PREVIOUS NEXT NEW SEARCH

A Century of Lawmaking for a New Nation: U.S. Congressional Documents and Debates, 1774-1875

Journals of the Continental Congress --MONDAY, DECEMBER 22, 1783

Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774-1789 PREVIOUS SECTION .. NEXT SECTION .. NAVIGATOR

Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774-1789
MONDAY, DECEMBER 22, 1783

Link to date-related documents.

Congress assembled: Present, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Pensylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia and North Carolina; and from the State of New Hampshire, Mr. [Abiel] Foster, and from the State of South Carolina; Mr. [Jacob] Read.2

[Note 2: 2 From this point the proceedings for December 22 were also entered in the manuscript Secret (Domestic) Journal.]

On the report of a committee consisting of Mr. [Thomas] Jefferson, Mr. [Elbridge] Gerry and Mr. [James] McHenry,

Page 820 | Page image

appointed to make the necessary arrangements for the public audience of GenerM Washington,

Resolved, That the order for the public audience of General Washington be as follows:

When the General rises to make his address, and also when he retires, he is to bow to Congress, which they are to return by uncovering without bowing.1

[Note 1: 1 This report, in the writing of Elbridge Gerry, the words in brackets being in the writing of Elias Boudinot, is in the Papers of the Continental Congress, No. 19, VI, folio 457.]

Page 821 | Page image

The Committee consisting of Mr. [Thomas] Jefferson, Mr. [Elbridge] Gerry, and Mr. [Hugh] Williamson to whom were referred the letters of the Ministers for the U.S. in Europe have agreed to the following Report:

They find that instructions bearing date the 29 of October, 1783, were sent to the Ministers Plenipotentiary of the U.S. of America at the Court of Versailles empowered to negotiate a peace, or to any one or more of them for concerting draughts or propositions for treaties of amity and commerce with the commercial powers of Europe; but that their powers will not extend to the actual signature of any such treaty, nor to negotiate with any State or power out of Europe.

They do not find that any commission consonant with these instructions has been issued to the said Ministers.

They are of opinion it will be advantageous to these United States to conclude such treaties with Russia Germany, the court of Vienna, Prussia, Denmark, The Elector of Saxony, Postponed from[ Hamburg, Great Britain, Spain, Portugal, Genoa, Tuscany, [Rome, Naples, Venice, Sardinia and the Ottoman Porte, for its possessions in Euripe, Asia and Africa.

That in the formation of these Treaties the following points be carefully stipulated:

That treaties of amity or of amity and commerce be entered into with Morocco, and the other states on the coast of Barbary Regencies of Algiers, Tunis and Tripoli [to continue for the same term of 10 years, or for a term as much longer as can be procured.]2

[Note 2: 2 The words in brackets axe in the writing of Thomas Jefferson.]

That our Ministers to be commissioned for treating with foreign nations, make known to the Emperor of Morocco the great satisfaction which Congress feel from the amicable disposition he has shewn towards these States and his readiness to enter into alliance with them; that the occupations of the war and distance of our situation have prevented our meeting his friendship so early as we wished; but that powers are now delegated to them for entering into treaty with him, in the execution of which they are ready to proceed, and that as to the expences of his Minister they do therein what is for the honor and interest of the United States, and conformable to the practice of other nations.

That a Commission be issued to Mr Adams, Mr Franklin, and Mr: Jay Mr Jefferson giving powers to them, or the greater part of them to make and receive propositions for such treaties of amity

Page 825 | Page image

and commerce, and to negotiate and sign the same, transmitting them to Congress for their final ratification, and that such Commission be in force for a term not exceeding two years.

That the said ministers be instructed to notify to the powers with whom they may negotiate the great value at which these states will esteem their friendship and connection and that it will be their constant endeavour to promote a good understanding and harmony with them and to prevent everything which might interrupt it by every means in their power, but that the heavy debt which they have contracted during the late war and the state of desolation and depopulation in which every part of these states were left by it have rendered it inconvenient at present for them to keep ministers resident at the courts of Europe, and they hope that this deviation from the practice of friendly nations may be ascribed to its true cause and not to any want of respect to their friends or of attachment to treaties, to the faithful observance of which they shall at all times pay the most earnest attention.

