State; by which it appears, that at a general assembly of the governor and company of the said State, holden at New Haven, on the second Thursday of October, 1783, the said assembly did appoint Roger Sherman, esq. William Williams, esq. James Wadsworth, esq. and William Hilhouse, esq. delegates to represent that State in the Congress of the United States of America, the year ensuing, in the room of Samuel Huntington, esq. Oliver Wolcott, esq. Richard Law, esq. and Oliver Ellsworth, esq. resigned.

STATE OF CONNECTICUT

At a General Assembly of the Governor and Company of the State of Connecticut, holden at New Haven on the second Thursday of October, 1783,

SEAL.

THIS ASSEMBLY do appoint Roger Sherman, Esq, William Williams, Esq, James Wadsworth, Esq, and William Hilhouse, Esq, Delegates to represent this State in the Congress of the United States of America the year ensuing in the room of Samuel Huntington, Esq, Oliver Wolcott, Esq, Richard Law, Esq, and Oliver Elsworth, Esq, resigned.

A true Copy of Record.

Examing.

By GEORGE WYLLYS Secret v1

Mr. John] Beatty, a delegate for New Jersey, attended, and produced credentials; by which it appears, that in the State of New Jersey, at Trenton, November 6, 1783, the council and assembly in joint meeting, proceeded to the election of five delegates to represent that State in Congress, when the hon. Jonathan Elmer, Silas Condict, John Stevens, John Beatty and Samuel Dick, esqrs. were duly elected, and empowered to represent and vote in behalf of that State in the Congress of the United States of North America, until

1 The original is in the Papers of the Continental Congress, Connecticut, Credentials of Delegates. It was entered in No. 179, Record of Credentials, and not in the Journal.

the 5th day of November next, unless a new appointment shall sooner take place.

STATE OF NEW JERSEY, TRENTON, Nov. 6 1783. The Council and Assembly in Joint Meeting proceeded to the election of five Delegates to represent this State in Congress, when The Honble Jonathan Elmer

Silas Condict

John Stevens

John Beatty &

Samuel Dick Esquires were duly elected.

Resolved, therefore, That the said Jonathan Elmer, Silas Condict, John Stevens, John Beatty and Samuel Dick Esquires, or any two or more of them be empowered to represent and vote in behalf of this State in the Congress of the United States of North America until the fifth day of November next, unless a new appointment shall sooner take place.

It is nevertheless expected that three of the Delegates do constantly attend in Congress unless prevented by sickness or other accident.

By Order of the Joint Meeting PHILEMON DICKINSON, Chairman.1 The committee, consisting of Mr. [William] Ellery, Mr. [Edward] Hand, Mr. [Richard Dobbs] Spaight, Mr. [Thomas] Jefferson and Mr. [Arthur] Lee, to whom was referred a letter of the 6 of November, from the legislature of New Hampshire, on the subject of a memorial from the owners of the private armed vessel called the brig McClary, respecting the proceedings and sentence of the judges of the court of appeals in cases of capture, in the case of the brig Lusannah, captured by the said private armed vessel, called the brigantine McClary; together with a letter from Mr. J. Sullivan, agent for the proprietors of the said brig McClary,

1 The original is in the Papers of the Continental Congress, New Jersey, Credentials of Delegates. It was entered in No. 179, Record of Credentials, and not in the Journal.

98814°-27-VOL 26- -2

having made a report; and the said report, after debate, being postponed,

A motion was made by Mr. [Elbridge] Gerry, seconded by Mr. [Samuel] Osgood,

That the further consideration of the report be postponed to the 1st Monday of April next; and that a copy of the memorial and papers relative thereto be transmitted to the present claimants of the brig Lusannah, to shew cause, if any they have, why the prayer of the said memorial should not be granted; and in the mean time that all proceedings in the sentence of the court of appeals, touching the premises, ought to be stayed.1

Your Committee find that by a resolution of Congress of Nov 25, 1775, it was recommended to the legislatures of the several states to erect Courts for determining the cases of captures from the enemy on the high seas, and it was declared that in all cases an appeal should be allowed to Congress, or such persons as they should appoint for the trial of appeals.

That this resolution was complied with by the several states, some of them ceding appeals to Congress on a larger and some on a more contracted scale; and New Hampshire particularly, by their act of Assembly of 1776, allowing them only in cases of captures by armed vessels fitted out at the charge of the United States, and reserving the appeal in all other cases to the Supreme Court of their own State.

That the course of Congress was to appoint a Committee for the trial of every Special appeal till the 30th Day of January, 1777, when a standing Committee was appointed to hear and determine appeals from the Courts of Admiralty in the respective states.

That the Brigantine M: Clary, a private armed vessel owned by John Penhallow and others, citizens of New Hampshire, captured on the high seas in the month of November, 1777, the Brigantine Lusanna, the subject of the present question, carried her into Piscataqua in the State of New Hampshire and libelled her before the

1 This motion, in the writing of Elbridge Gerry, is in the Papers of the Continental Congress, No. 36, II, folio 283. The letter of the New Hampshire legislature is in No. 44, folio 203. Sullivan's letter is in folio 207.

maritime Court of the said State, whereon the said vessel and cargo were by the said court condemned.

That the claimants, Elisha Doane and others, prayed an appeal to Congress, which being refused, they appealed to the Superior Court of New Hampshire, where the sentence being confirmed they again prayed an appeal to Congress which was refused, and the sentence, carried into effect by a sale and distribution of the vessel and cargo.

That on the 9th Day of October, 1778, the said Elisha Doane petitioned Congress for a revision of the said sentence, which petition being referred to the Committee of Appeals, they in May, 1779, summoned the Libellants to appear before them in defence of their right, which they accordingly did-by-their-counsel, and the said committee on a hearing of both parties reported to Congress that

That on the 22% of the same month Congress resolved that certain Resolutions of theirs of March 6th, 1779, relative to their controul over all jurisdiction in cases of capture on the high seas should be transmitted to the several states, where upon Congress by their resetn. of May 22, 1779, and they be respectively requested to take effectual measures for conforming therewith.

That they were accordingly transmitted to the State of New Hampshire, the legislature thereof by their act of Nov., 1779, extended the license of appeal to Congress to every case wherein any subject of any foreign nation in amity with the United States should be interested in the dispute, and allowed it no further.

That in May, 1780, a Court of Appeals was established by Congress with jurisdiction over all matters respecting appeals in cases of capture, then depending before Congress or the Commiss" of appeals, consisting of Members of Congress.

That all these transactions were prior to the completion of the Confederation which took place on the first day of March, 1781.

That on the 17th of September, 1783, the Court of Appeals proceeded to consider the case of the said Elisha Doane and others against the Brig Lusanna, John Penhallow, Libellant, and to reverse the said sentences passed by the inferior and superior courts of New Hampshire.

Whereupon your Committee, have Come to the following resolu

tion:

Resolved, That the said capture having been made by citizens of New Hampshire carried in and submitted to the jurisdiction of that state before the completion of the Confederation, while appeals to Congress in such cases were absolutely refused by their legislature, neither Congress nor any persons deriving authority from them had jurisdiction in the said case.1

A motion was made by Mr. [Jeremiah Townley] Chase, seconded by Mr. [Jacob] Read, to strike out the latter part, viz. and in the mean time, &c. to the end:

And on the question, shall those words stand? the yeas and nays being required by Mr. [Abiel] Foster,

So the question was lost and the words were struck out. On the question to agree to the motion as amended, the yeas and nays being required by Mr. [Abiel] Foster,

1 This report, in the writing of Thomas Jefferson, is in the Papers of the Continental Congress, No. 44, folio 223.