| 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 --WEDNESDAY, MAY 4, 1785.
Congress assembled. Present as before.
On the report of a committee, consisting of Mr. [William Samuel] Johnson, Mr. [David] Howell and Mr. [William] Grayson, to whom was referred a letter of the 14th March, 1785, from the widow of the late Brigadier General David Wooster,
Resolved, That it be earnestly recommended to the State of Connecticut, to settle with and pay the widow of the late Brigadier General D. Wooster, the seven years half-pay of a Brigadier General, agreeably to the resolution of February 28th, 1785; the amount whereof they are authorized to charge to the United States.1
[Note 1: 1 This report, in the writing of David Howell, is in the Papers of the Continental Congress, No. 19, VI, folio 597. The word lined out is so in the report but not in the Journal.]
On a report of the Board of Treasury, to whom was referred a Letter from the Secretary at Wax of the 29th April last,
Report
That from an estimate of the War Office it appears that the amount of the monthly pay due to the Officers and men now in the actual service of the United States amounts to four thousand two hundred and sixty dollars and seventy five ninetieth parts of a dollar,
That since their inlistment they have only received one month's pay, agreeably to the Resolve of Congress of the 3d June 1784, and that the said troops will be upwards of nine months in service before they can be relieved by the new levies;
From this state of facts the Board submit to the consideration of Congress the following resolves--
Page 335 | Page image
Resolved, (by nine States)That the Secretary at War issue his warrant for two months' pay for the Officers and Soldiers in the actual service of the United States.
That the arrearages due to the said Officers and Soldiers, shall be paid out of the monies appropriated by the resolve of Congress of the 28th April, 1784, for the Military Department.1
[Note 1: 1 The report, signed by Samuel Osgood and Walter Livingston, and dated May 3, is in the Papers of the Continental Congress, No. 139, folio 17. It is indorsed as having been read May 4 and passed.]
Congress resumed the consideration of the Ordinance for ascertaining the mode of disposing of Lands in the Western Territory.
A motion was made by Mr. [James] McHenry, seconded by Mr. [James] Monroe, to strike out the following words in the twelfth section of the ordinance [respecting the sale of lands] viz. "or he may sell any Township by sections, provided he sells them in the order of their number on the plat, and not otherwise; and that he does not offer a second township for sale by sections till the whole of the former is sold," and in their place to insert, "In the following manner, viz., the alternate Townships or fractional parts of Townships in each range shall be sold entire, beginning to sell No. 1, in the first range entire, but No. 2, in the second range shall be sold entire, and thus onwards, No. 1, on the Ohio, in the alternate ranges, being sold entire. The other Townships and fractional parts of Townships shall be sold in sections of one mile square, or the fractional parts of a section as the case may require so that one half of the Territory may be sold in Townships or fractional parts, the other half in sections."2
[Note 2: 2 This motion, in the writing of Hugh Williamson, is in the Papers of the Continental Congress, No. 36, III, folio 11. The words lined out so appear in the motion but not in the Journal and the words within brackets were added by Thomson.]
A motion was made by Mr. [David] Howell, seconded by Mr. [William Samuel] Johnson, to postpone that motion, to
Page 336 | Page image
insert in lieu of the words moved to be stricken out, the following, "That all the fractional parts of Townships be sold by sections, to be taken indiscriminately; that the first and last sections not reserved in the numerical order of the sections of every whole integral Township, be exposed to sale by sections, and after they are sold, the next succeeding sections in the numerical order upwards and downwards be exposed to sale. And that any seven sections contiguous in numerical order may be exposed to sale, and after sale thereof, any section contiguous adjoining each of said number either end of said seven sections may be exposed to sale, and others adjoining in numerical order upwards and downwards; provided that any purchaser may have a Township sold exposed to sale in preference to any sale thereof by sections, in case he will offer the stipulated sum of one dollar per acre."1
[Note 1: 1 This motion, in the writing of David Howell, is in the Papers of the Continental Congress, No. 36, III, folio 13. The words lined out so appear in the motion, but not in the Journal.]
And on the question to postpone for the purpose above-mentioned, the yeas and nays being required by Mr. [David] Howell,
{table}
Page 337 | Page image
So the question was lost.
A motion was then made by Mr. [Rufus] King, seconded by Mr. [Samuel] Holten, to postpone the motion of Mr. [James] McHenry, to take up the following: In lieu of the words moved to be struck out by Mr. [James] McHenry, to insert these, "or he may sell one-third of the Townships or fractional parts of Townships, by sections or fractional parts of sections, where the same may happen from the reasons aforesaid; beginning with the Township or fractional part of a Township in every range lying upon the river Ohio, and then taking the third Township in the same range, and so northwardly in arithmetical progression."1
[Note 1: 1 This motion, in the writing of Rufus King, is in the Papers of the Continental Congress, No. 36, III, folio 15.]
A motion was made by Mr. [Charles] Pinckney, seconded by Mr. [James] Monroe, to amend the motion of Mr. [Rufus] King, by striking out the word "third," in both places in the motion, and in lieu thereof inserting the word "half" and the word "second," so that it read, "or he may sell one half of the Townships or fractional parts of Townships by sections, or fractional parts of sections, where the same may happen from the reasons aforesaid; beginning with the Township or fractional part of a Township in every range lying upon the river Ohio, and then taking the second Township in the same range, and so northwardly in arithmetical progression."
And on the question to agree to this amendment, the yeas and nays being required by Mr. [Charles] Pinckney,
Page 338 | Page image
{table}
So the question was lost.
On the question to agree to the motion of Mr. [Rufus] King, the yeas and nays being required by Mr. [Abiel] Foster,
{table}
So the question was lost.
Page 339 | Page image
When the question was about to be put, on the motion of Mr. [James] McHenry, the same was postponed till tomorrow, in right of the state of New Hampshire.1
[Note 1: 1 On this day, as the indorsement states, was read a letter of April 22 from L. de Neufville respecting recovery of debts due John de Neufville & Son and asking for the return of the papers in the case. Thomson has endorsed the letter: "A verbal order by Congress to return the papers". May 9, 1785 L. de Neufville Son receipts for the papers. The letter is in No. 78, XVII, folio 171.]
PREVIOUS SECTION .. NEXT SECTION .. NAVIGATOR
| PREVIOUS | NEXT | NEW SEARCH |