pany. The commanders of those ships, are brave men and I dare say will not loose their ships through Cowardice." New Hampshire is at last represented; but the representation came too late. The Resolve, respecting half pay, had passed by a majority of one State only. If N. H. had been present, Congress would have been divided. It first passed for life; but the majority being as small as possible, agreed to a kind of coalition, and it was finally resolved that the military commissioned officers who should continue in the service to the end of the war should be entitled to half pay for seven years. The opposition which I think was justly made to the half pay establishment hath retarded the arrangement of the army so long that I am afraid it will not take place until next winter. It is proposed to reduce the battalions to 88 which will of course reduce the number of officers, and lessen the quantum of half pay. The Number of Battalions will continue to be reduced as vacancies of officers shall happen by death or resignation." The argument you draw from the confederation was urged against the establishment and every method taken to get it to the States, but N. H. was not represented and so the minority failed, or rather there was a majority against referring it to the States. Some consideration ought certainly to be made to the brave officers who should continue in the service to the end of the war, on account of depreciation and the hardship they have and may endure, and the risk they have and may run of health and life. Taken up in this light, perhaps three and half year's pay may not be too much. 315. HENRY LAURENS TO THE PRESIDENT OF SOUTH CAROLINA (RAWLINS LOWNDES).1 Dear Sir, 1st June 1778. My last to your Excellency of the 14th Ulto. went by Messenger Sharp.2 The Committee to whom your Excellency's Letters of the 13th and 18th April had been referred having made their Report to Congress the inclosed Act of the 29th Ulto. was thereupon produced to which I beg leave to refer. Congress are truly Sensible of the necessity of marking a limit to the Military in every State. be this as it may, from the tenor of a Resolve, in an Act which I am to transmit to Georgia there appears to me an opening for disputes between the Executive of a State and the officer commanding the Troops in such a State. even in cases where the Salvation of the State may be at hazard, a capricious, or a Sensible Officer, according to my interpretation may under sanction of this Resolve, withdraw every Troop from a State whenever he shall judge it proper to do so, notwithstanding a The proceedings of the courts-martial on Captains John Manley and Thomas Thompson were laid before Congress Aug. 5. See Paullin, Out-Letters, I. 238, 242, 252, 271, 280; also I. J. Greenwood, Captain John Manley. See the Journals, May 15, and no. 302, ante. 7 See nos. 288, 298, 299, 307, ante. 8 The reference is to the vote of May 13 (Journals, pp. 495-496). Cf. no. 202, ante. [315] S. C. Hist. Soc., Laurens Letter-Book, Mar.-Sept., 1778, p. 157. 2 The reference is to an official letter of May 14. See the private letter of May 17, no. 287, ante. former restriction.* at best it will encourage dispute. being restrained within my own Sphere of Duty when this was offered I could do no more than intimate in private my own feelings to one of my Colleagues and to the Member who had framed the Act. As these Gentlemen received no impressions from my remarks, I therefore doubt the force of them. nevertheless as I cannot divest my mind of its original Ideas on the subject, I take the liberty of submitting my opinion to your Excellency. The Resolve in general, concerns the whole Union and may particularly affect the State of South Carolina. I shall therefore subjoin a Copy for the information of Your Excellency and the Executive of the State.