That consuls be appointed for the ports ofand consuls general be established at

[That the said Ministers be instructed in their negociations with the foreign to Court urge with perseverance the necessity of a reasonable forbearance in the levy of debts due within these states to British subjects, the establishment of the idea of these states that all demands for interest accruing during the war would be highly inequitable and unjust; and the expediency of settling this by precise stipulation in order to avoid these mutual complaints and alterations which may disturb the harmony of the two nations.

(That the said Ministers to be Commissioned for treating with foreign nations be referred to the instructions of the thirtieth day of May 1783, relative to British debts, the objects of which they are hereby directed to urge with perseverance.)

That they require with firmness and decision full satisfaction for all slaves and other property belonging to citizens of these States taken and carried away in violation of the preliminary and definitive articles of peace; and to enable them to do this on precise grounds Congress will furnish them with necessary facts and documents.]1

[Note 1: 1 The words in brackets are in the writing of Thomas Jefferson, except the paragraph in parentheses, which is in the writing of Jacob Read.]

That Doctor Franklin be desired to notify to the Apostolical Nuncio at Versailles, that Congress will always be pleased to testify their respect to his Sovereign and State, but that the subject of his

Page 826 | Page image

application to Doctor Franklin being purely spiritual it is without the jurisdiction and powers of Congress, who have no authority to permit or refuse it, these powers being reserved to the several States individually.

That Doctor Franklin be instructed to express to the Court of France, the constant desire of Congress to meet their wishes. That these States are about to form a general system of commerce by treaties with other nations and by internal requlations; that at this time we cannot foresee what claims might be given to those nations by the explanatory propositions from the Count do Vergennes on the 2 and 3 articles of our treaty of amity and commerce with his M. C. M. but that he may be assured it will be our constant care to place no people on more advantageous ground than the subjects of his Majesty.

That the papers containing the claims of the five Forsters, brothers, for the prize of their vessel the Three Friends, made by Captain Landais of the Alliance Frigate, which papers were communicated by the Count de Vergennes to Dr Franklin to the end he might apply to Congress for an indemnification of the said Forsters, be remitted to the said Ministers with a copy of the fourth clause of the instructions to them of Oct. 29, 1783; and the following extract from Dr Franklins letters of July 22, 1783, to the Secretary for foreign affairs, viz. "Mr Barclay has in his hands the affair of the Alliance and Bon homme Richard. I will afford him all the assistance in my power; but it is a very perplexed business. That expedition, though for particular reasons under American commissions and colours, was carried on at the King's expence and under his orders. Mr do Chaumont was the agent appointed by the Minister of the Marine to make the outfit. He was also chosen by all the Captains of the Squadron, as appears by an instrument under their hands, to be their agent, receive, sell and divide prizes &c. The Crown bought two of them at public sale, and the money I understand is lodged in the hands of a responsible person at L'Orient. Mr de Chaumont says he has given in his accounts to the Marine, and that he has no more to do with the affair except to receive a balance due to him. That account however is I believe unsettled, and the absence of some of the Captains is said to make another difficulty, which retards the completion of the business. I never paid nor received any thing relating to that expedition nor had any other concern in it than barely ordering the Alliance to join the squadron at M. de Sartine's request." From which extract

Page 827 | Page image

there is reason to believe the United States of America had no concern in the expedition; but that it was carried on wholly under the authority and for the advantage of his Most Christian Majesty; that if this fact should not be so apparent as to give full satisfaction to his Majesty's Ministers, they then take such measures as in their discretion shall be thought most conducive to an amicable and equitable adjustment thereof on the best evidence they shall be able to procure.

