A question being taken on the latter part, passed in the negative. Congress then resumed the consideration of the report of the committee, consisting of Mr. [James] Duane, Mr. A[rthur] Lee, and Mr. S[amuel] Huntington, to whom was referred a letter of 11 July last, from the legislature of Massachusetts, which is in the words following: That the subjects of complaint in the said letter are the grant of half-pay for life to the officers of the army; the commutation granted to the said officers of five years' whole pay, in lieu of the said half-pay; and the salaries allowed to the civil officers of Congress. The half-pay, your committee observe, was granted at a critical period of the war, when our finances were embarrassed, our credit impaired, our army distressed, the officers discontented, and resignations so general, as to threaten the dissolution of a corps on whose military experience the public safety, in the judgment of the Commander in Chief, greatly depended. The first grant was limited to seven years, but not being deemed satisfactory to the army, the evil of resignations continued to prevail to so alarming a degree, as to require a more effectual remedy; and the grant of half-pay to the officers was extended for life. Your committee are persuaded that no doubt can be entertained, but that Congress were of opinion, that this provision was alone competent, if it was not the only one at that time in their power, to establish a military force capable of opposing the dangers with which the United States were then surrounded. That although it is to be regretted that any measure has been adopted by Congress, which has given uneasiness to the legislature or the citizens of the Massachusetts; yet experience has shewn how essentially that provision in question has contributed to the stability of the army, to its perfection in discipline, to the vigor and decision of its operations, and to those brilliant successes which have hastened the blessings of a safe and honorable peace. Your committee beg leave further to observe, that from an earnest desire to give satisfaction to such of the states as expressed a dislike to the half-pay establishment, a sum in gross was proposed by Congress and accepted by the officers as an equivalent for their half pay. That your committee are informed, that such equivalent was ascertained on established principles which are acknowledged to be just, and adopted in similar cases: but that if the objections against the commutation were ever so valid, yet as it is not now under the arbitration of Congress, but an act constitutionally and finally adopted, and the national faith pledged to carry it into effect, they could not be taken into consideration. With regard to the salaries of civil officers it may be observed, that the necessaries of life have been very high during the war, and particularly so where the publiek Business has been principally transacted: hence it has happened that even the salaries complained of have not been found sufficient to induce persons properly qualified to accept of many important offices, and the public business is left undone. Your committee are nevertheless of opinion, that since the cessation of hostilities, and the reduction of the price of most of the necessaries of life the expence of living is moderated, and that a considerable reduction may be made in the civil list. Your Committee therefore submit the following resolution: Resolved, That a Committee be appointed to consider and report the reductions of salary which ought to be made on the Civil List.1 A motion was made by Mr. [James] McHenry, seconded by Mr. [John Francis] Mercer, to commit the report: and on the question for committing, the yeas and nays being required by Mr. [Samuel] Holten, 1 This report in the writing of James Duane is in the Papers of the Continental Congress, No. 20, I, folios 149 and 159. According to the indorsement, it was delivered September 2, and committed, on the same day, to Mr. S[amuel] Huntington, Mr. [Elbridge] Gerry and Mr. [Abiel] Foster. They delivered a report, September 8, which was considered September 16 and 17. The report of September 2 was again taken up, September 18, and, according to the indorsement, and the record in Committee Book, No. 186, was referred to Mr. [James] Madison, Mr. [John Francis] Mercer and Mr. [James] Duane, who reported on September 19. See post, September 25. So it was resolved in the affirmative. The committee of the week [Mr. John Montgomery, Mr. Abraham Clark and Mr. Samuel Holten] report that the within letter [from Peter W. Yates, dated Albany September 7, 1783, asking an exemplified copy of the articles of ratification] be read in Congress.1 FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 19, 1783 The committee, consisting of Mr. [James] Madison, Mr. [John Francis] Mercer and Mr. [James] Duane, to whom was referred the report of the committee, on the letter of the 11 July, from the legislature of Massachusetts, brought in a report, which was taken into consideration, and the following paragraph being under debate: "And resignations so general as to threaten the dissolution of a corps, on whose military experience the public safety, in the judgment of the Commander in Chief, greatly depended;" a motion was made by Mr. [David] Howell, seconded by Mr. [William] Ellery, to strike out the words, "in the judgment of the Commander in Chief:" And on the question, shall those words stand, the yeas and nays being required by Mr. [James] McHenry, 1 This report, in the writing of Abraham Clark, is in the Papers of the Continental Congress, No. 59, III, folio 69. Yates's letter is on folio 67. The memorial of a number of merchants of Boston and the neighboring seaports, dated Boston, August 18, 1783, probably was presented about this time, but the indorsement fails to show what was done with it. It is in No. 41, I, folios 381-6. The memorial of Nathan Goodale, dated Princeton, September 17, was this day referred to the Secretary at War, as the indorsement indicates. It is in No. 41, III, folio 501. The memorial of Mark Bird, dated Delaware Mills, September 15, relative to his accounts as D. Q. M. G. and the balance due; and asking that the chain, which was prepared to throw across Hudson River, be delivered to him, was on this day referred to Mr. [Abraham] Clark, Mr. [Thomas] FitzSimons and Mr. [Benjamin] Hawkins. It is in No. 59, III, folio 215. On this day, as the indorsement states, was read a letter of September 18 from General Washington, acknowledging receipt of resolve of Congress, giving him access to the secret papers of Congress. It is in No. 152, XI, folio 483. So it was resolved in the affirmative. On the consideration of the paragraph in which is the following sentence: "But if the objections against the commutation were ever so great, yet as it is not now under the arbitration of Congress, but an act constitutionally and finally adopted;" a motion was made by Mr. [David] Howell, seconded by Mr. [Silas] Condict, to strike out the words, "constitutionally and;" and on the question, shall those words stand, the yeas and nays being required by Mr. [Theodorick] Bland, New Hampshire, Mr. Foster, Mr. Gerry, Higginson, Rhode Island, Mr. Ellery, Howell, Connecticut, Mr. S. Huntington, no B. Huntington, ay} div. New York, Mr. Duane, L'Hommedieu, New Jersey, Mr. Boudinot, Pennsylvania, ay} ay no ay Mr. Fitzsimmons, Maryland, McHenry, } } ay div. ay }ay ay |