* . . . . A Commanding Officer as a little reflexion will shew, may shield himself in almost every Case by unanimity of voices in a Council of War and by means which have sometimes been practiced and which may again be adopted. Under this Resolution I conceive every Garrison may be stripped, if not of all, of the best Men by a Commander of Troops whenever he shall determine the propriety of a distant expedition. the want of access to a Military Chest may be some check, but if there be danger in the power adventitious Checks I humbly apprehend cannot safely be relied on for preventing the exercise. I acknowledge I have not time at this Instant for examining and comparing the former Resolve alluded to above,** as I remember the General or Commander cannot march out of our State more than 3d of the Troops without order of Congress or consent of the president. if this be all he can do now, why this new and general Resolve Your Excellency will judge and you will be pleased to receive this from me as a private and pardon me for making it the vehicle of the public Act first mentioned.. My dear Sir, 316. SAMUEL ADAMS TO JAMES WARREN.1 YORK TOWN, June 1, 1778. Congress has been pleasd to put me on the Marine Committee.2 I mention this to you, in hopes that I shall have the Pleasure of receiving your Letters the oftener on that Account, and particularly on the Subject of the Navy, which I will use my utmost Endeavours to build up.3 The The asterisk is in the original, and serves to designate the passage referred to near the end of the selection ("the former resolve alluded to above *"). See note 5, below. The omitted passage is the first of the resolves passed May 29 (Journals, pp. 553-554) upon the letters of Gov. John Houstoun of Georgia and Gen. Robert Howe. Houstoun's letter, dated Mar. 20, was read May 25. No letter of Howe is mentioned in connection with Houstoun's letter until the committee makes its report. Similarly, no letter of Howe is mentioned when the letters of Governor Lowndes and General Moultrie are referred to a committee (May 14), yet there is mention of such a letter or letters in connection with the committee's report (May 26, 29). Cf. nos. 287, 290, ante. See note 3, above. The restriction to which Laurens refers is contained in the resolve concerning the South Carolina battalions, June 18, 1776 (Journals, V. 462). Cf. no. 220, note 4, ante. [316] Mass. Hist. Soc., Warren MSS., vol. 3, p. 209; Warren-Adams Letters, II. 15. 2 May 27. 3 See no. 305, ante. 6 Committee have orderd a Letter to your Board by this Post. Capt. Burk is to have the Command of the Resistance which may be a Step to further Promotion hereafter. The french Gentleman who was fed with Promises at Boston and afterwards substantially relievd by you is highly esteemd by this Committee, and will be rewarded and employed, and Capt. Peck' is not unnoticed. The new Frigate at Salisbury, though before christened by another Name, has that of the Alliance given to her by the Committee. This Letter I intended to have finishd and forwarded by the Post, this Morning, (June 2) but was prevented. Capt. Barry who is to take the Command of the Raughley will deliver it to you. I am apprehensive for our Friend Mr. J. A. who if I mistake not had saild 7 Weeks when the last Vessel left Nantz. The Bearer is in Haste. Adieu. Dear Sir, 317. HENRY LAURENS TO JOHN RUTLEDGE.1 3d June 1778 We have before us in Congress a plan for extending Commissioners and friendly commercial Treaties at the Courts of Lisbon, Hague, Stockholm, Copenhagen and St. Petersburgh. two whole days the subject has been upon the Anvil and very laboriously hammered." I have had the presumption to wish myself on the floor once or twice, from an opinion that even the little commercial knowledge I am possessed of might have struck light. There is not a Merchant present, and not a Book in Town to assist a speculatist, but there's another obstacle to dispatch in this point, which as a Silent Spectator and auditor I can see pretty clearly and half understand a plurality of Officers partly established and further aimed at. 4 The letter, dated May 30, is in Paullin, Out-Letters of the Marine Committee, I. 250. One paragraph of that letter reads: It was certainly out of the Line of your Department to have the receiving and storeing of Capt [a]in Greens cargo of Clothing and Stores-that was the business of the Continental Agent, who in the delivery thereof should be governed by the Orders of Congress, the Board of War or the Committee of Congress agreeably to the enclosed Resolve of Congress dated the 28th Current which we send to prevent your taking unnecessary trouble in future." 