& rejecting it, such a right could not be exercised without giving extreme offence to the suspected party. To guard agst these difficulties it was finally agreed, & the Sub-committee accordingly reported to the G Committee,

"That it is expedient to require of the Several States a return of all surveyed & granted land within each of them; and that in such returns the land be distinguished into occupied and unoccupied.

"That it also was expedient to appoint one Commiss! for each State who should be empowered to proceed without loss of time into the several States; & to estimate the value of the lands therein according to the returns above mentioned, & to such instructions as should from time to time be given him for that purpose.'

This report was hurried in to the Grand Comitee for two reasons; 1t, it was found that Mr. Rutledge, Mr. Bland, & several others relied so much on a valuation of land, and connected it so essentially with measures for restoring public credit that an extreme backwardness on their part affected all these measures, whilst the valuation of land was left out. A 2a reason was that the Sub-Committee were afraid that suspicions might arise of intentional delay, in order to confine the attention of Cong: to general funds as affording the only prospect of relief.

The Grand Committee for like reasons were equally impatient to make a report to Congress; and accordingly after a short consultation the question was taken whether the above report of the Sub-com, or the report referred to them sa be preferred. In favor of the 1st were Mr. Wilson, Mr. Carrol, Mr. Madison, Mr. Elmore, Mr. Hamilton. In favor of the 24 were Mr. Arnold, Mr. Dyer, Mr. Hawkins, Mr. Ghorum, Mr. Rutledge and Mr. Gilman. So the latter was immediately handed in to Congress, & referred to a committee of the whole into which they immediately resolved themselves.

A motion was made by Mr. Bland, 2ded by Mr. Madison, that this report s be taken up in preference to the subject of general funds. Mr. Wilson opposed it as irregular and inconvenient to break in on an unfinished subject; and supposed that as some further experiment must be intended than merely a discussion of the subject in Congress, before the subject of gen! funds would be seriously resumed, he thought it unadvisable to interrupt the latter.

Mr. Madison answered that the object was not to retard the latter business but to remove an obstacle to it; that as the two subjects were in some degree connected as means of restoring public credit, & inseparably connected in the minds of many members, it was

but reasonable to admit one as well as the other to a share of attention; that if a valuation of land s be found on mature deliberation to be as efficacious a remedy as was by some supposed, it wa be proper at least to combine it with the other expedient, or perhaps to substitute it altogether; if the contrary should become apparent, its patrons w join the more cordially in the object of a general revenue. Mr. Hamilton concurred in these ideas & wished the valuation of land to be taken up in order that its impracticability & futility might become manifest. The motion passed in the affirmative, & the report was taken up.

The phraseology was made more correct in several instances.

A motion was made by Mr. Boudinot 2ded by Mr. Elseworth to strike out the clause requiring a return of "the names of the owners," as well as the quantity of land. Mr. Elseworth also contended for a less specific return of the parcels of land. The objection agt the clause were that it would be extremely troublesome and equally useless. Mr. Bland thought these specific returns w be a check on frauds and the suspicion of them. Mr. Williamson was of the same opinion, as were also Mr. Lee, Mr. Ghorum, & Mr. Ramsay.1 The motion was withdrawn by Mr. Boudinot.

SATURDAY AND MONDAY.

No Congress.

TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 4.

An indecent & tart remonstrance was res from Vermont agt the interposition of Cong in favor of the persons who had been banished & whose effects had been confiscated. A motion was made by Mr. Hamilton 2ded by Mr. Dyer to commit it. Mr. Wolcot who had always patronized the case of Vermont wished to know the views of a committment. Mr. Hamilton said his view was to fulfill the resolution of Congress woh bound them to enforce the measMr. Dyer s his was that so dishonorable a menace might be as quickly as possible renounced. He said Gen! Washington was in favour of Vermont, that the principal people of N. England were all supporters of them, and that Congress ought to rectify the error into which they had been led, without longer exposing themselves to reproach on this subject. It was committed without dissent.

ure.

1 Mr. Dyer ludicrously proposed as a proviso to the scheme of referring the valuation to the States, "that each of the States should cheat equally." [Note in MS.]

Mr. Wilson informed Congress that the Legislature of Pen: having found the Ordinance of Cong: erecting a Court for piracies so obscure in some points that they were at a loss to adapt their laws to it, had appointed a Com: to confer with a Com: of Congress. He accordingly moved in behalf of the P delegation that a Com: might be apps for that purpose. After some objections by Mr. Madison agʻt the impropriety of holding a communication with P through committees when the purpose might be as well answered by a Memorial or an instruction to its Delegates, a Com: was app2, consisting of Mr. Rutledge, Mr. Madison & Mr. Wilson.

