instead. O'Hara offered his sword in a ceremonial position of surrender, but Washington refused and had Major Gen. Benjamin Lincoln accept it, thus initiating the formal surrender of the British Army at Yorktown.
While it might seem dishonorable to us that Cornwallis did not take to the field, neither his loss of Yorktown nor his refusal to take to the field was largely seen as dishonorable in the eyes of his countrymen. Having just suffered the arguably most embarrasing defeat in 18th century British history (in the eyes of the British), Cornwallis may have very-well been ill and unable to attend. As some historians have noted, "Although the Yorktown capitulation decided the war in favour of the colonists, Cornwallis remained in high esteem at home." Cornwallis went on to become governor of Indian just four years after his defeat at Yorktown. He went on to have an impressive career, including a promotion to marquess in 1792. It appears that his loss at Yorktown did not hold back his future successes.