That the claim of the Sr. Bayard against these United States for the sum of 255,236 dollars continental money is not founded in justice in the opinion of your committee from the circumstances of the case as stated by himself, which are that a vessel and cargo in which he was interested, sailing in May, 1779, from Charlestown for France was taken by an English armed vessel and retaken by an American frigate called the Boston; that she was carried to Boston and there sold as French property by Mr. De Valnais, Consul for France at that port; that he unfaithfully and irregularly as is suggested endeavoured to have the whole adjudged to the recaptors; but that the sentence was, that they were only entitled to one eighth, and the Sr. Bayard's correspondents obliged Mr. de Valnais to deposit with the consul of France in Philadelphia 255,236 dollars continental money in part of the proceeds with a reserve to the Sieur Bayard against Mr. de Valnais of every right of redress for his irregular conduct; that no injurious intermeddling by the U.S. or any of them or by any of their citizens is here complained of; that the money was constantly in the hands of the Sieur Bayard's correspondents, or of the consul for his nation; that he may indeed have suffered by its depreciation as many others have suffered, both foreigners and citizens, but the latter in an infinite proportion to a much higher degree than the former; that this depreciation was not effected by any arbitrary change by Congress in the value or denomination of the money (which yet has been frequently practised by European States, who never have thought themselves bound to make good the losses thereby incurred, either by their own citizens or by foreigners), but ensued against the will and the unremitting endeavors of Congress; that in this case too it might have been lessened if not prevented by investing the money immediately in gold and silver or in other commodities. Your Committee, therefore, are of opinion that these States are not bound to make good the loss by depreciation, and that the doing it would bring on an infinitude of other cases, with endless investigations and unfairness, and would require greater funds than we are prepared with.

Page 828 | Page image

That as to the residue of the claims of the Sieur Bayard, if founded in truth and right they lie only against the State of Georgia, to the governor whereof it will be proper for Congress to transmit copies of the papers expressing our confidence that that State will cause to be done in it what justice and the respect due between friendly nations require, and that the Sieur Bayard be referred to them.

That the friendly services rendered by the Sieur John Baptist Pequet, agent for the French Nation at Lisbon, to great numbers of American sailors carried prisoners into that port during the late war, and his sufferings on that account, merit the sincere acknowledgements of Congress; and that it be referred to the said Ministers to deliver him these in honorable terms and to make him such gratification as may indemnify his losses and properly reward his zeal.1

[Note 1: 1 This report, in the writing of Charles Thomson, except as indicated, is in the Papers of the Continental Congress, No. 25, II, folios 347--354. The indorsement states that it was delivered December 20; read December 22; recommitted January 22, 1784; reported again March 4, 1784, and "Monday next assigned for consideration. No copies to be made out. Secret. Reported 14 April, 1784. Order for Thursday 15." According to the record in Committee Book No. 186, the report of March 4 was recommitted April 12, Mr. [Richard Dobbs] Spaight and Mr. [Ephraim] Paine being added to the committee.]

The Superintendent of Finance to whom was referred an extract from the Journals of the General Assembly of Pennsylvania, Begs leave to report,

That the said extract consists of two parts, the former whereof contains certain matters reported by a Committee of that honorable House in consequence of a Conference held with the Commissioner for settling the accounts of the said State, the which matters are reported by the Committee and appear to have been considered by the house as facts. The latter part contains reasonings upon the former and resolutions in consequence thereof. Pursuing therefore the same line the Superintendant of Finance must take leave to observe:

That the former part of the said extract imphes an inattention on his part to the orders of the United States in Congress, and an assumption of powers not delegated. He humbly prays to submit both of these charges to the Wisdom and Equity of Congress, who have long since had before them all the instructions given to the Commissioners for settling accounts, together with a report on the reference mentioned in the Extract, wherefore it is to be presumed that if undue negligence or the arrogating of power had appeared it would not have passed unnoticed.