The Report proposing a commutation for the half-pay due to the army, was taken up. On a motion to allow 5 years whole pay in gross to be funded & bear interest, this being the rate taken from Dr. Price's calculation of annuities, N. H. was no, R. I. no, Cont no, N. J., no, Virginia ay (Mr. Lee no) other States ay. So the question was lost.-5 years was then proposed, on which N. H. was no, R. I. no, C no, N. J. no. So there were but 6 ays, & the proposition was lost. Mr. Williamson proposed 5 & called for the yeas and nays. Messrs. Wolcot and Dyer observed that they were bound by instructions on this subject. Mr. Arnold said the case was the same with him. They also queried the validity of the Act of Cong which had stipulated half pay to the army, as it had passed before the Confederation, and by a vote of less than seven States. Mr. Madison so that he wished if the yeas & nays were called it might be on the true calculation, and not on an arbitrary principle of compromise, as the latter standing singly on the Journal wa not express the true ideas of the yeas, and might even subject them to contrary interpretations. He s that the act was valid because it was decided according to the rule then in force, & that as the officers had served under the faith of it, justice fully corroborated it; & that he was astonished to hear these principles controverted. He was also astonished to hear objections agst a commutation come from States in compliance with whose objections agst the half pay itself this exped had been substituted. Mr. Wilson expressed his surprise also that instructions sa be given which militated agst the most peremptory & lawful engagements of Cong, and said that if such a doctrine prevailed the authority of the Confederacy was at an end. Mr. Arnold said that he wished the report might not be decided on at this time, that the Assembly of R. I. was in session & he hoped to receive their further advice. Mr. Bland enforced the ideas of Mr. Madison & Mr. Wilson.-Mr. Gilman thought it w be best to

refer the subject of pay to the several States to be settled between them & their respective lines. By general consent the Report lay

over.

Mr. Lee communicated to Congress a letter he had received from Mr. Samuel Adams dated Boston Dec 22, 1782, introducing Mr. from Canada, as a person capable of giving intelligence relative to affairs in Canada & the practicability of uniting that Province with the confederated States. The letter was committed.

In Com of the whole on the Report concerning a valuation of the lands of the U. States

A motion was made by Mr. Rutledge w took the sense of Cong on this question whether the rule of apportionment to be grounded on the proposed valuation s continue in force until revoked by Cong, or a period be now fixed beyond which it s not continue in force. The importance of the distinction lay in the necessity of having seven votes on every act of Cong. The Eastern States were generally for the latter, supposing that the Southern States being impoverished by the recent havoc of the enemy would be underrated in the first valuation. The Southern States were for the same reason interested in favor of the former. On the question there were 6 ays only, which produced a dispute whether in a Committee of the whole a majority w decide, or whether 7 votes were necessary.

In favor of the first rule it was contended by Mr. Ghorum & others, that in Committees of Congress the rule always is that a majority decides.

In fav of the latter it was contended that if the rule of other committees applies to a com: of the whole, the vote s be individual per capita, as well as by a majority, that in other deliberative assemblies, the rules of voting were not varied in Comme: of the whole, and that it we be inconvenient in practice to report to Cong: as the sense of the body, a measure approved by 4 or 5 States, since there could be no reason to hope that in the same body in a different form 7 States w approve it, and consequently a waste of time would be the result.

Com: rose and Con: Adjourned.

WEDNESDAY FEBR! 5 AND THURSDAY, FEB! 6.

In order to decide the rule of voting in a Com: of the whole, before Cong should go into the said Com:, Mr. Bland moved that the rule s be to vote by States, & the majority of States in Com to decide. Mr. Wilson moved to postpone Mr. B: motion in order to resolve that

the rule be to vote by States and according to the same rules which govern Congress; as this gen! question was connected in the minds of members with the particular question to which it was to be immediately applied. The motion for postponing was negatived, chiefly by the Eastern States. A division of the question on Mr. Bland's motion was then called for & the first part was agreed to as on the Journal. The latter clause, to wit, a majority to decide, was negatived; so nothing as to the main point was determined. In this uncertainty Mr. Osgood proposed that Cong should resolve itself into a Com of the whole. Mr. Carroll as chairman observed that as the same difficulty would occur, he wished Cong would previously direct him how to proceed. Mr. Hamilton proposed that the latter clause of Mr. Bland's motion sha be reconsidered and agreed to, wrong as it was, rather than have no rule at all. In opposition to which it was so that there was no more reason why one & that not the minor side sa wholly yield to the inflexibility of the other than vice versa; and that if they sa be willing to yield on the present occasion, it we be better to do it tacitly, than to saddle themselves with an express and perpetual rule which they judged improper. This expedient was assented to and Congress accordingly went into

A Committee of the Whole.

The points arising on the several amendm*: proposed were 1t the period beyond woh the rule of the first valuation sa not be in force, on this point Mr. Collins proposed 5 years, Mr. Bland 10 years, Mr. Boudinot 7 years, N. Jersey have instructed her Delegates thereon. The Con! delegates proposed 3 years. On the question for 3 years, N. H. no, Mas. no, R. I. ay, Cont ay, all the other States no. the question for 5 years, all the States ay except Cont

On

The 2 point was whether & how far the rule sa be retrospective. On this point the same views operated as on the preceding. Some were agt any retrospection, others for extending it to the whole debt, and others for extends it so far as was necessary for liquidating and closing the accounts between the United States and each individual State.

This was generally satisfactory, except to Mr. Dyer and Mr. Mereer, who supposed that as in that ease the requisitions of Congress would be the sum apportioned it would operate too much in favor of the states which would be underrated in the first valuation. The several motions expressive of these different ideas were at length withdrawn, with a view that the point might be better digested,