intelligence received by Congress as he shall judge fit; and that he have like authority with respect to acts and resolutions passed by Congress; reporting, nevertheless, the communications which, in all such cases, he shall have made.”

It was objected, by some, that such a resolution was unnecessary, the Secretary being already possessed of the authority; it was contended by others that he ought, previously to such communication, to report his intention to do so; others, again, were of opinion that it was unnecessary to report at all.

The motion was suggested, by casual information from the Secretary, that he had not cominunicated to the French Minister the re-appointment of Mr. Jefferson, no act of Congress having empowered or instructed him to do so.

The motion was committed to Mr. WILLIAMSON, Mr. MADISON, and Mr. PETERS.

FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 22ND.

A considerable time previous to this date, a letter had been received by Congress from Mr. Henry Laurens, informing them of his discharge from captivity, and of his having authorized in the British Ministry an expectation that Earl Cornwallis should in his turn be absolved from his parole. Shortly after, a letter from Dr. Franklin informed Congress that at the pressing instance of Mr. Laurens, and in consideration of the offer of General Burgoyne for Mr. Laurens by Congress, as well as the apparent reasonableness of the thing, he had executed an instrument setting Cornwallis at liberty from his parole,

until the pleasure of Congress should be known. These papers had been committed to Mr. RUTLEDGE, Mr. MONTGOMERY and Mr. MADISON, who reported in favor of the ratification of the measure, against the opinion, however, of Mr. RUTLEDGE, the first member of the Committee. The report, after some discussion, had been recommitted, and had lain in their hands until, being called for, it was thought proper by the Committee to obtain the sense of Congress on the main question, whether the act should be ratified or annulled; in order that a report might be made correspondent thereto. With this view, a motion was this day made by Mr. MADISON, Seconded by Mr. OSGOOD, that the Committee be instructed to report a proper act for the ratification of the measure. In support of this motion it was alleged, that whenever a public minister entered into engagements without authority from his Sovereign, the alternative which presented itself was either to recall the minister, or to support his proceedings, or perhaps both; that Congress had, by their resolution of the seventeenth day of September refused to accept the resignation of Mr. Laurens, and had insisted on his executing the office of a Minister Plenipotentiary; and that on the twentieth day of September they had rejected a motion for suspending the said resolution; that they had no option, therefore, but to fulfil the engagement entered into on the part of that Minister; that it would be in the highest degree preposterous to retain him in so dignified and confidential a service, and at the same time stigmatize him by a disavowal of his conduct, and thereby disqualify him for a proper execution of the service; that it was

improper to send him into negotiations with the enemy, under an impression of supposed obligations; that this reasoning was in a great degree applicable to the part which Dr. Franklin had taken in the measure; that, finally, the Marquis de la Fayette, who, in consequence of the liberation of Cornwallis, had undertaken an exchange of several officers of his family, would also participate in the mortification; that it was overrating far the importance of Cornwallis, to sacrifice all these considerations to the policy or gratification of prolonging his captivity.

On the opposite side it was said, that the British Government having treated Mr. Laurens as a traitor, not as a prisoner of war, having refused to exchange him for General Burgoyne, and having declared, by the British General at New York, that he had been freely discharged, neither Mr. Laurens nor Congress would be bound, either in honor or justice, to render an equivalent; and that policy absolutely required that so barbarous an instrument of war, and so odious an object to the people of the United States, should be kept as long as possible in the chains of captivity; that as the latest advices rendered it probable that Mr. Laurens was on his return to America, the commission for peace would not be affected by any mark of disapprobation which might fall on his conduct; that no injury could accrue to Dr. Franklin, because he had guarded his act by an express reservation for the confirmation or disallowance of Congress; that the case was the same with the Marquis de la Fayette; that the declaration against partial ex

changes, until a cartel on national principles should be established, would not admit even an exchange antecedent thereto.

These considerations were, no doubt, with some the sole motives for their respective votes. There were others, however, who at least blended with them, on one side, a personal attachment to Mr. Laurens, and on the other, a dislike to his character, and a jealousy excited by his supposed predilection for Great Britain, by his intimacy with some of the new Ministry, by his frequent passing to and from Great Britain, and by his memorial, whilst in the Tower, to the Parliament. The last consideration was the chief ground on which the motion had been made for suspending the resolution, which requested his continuance in the commission for peace.

In this stage of the business, a motion was made by Mr. DUANE, seconded by Mr. RUTLEDGE, to postpone the consideration of it; which being lost, a motion was made by Mr. WILLIAMSON, to substitute a resolution declaring, that as the British Government had treated Mr. Laurens with so unwarrantable a rigor, and even as a traitor, and Cornwallis had rendered himself so execrable by his barbarities, Congress could not ratify his exchange. An adjournment was called for, in order to prevent a vote with so thin and divided a House."3

No Congress till

MONDAY, NOVEMBER 25TH.

A letter from the Lieutenant Governor of Rhode Island was read, containing evidence that some of the leaders in Vermont, and particularly Luke Nolton, who had been deputed in the year 1780 to Congress as agent for that party, opposed to its independence, but who had since changed sides, had been intriguing with the enemy in New York. The letter was committed. (See November the twenty-seventh.)

The consideration of the motion for ratifying the discharge of Cornwallis was resumed. Mr. WILLIAMSON renewed his motion, which failed. Mr. MCKEAN suggested the expedient of ratifying the discharge, on condition that a general cartel should be acceded to. This was relished at first by several members, but a developement of its inefficacy and inconsistency with national dignity stifled it.

A motion was made by Mr. RUTLEDGE, Seconded by Mr. RAMSAY, that the discharge should be ratified in case Mr. Laurens should undertake the office of commissioner for peace. This proposition was generally considered as of a very extraordinary nature, and after a brief discussion withdrawn.

In the course of these several propositions, most of the arguments stated on Friday last were repeated. Colonel HAMILTON, who warmly and urgently espoused the ratification, as an additional argument, mentioned that some intimations had been given by Colonel Laurens, of the army, with the privity of General Washington, to Cornwallis,