Page 829 | Page image

It is further to be observed that the doubts stated by the said Commissioner, and the difficul.ties under which he is supposed to labor must have chiefly originated in circumstances peculiar to himself, because that such doubts and difficulties have not occurred to the Commissioners employed in other States, and because they would easily have been obviated by a careful consideration of the acts and instructions in his possession, excepting only in one point viz. "Whether charges for Building, Fences, wood &c--damaged or destroyed by Continental Troops or militia are to be allowed." This question (which can only be resolved by special act of Congress) is not to be found among twelve questions proposed by the Commissioner to Congress; but among nine proposed to the Superintendant of Finance--It is stated in the said extract "that by the Instructions from the Office of Finance to the said Commissioner he is enjoined a strict attention to the Resolve of Congress of the twenty third of August, 1780, touching all certificates generally; that this Resolve introduces an entire new method of granting certificates; that to require those new forms in certificates granted before they were instituted is requiring an impossibility or (in other words) "is a refusal to liquidate any certificates given before the 23rd. of August 1780." Were this the case, doubtless there would be sufficient cause of complaint, and sharp animadversion; but the acts and instructions, all of which are in possession of Congress, will shew the State of Facts to be as follows: The act of Congress of the twentieth of February, 1782, speaking of the Commissioner contains the following words: "That he be also fully empowered and directed to liquidate and settle, in specie value, all certificates given for supplies by public Officers to Individuals, and other claims against the United States by Individuals for supplies furnished the army, the transportation thereof and contingent expences thereon within the said State, according to the principles of equity and good conscience, in all cases, which are not or shall not be provided for by Congress." Under this Act of Congress, the Comptroller of the Treasury issued certain instructions, which were approved of by the Superintendant of Finance, thereby directing each of the several Commissioners "to open an account with the principal of each Department for the time being, and with every person who is properly accountable for articles purchased by, or delivered to him. In which they must be charged respectively with all such articles, and for which they are to account with the Commissioners appointed or to be appointed to adjust the accounts of these Departments respectively." The Superintendant of Finance

Page 830 | Page image

in a letter to the Commissioners of the seventh of September, 1782, after referring to the Comptroller's instructions calls their attention to two particulars, the former whereof is not material to the present point and the latter is as follows: "In settling the accounts with Individuals you will consider, that artful men have frequently taken advantage of the public, and that (in many instances) public offices have taken advantage of the weak and unprotected. You will therefore always remember, that it is your duty to do justice." The two commissioners who were first appointed, after considering the Acts of Congress, and the several instructions given to them proposed (among others) the following question "Whether certificates given to Individuals are to be taken as they stand, and new ones given for their amount; or whether they are to be reexamined and new prices affixed to the articles, when they have been over or under charged." The Superintendant and Comptroller entered into a consultation together, and the following answer was returned: "Certificates given by Quarter Masters or Commissaries to Individuals must be re-examined, the articles shewn, and their value determined, that the Receiver of them may be charged and made accountable to the Commissioners appointed for the respective Departments. See Resolutions of Congress of the 23rd of August 1780 relating to them, which must be strictly attended to." This question and answer is regularly transmitted by the Comptroller to all the Commissioners appointed to adjust the accounts between the individual States and the Union. The Commissioner for the State of Pennsylvania had therefore the matters above recited in his possession, when he proposed to Congress the following questions. "Are certificates or receipts given by Quarter Masters, Commissaries, their Deputies, Assistants, Agents, or other public officers for supplies furnished before the 15th of September, 1780, to be taken as they stand, and new ones given for their amount estimated in Specie? Are Certificates issued agreeable to the mode prescribed by Resolution of Congress 23rd August to be taken up and new ones given?" These questions were (among others) referred to the Superintendant of Finance, who thereupon informed the Commissioner, that the answer thereto was in the act of Congress, the latter from the Superintendant, and the question and answer above quoted. Surely there is nothing in either which requires the forms prescribed by the Act of the 23rd of August, 1780, in certificates granted before they were instituted. The Commissioner is indeed referred to that Act, and directed to pay attention to it. But the evident construction of

