| 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 --THURSDAY, MARCH 24, 1785.
Congress assembled. Present, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina and South Carolina; and from the state of Pennsylvania, Mr. [Joseph] Gardner, and from Georgia, Mr. [William] Houstoun.
A letter of 17th, from H. Knox, esq. was read, accepting the office of Secretary at War.2
[Note 2: 2 This letter, dated March 17 and addressed to Charles Thomson, is in the Papers of the Continental Congress, No. 78, XIII, folio 591.]
On motion of Mr. [Hugh] Williamson, seconded by Mr. [John] Sitgreaves,
Ordered, That the Secretary of Congress inform the Commissioners who are appointed to negotiate a peace with the Southern Indians, that it is the pleasure of Congress that
Page 196 | Page image
they meet at Charleston, South Carolina, on the 16 day of May, and there fix on the tune and place for holding a treaty or treaties with the Southern Indians, take the proper steps for giving due notice thereof to the several Nations or tribes concerned and make the necessary preparations for executing the further duties of the Commission, with all possible and convenient dispatch.1
[Note 1: 1 This motion, in the writing of Hugh Williamson, is in the Papers of the Continental Congress, No. 36, II, folio 537. See ante, March 22 and post, June 15.
On this day, according to the indorsements and Committee Book No. 190, the report on the memorial of John Halsted for a settlement of his accounts which was read in Congress, April 22, 1784, was referred to Mr. [William] Ellery, Mr. [John] Bull and Mr. [Samuel] Holten, together with another memorial from Halsted, dated March 23, 1785, The committee reported March 28]
The committee consisting of [Mr. William Ellery, Mr. Joseph Gardner and Mr. Hugh Williamson] to whom was referred the memorial of several Officer of the late Corps of Artificers praying that in settling their Accounts they be allowed the Commutation of half pay as founded on Justice or on the Acts of Congress, beg leave to Report
That the Claims of those Officers does not appear to be founded on the usage of Nations nor in Equity. They believe that half pay has been allowed to Military Officers partly from a regard to the hardships and personal dangers to which they were exposed, but chiefly from a consideration that by a long continuance in the Military line, they may have lost those habits by which they formerly had been enabled to provide for themselves or families which reasons does not apply so fully to the Officers of Artificers.
Your Comtee. are of opinion that their sole rule on this occasion must be the Acts of Congress respecting the Officers in the Corps of Artificers, and they do not find any Resolution by which they are entitled to half pay or Commutation, on the contrary they seem to be expressly cut off from any such Claim.
The Original Act of Congress of May 15, 1778, by which half pay was promised for 7 years; confines the same to Military Officers which certainly did not include the Artificers and your Comtee. are of opinion that all subsequent Acts which relate to half pay, the same denomination of Officers must be intended, unless in cases where other Officers are expressly mentioned. Surely the Act of October 2, 1780, promising half pay to Officers who might be deranged, never could be construed as giving half pay to any Class of Officers who had no Claim to
Page 197 | Page image
half pay had they continued in service to the end of the War. If any doubts could have arisen "Whether the Artificers were intended in the promise of half pay it must be fully removed by the Act of the 16th. November, 1779, it was there Resolved--That it be recommended to the several States, to allow the Corps of Artificers established by Congress the 12 Inst., all the benefits provided for Officers and Soldiers in the line of their quotas of the Continental Battalions except the half pay." After this pointed and express exclusion of those Officers from the allowance of half pay your Committee are of opinion that nothing but a subsequent promise equally pointed and express can give them a title to the same--none such has been made, Wherefore they submit the following Resolve--
That the Officers of the late Corps of Artificers in the service of the United States are not entitled to half pay or the Commutation for half pay.1
[Note 1: 1 This report, in the writing of a clerk and marked "Copy", is in the Papers of the Continental Congress, No. 62, folio 63. It is indorsed as the report on half pay and commutation to Artificers and "On Memorial of Joseph King, John Jordan & Wiley &ca." According to Committee Book No. 191, it was submitted this day. See ante, March 8 and 11, and post, October 19.]
The Committee [Mr. Rufus King, Mr. William Samuel Johnson and Mr. Arthur St. Clair] to whom was referred the memorial of Turnbull, Marmie & Co., alledging themselves proprietors of the land on which Fort Pitt is erected, and praying that possession thereof may be delivered to them by the United States, submit the following resolution:
Resolved, That the prayer of the memorial of Turnbull, Marmie & Co. cannot be granted, it being necessary under present circumstances that the Post of Fort Pitt should remain in the possession of the troops of the United States.2
[Note 2: 2 This report, in the writing of Rufus King, is in the Papers of the Continental Congress, No. 19, VI, folio 107. The indorsement shows that it was read on this day.
On this day, according to Committee Book No. 190, Mr. [Rufus] King, Mr. J[ohn] Henry and Mr. [David] Howell were appointed to examine Benjamin Davison on the plot to forge army pay settlement certificates. They reported March 28.
Also, according to Committee Book No. 190, the report on Captain Harding's claim was referred to Mr. [William] Grayson, Mr. [William Samuel] Johnson and Mr. [William] Ellery, who reported April 4.]
Congress resumed the consideration of the paragraph in the report of the committee on the letter of 5 February, from
Page 198 | Page image
Baron Steuben, which was yesterday under debate, and a motion was made by Mr. [Lambert] Cadwallader, seconded by Mr. [Charles] Pinckney, after the words "sum of," to add, "twenty five thousand dollars:"
And on the question to agree to this, the yeas and nays being required by Mr. [William] Ellery and Mr. [Charles] Pinckney,
{table}
So the question was lost.
Ordered, That the further consideration of the report be postponed till Monday next.1
[Note 1: 1 See post, July 7.
On this day, as the indorsement states, was read a letter of March 14 from W. Greene, Governor of Rhode Island, announcing the passage by the assembly of that state of an act to raise revenue and another impowering congress to regulate foreign trade. It is in the Papers of the Continental Congress, No. 64, folio 544.
Also, a letter of March 17 from Joseph Greene forwarding application of Thomas Hickling for appointment as consul to the Azores. It is in No. 78, X, folio 487.
Also, a letter of March 24 from Adam Hoops requesting appointment as surveyor in one of the new states. It is in No. 78, XII, folio 391, and was filed.]
Adjourned to Monday next, ten o'Clock.
PREVIOUS SECTION .. NEXT SECTION .. NAVIGATOR
| PREVIOUS | NEXT | NEW SEARCH |