Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

previous to his capitulation, that he might be exchanged for his father, then in the Tower.

The report of the Committee on Mr. MADISON'S motion, on the twenty-first instant, relative to the Secretary of Foreign Affairs, passed without opposition.

TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 26TH.

No Congress, but a Grand Committee * composed of a member from each State.

The States of New Hampshire and Massachusetts having redeemed more than their quota of the emissions prior to the eighteenth of March, 1780, had called on Congress to be credited for the surplus, on which the Superintendent of Finance reported, that they ought to be credited at the rate of one dollar specie for forty of the said emission, according to the act of March aforesaid. This report, being judged by Congress unjust, as the money had been called in by those States at a greater depreciation, was disagreed to. Whereupon, a motion was made by Mr. OSGOOD, that the States who had redeemed a surplus should be credited for the same according to its current value at the time of redemption.

This motion, with a letter afterwards received from the State of Massachusetts on the same subject, was referred to the Grand Committee in question.

* The proceedings of Grand Committees, though often rendered particularly important by the freedom and fulness of discussion, make no part of the Jour nal, except in the reported result.

The Committee were unanimous that justice required an allowance to the States who should sink a surplus, to be apportioned on the different States. The different expedients were:

That Congress should renew their call on the States to execute the act of the eighteenth of March, 1780, and leave it to the States to level the money by negotiations among themselves. This was Mr. HAMILTON's idea. The objections against it were, that either nothing would be done in the case, or the deficient States would be at the mercy of the hoarding States; although the former were, perhaps, prevented from doing their part by invasions, and the prosperity of the latter enabled them to absorb an undue proportion.

By Mr. MADISON it was proposed that Congress should declare, that whenever it should appear that the whole of the bills emitted prior to the eighteenth of March, 1780, shall have been collected into the treasuries of the several States, Congress would proceed to give such credit for any surplus above the quotas assigned as equity might require, and debit the deficient States accordingly. In favor of this expedient it was supposed that it would give a general encouragement to the States to draw the money outstanding among individuals into the public treasuries, and render a future equitable arrangement by Congress easy. The objections were, that it gave no satisfaction immediately to the complaining States, and would prolong the internal embarrassments which have hindered the States from a due compliance with the requisitions of Congress.

It was lastly proposed by Mr. FITZSIMMONS, that

the Commissioners appointed to traverse the United States, for the purpose of settling accounts, should be empowered to take up all the outstanding old money, and issue certificates to be apportioned on the States as part of the public debt; the same rule to determine the credit for redemptions by the States. This proposition was, on the whole, generally thought by the Committee least objectionable, and was referred to a sub-committee, composed of Mr. RUTLEDGE, Mr. FITZSIMMONS, and Mr. HAMILTON, to be matured and laid before the Grand Committee. One consideration suggested by Mr. HAMILTON in its favor was, that it would multiply the advocates for federal funds for discharging the public debts, and tend to cement the Union."

WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 27TH.

The report of the Committee on the letter from the Lieutenant Governor of Rhode Island (see November the twenty-fifth) was made, and taken into consideration.

It was moved by Mr. McKEAN, to insert in the first clause on the Journal, after directing the apprehension by General Washington, "in order that the persons may be brought to trial." The reason urged for the motion was, that it might appear that the interposition was not meant to supersede civil process further than the necessity of the case required. Against the motion it was urged, that it would lead to discussions extremely perplexing and dilatory, and that it would be more proper after the appreVOL. I.-14

hension should have taken place. lost, six States only being for it.

The motion was

(See page 281.)

With respect to the main question, it was agreed on all sides, that it was indispensable to the safety of the United States that a traitorous intercourse between the inhabitants of Vermont and the enemy should be suppressed. There were, however, two modes proposed for the purpose, viz: the direct and immediate interposition of the military force, according to the report; and, secondly, a reference in the first instance to the acting authority in Vermont, to be followed, in case of refusal or neglect of justice on the offenders, by an exertion of compulsive measures against the whole body.

In favor of the first mode it was said, that it would be the only effectual one, and the only one consistent with the part Congress had observed with regard to Vermont; since a reference to the authority of Vermont, which had itself been suspected and accused, would certainly be followed at the best by a mere mock trial; and would, moreover, be a stronger recognition of its independence than Congress had made or meant to make.

In favor of the second mode it was alleged, that the body of the people in Vermont were well attached to the Revolution; that a sudden march of military force into the country might alarm them; that if their rulers abetted the traitors, it would disgrace them in the eyes of their own people, and that Congress would be justified in that event to "split Vermont up among the other States." This expression, as well as the arguments on this side, in general, came from Mr. HOWELL, of Rhode Island, whose

object was to render the proceedings of Congress as favorable as possible to the independence of Vermont.

In order to compromise the matter, Mr. ARNOLD moved that the Commander-in-Chief should be directed to make a previous communication of his intentions, and the evidence on which they were founded, to the persons exercising authority within the district in question.

It was suggested by Mr. MADISON, as a better expedient, that he should be authorized to make the communication, if he should deem it conducive to the more certain apprehension of the suspected per

sons.

The Delegates from New York said, they would agree, that after the apprehension should have been effected, the Commander might give notice thereof to the persons exercising authority in Vermont.

It was finally compromised as it stands on the Journal.

In the course of the debate, Mr. CLARK informed Congress, that the Delegates of New Jersey could not vote for any act which might oppose force to the authority of Vermont, the Legislature of that State having so construed the resolutions of the seventh and twentieth of August as to be incompatible therewith, and accordingly instructed their Delegates.

The communication directed to the States on this occasion, through the Commander-in-Chief, was objected to by several members as an improper innovation. The object of it was to prevent the risk of discovery, if sent before the plans which might be

« ZurückWeiter »