Page 831 | Page image

this order limits it to certificates issued under the Act, and even if that were not the case, yet when the whole of the Instructions (or rather the answers) which are complained of is taken together, there cannot be the shadow of a doubt. For among the Commissioners questions to the Superintendant is the following--" How are claims for supplies furnished or services performed by an individual who is destitute of a certificate or any kind of voucher, having only a bare charge against the United States for the same, to be settled? Will the oath or affirmation of the Claimant make the charge good?" And he shortly after asked the Congress "How are claims for supplies furnished for public use by an Individual, who is destitute of a proper voucher, to be authenticated?" To both these queries the answer given by the Superintend ant (and which forms part of the instructions complained of) is as follows: "They relate to the same point viz. what evidence shall establish claims. It appears that the articles passed in favor of the Claimant, must charge some other person, and that public notice is to be given of the times and places of settlement, that both parties may attend. Under these circumstances if the demand is grounded on Principles of Equity, and the evidence produced satisfies the Conscience of the Commissioner he is bound to pass it, by the act of Congress." Now it must be remembered that the Commissioner is (by the act under which he was appointed) empowered and directed to liquidate &c. according to the principles of equity and good conscience, in all cases which are not or shall not be provided for by Congress. The answers therefore given by the Superintendant to his questions, are no more than applications of the act to the doubts which he had suggested. It is more than probable that if the Honorable Assembly of Pennsylvania had communicated with the Superintendant on this subject, they would not have assumed the same ground of reasoning which they appear to have done.

It is alledged in the said extract "That certificates given for personal services, wages, or hire are rejected." In answer to which it can only be said, that if the Claimants are officers or persons acting in any of the Departments the certificates ought to be rejected by the Commissioner for the State, because such accounts are to be liquidated by the Commissioners for the Departments respectively; but if other claims have been rejected by the Commissioner, he must have been under the influence of some misapprehension.

As the Honorable Assembly have (through their Delegates) proposed certain Resolutions, it will be proper to examine the reasoning

Page 832 | Page image

which led to that proposition, and first it is alledged that "if an exact account is really wanted, of the Specific articles for which any certificates were given, it may be found in the receipts given by the party, at the time of getting his certificates, and (that) these receipts are in the power of the public, being lodged with the heads of the different Departments." Surely such an assertion is somewhat hazarded. Congress have before them full evidence that many persons late officers in the Civil Departments refuse to account at all. If therefore such persons should even possess the supposed receipts, still those receipts are not in the Power of the Public, nor will they be so until all the States have passed laws similar to those of the State of Pennsylvania. But further it will (on enquiry) appear that when Individuals received certificates from public officers, the receipts they gave do not always contain a list of the articles or account of the services which had been rendered. Certainly, where any fraud was designed, a specification of articles was of course avoided, and in many cases it has been neglected, even where nothing wrong was intended. The idea, therefore, that the specific articles are contained in the receipts, is as unfounded as that those receipts are in the power of the Public. But supposing the facts were such as they are assumed to be, will it follow that the officers have in no instance been guilty of collusion with individuals, and given more than they were worth both for articles and services? And will it not appear an exact account of the specific articles is really wanted and indeed absolutely necessary for the detection of such abuses? Or if it be supposed, that all the inhabitants of Pennsylvania were so honest, and so disinterested, as neither to partake in fraud, nor take advantage of negligence, must it also be presumed that the public officers acting within that State have in no cases whatever, seized the property of Individuals and given certificates for less than the value? Or if it be imagined, that the officers and the individuals have been all alike innocent, and that the clamors raised on these subjects are totally groundless as to Pennsylvania will it follow that such things have not happened in any other State? Or will it be proper to establish different rules for the settlement of public accounts under the idea of honesty in one State and the want of it in another? It is however assumed as a position that "any frauds that have been committed cannot be detected in any other place, so well as by the Commissioners who settle the general accounts, at the Heads of Departments." But surely it is necessary not only to the detection of frauds, but even to the settlement of accounts at all, that the Commissioners acting in the several States

Page 833 | Page image

obtain accounts of the articles before they pass the sums. If for instance the public officer should by collusion with the party make a charge of double the sum actually due for any articles can a deduction be made after the sum hath been passed to the Individual by the State Commissioners? If the officer should omit to charge himself with articles purchased, can this be proved when only the money certificate is produced against him? If the officer paid by a certificate, the nominal sum for articles purchased a year before, will this appear in such manner as to prevent him from taking all the benefit of the depreciation? If for instance he purchased to the amount of two hundred thousand dollars, when money was at two for one, paid in certificates when it was at four for one, and carried the articles to account at a reasonable specie value, viz, one hundred thousand dollars, and if the certificates be now liquidated at their value, viz. fifty thousand dollars, would he not be gainer of the like sum of fifty thousand dollars, merely by the depreciation?. It is also asserted "that the holders of certificates are subjected to many inconveniences from this Delay, and that after coming from the remote parts of the State, and having a liquidation of their certificates refused, they depart with murmurs and discontent." If holders of certificates come from remote parts of the State, and the act of Congress of the 20th of February, 1782, intended to afford relief becomes (thereby) a source of distress, it must arise either from ignorance in the people themselves, or from a want of attention in the Commissioner, for by the act it is ordained "That the Commissioners respectively give public and early notice of the Times and Places of their settling and the Districts within which they settle accounts, that as well the public officers as the private individuals may have an opportunity to attend." From the whole scope and tenor of the act, as well as from the express words of this particular part, it appears clearly to have been the intention of Congress, that the Commissioner should mark out convenient Districts in the State, take some proper position in each District, and there give such early public notice of the place and the District as that claims arising from transactions within that District might be brought in and adjusted, and both the public officer and the private individual concerned in the transaction have an opportunity of attending.

As the honorable assembly have marked out a different mode of settlement, than that which hath been adopted, it may be proper to take a general view of the present and of the proposed plan, so as to discover the inconveniences resulting from each, and thence determine which ought to be preferred. Under the present plan the

Page 834 | Page image

first step of the Commissioner is to mark out some particular spot with a convenient surrounding District, within which the parties may attend without the waste of time and the expense of long journies. The next is to give early public notice. Supposing then the time to have arrived which he had specified in his advertisement and a claimant to appear, the first question to be solved is whether that claimant be one of those, whose demands are to be adjusted by him, or whether it is the business of a Commissioner or one of the Departments. Supposing the former, the next object of inquiry would be whether any and what services or supplies were rendered by the claimant to the United States, and if any were rendered, then what was the real value at the time and place of rendering them. Every kind of evidence exhibited in support of each point is then to be examined, the officer who is said to have received the articles, is to be heard if he contest the claim and finally the Commissioner being in the vicinity of the place, with opportunity to learn both the acts done and the characters of the agents must decide according to equity and good conscience, where no express provision is made by an act of Congress. If this decision be in favor of the claimant, the business of the Commissioner is to give a certificate for the full value of the articles and services and then to charge the proper officer and Department (not with so much money) but with the specific articles and services, for the due application whereof account is to be rendered to the Commissioner of the Department. A duty of the State Commissioner in the course of this business will be to discover, and detect as much as possible, the frauds which have been committed and to transmit proper evidence as it may arise to the Commissioner of the Department. In cases however where the decision is against the claimant, it will be proper still to return to the Commissioner of the Department a state of the claim, that if it should be found to be credited to the public, in the accounts of such Department, the party may meet with redress at a future period. The inconveniences attending this mode are that possibly some just claims may be finally rejected from the want of sufficient proof, and that some honest claimants may be put to trouble and difficulty in supporting their claims. The proposed plan appears to be shortly this, that the Commissioner shall liquidate every certificate which may be tendered to him in specie value. If however the restriction implied in the extract by the words "that no delay be given to any certificate granted by an officer who has settled his public accounts &c." be made, viz. that the liquidation of such certificates be suspended until the accounts of the officer who gave them be settled, it is

Page 835 | Page image

humbly conceived that such liquidation can never take place. Because as the public have assured the debts of their officers, it is impossible to settle the accounts of those officers, until the amount of their debts be known. Those debts forming a charge against the officers in the same manner as the monies advanced to them from the public Treasury. The settlement of the officers' accounts must therefore ultimately depend on the settlements made with individuals, and therefore this restriction must be rejected or the whole plan prove abortive. The proposition of the honorable assembly may then be examined and considered as of the effect which is just now stated, and if that proposition be adopted the Commissioner sitting in one corner of a State and examining claims and certificates brought from two or three hundred miles distance, without the slightest attention to the value of articles for which money is claimed, will be exposed to every kind of imposition. Certificates will be counterfeited, pretended depositions will be produced, fabricated accounts will be delivered, vast sums will of course be acknowledged as due to whoever may please to demand them. The officers will (and very justly too) refuse to account for such sums. The frauds which they will detect in claims allowed by the State Commissioners, will cast a cloud even upon the just claims, and the Commissioners for the Departments will for that reason be unable to insist on any. Thus the officers will be empowered in their turn, to render such accounts as they think proper, so that on the whole the public debts will be greatly and unnecessarily accumulated, and a precedent will be established to sanctify every improper act, which may hereafter be committed in times of confusion. These are public inconveniences, and from a comparison of the two plans, one important question arises, shall the public property be given away, and the Country be taxed for the purpose of paying monies not justly due, or shall Individuals who have claims on the United States be obliged to validate such claims by sufficient evidence? Surely the honorable assembly of Pennsylvania will not cannot hesitate in deciding this question.

All which is humbly submitted.

Robt Morris.

Office of Finance, 5th Nov., 1783.1

[Note 1: 1 This report is in the Papers of the Continental Congress, No. 137, III, folio 255. According to the indorsement, and to the record in Committee Books No. 186 and No. 191, it was read and entered December 22, 1783, and on January 9, 1784, referred to Mr. [Richard Dobbs] Spaight, Mr. [Elbridge] Gerry and Mr. [Arthur] Lee. On February 13, Mr. [John] Beatty and Mr. [Roger] Sherman were added to this committee, and a report was delivered April 13.]

Page 836 | Page image

The Superintendant of Finance to whom was referred the Letter of Charles Stewart of the twenty-ninth [27] of October begs leave to report,

That the same Letter was upon the Reference thereof transmitted to the Commissioner for adjusting the Accounts of the Commissary's Department and that his answer was made on the fourth Instant, a copy whereof is now enclosed.

Office of Finance, 6th. Novr. 1783.1

[Note 1: 1 This report is in the Papers of the Continental Congress, No. 137, III, folio 267. According to the indorsement, it was entered and read this day. See ante, October 29, footnote, and post, April 15, 1784.
On this day, as the indorsement indicates, was read a letter of December 13 from Joseph Reed asking a testimonial of his conduct during the contest to carry with him to Europe. It is in No. 78, XIX, folio 459. As shown by the indorsement and by Committee Books No. 186 and No. 191, it was referred to Mr. [James] McHenry, Mr. [David] Howell and Mr. [Arthur] Lee; and on January 26, 1784, Mr. [James] Tilton was appointed in place of McHenry. The committee reported January 30, 1784.
Also, a letter of December 21 from General Washington, enclosing a list of officers who wish to be placed on the Peace Establishment; a letter, of September 3, from General Arthur St. Clair; a letter, of October 11, from General Nathanael Greene, and correspondence with General Anthony Wayne. It is in No. 152, XI, folio 533.]

PREVIOUS SECTION .. NEXT SECTION .. NAVIGATOR

PREVIOUS NEXT NEW SEARCH