5 Capt. William Bourke. See ibid., p. 251. In a postscript to a letter to John Bradford Apr. 28 (ibid., p. 232) the marine committee say, "Inclosed is a Resolve of Congress of this date appointing William Burke a Captain in the Navy". The postscript should no doubt have been dated May 1, as that is the date of the appointment as recorded in the Journals, and the correctness of the latter is indicated by the fact that the resolve was based on a memorial of Bourke dated Apr. 30. See, further, the Journals, June 19, Sept. 28; also Paullin, Out-Letters, I. 287-289, II. 2. Cf. no. 440, post. 6 Capt. Pierre Landais. See no. 314, ante, and nos. 317, 362, 366, post. 7 Capt. John Peck of Plymouth (see Warren-Adams Letters, II. 305). He had been recommended as a skilled designer of vessels. See Paullin, Out-Letters, I. 253, 272, 279, II. 54, 84. 8 See the Journals, May 29; also no. 440, post. In the letter of May 30 referred to in note 4, above, the marine committee remark: "The Printers were premature in naming the New ship at Salisbury. The Congress have resolved that she be called the Alliance." The Raleigh. See no. 314, ante. In his reply June 26, as also in his letters of June 28 and July 5 (Warren-Adams Letters, II. 24, 27, 30), Warren discusses further the several naval questions of which Adams here speaks. [317] S. C. Hist. Soc., Laurens Letter-Book, Mar.-Sept., 1778, p. 160. 2 See the Journals, Apr. 21, 30, May 1, 7, 16, 28, June 1, 2. Cf. nos. 272-275, ante. One of the Ministers at Versailles* who is Minister at Madrid, is tendered as the proper person to treat with Lisbon. the Minister intended, if practicable, for Berlin and Vienna it is proposed Should negotiate with the Northern Courts; hence those minds disposed to assign a Minister to a Court and no more, are embarrassed. here a kind of delicacy, mark'd in my plain vocabulary, "false" restrains them from speaking out. hitherto therefore the contest has been confined to advanced guards and now and then upon the flanks. if it became me, I should be very apt to carry arguments home by the shortest inoffensive course. in my present situation, however important the point, I do not see my duty in interposition either within or out of Doors. the subject which has cost already two very precious days, will probably be postponed the third and possibly a very necessary measure too long delayed because some of us are not inclined to conduct it properly. Captn. Landais a skillful Sea Officer has prevailed upon us to reduce in Stile the 74 Gun Ship which had been intended at Portsmouth. his plan which we have adopted, is to lay two Decks only; to mount on the lower 28-24 and on the upper 28-18 pounders. the building will be much less expensive, the Vessel sail faster, and be of equal force with 450, instead of 600 Men and now the workmen who had been taken off will be ordered to proceed.* I am thinking very seriously of an enterprize against the place where you and I Sir once Sent John Burnet. we may if the British Troops should withdraw and not pay Charles Town too serious a visit, obtain proper Officers and Men for beginning the operation the 1st Novemb., the most proper Month in the twelve." the Remark which I made on our Treaty of 6th Febry respecting Bahama and the latent views of Spain, were not a little exploded here, but since we have been told that Court is desirous of repossessing Pensacola, which might have been predicted without pretension to much depth in politics, Gentlemen begin to reflect. our feelings are generally proportioned to the distance from danger. New England's jealousies are excited by the proximity of Canada. Carolina sees the destruction of her Commerce, from Bahama and Florida in the hands of our Enemy. I say nothing of Georgia because she is not represented. P. S. Major Genl. Conway is just come to Town in order to explain his meaning in a Letter of April, which Congress in his opinion had mistaken, and immediately notified him that his Resignation was accepted. if he fails of success in that point he intimates to me his hopes of a Recommendatory Certificate of his behaviour. whether this alternative will be listened 3 Note in the original: “* A. L. + W. L.", that is, Arthur Lee plus William Lee. 4 Cf. nos. 314, 316, ante. 5 The allusion is no doubt to a proposed expedition against Saint Augustine (East Florida). See the report on the state of Georgia, in the Journals, Feb. 13. Cf. no. 482, post. See also the Journals, Nov. 2, 10. Cf. the Journals for 1779, Jan. 15, 28, Feb. 23, Dec. 16. Concerning a proposed expedition against West Florida, see Laurens's letters to General McIntosh and Governor Rutledge, Aug. 11, 12, 1777, in vol. II. of these Letters, nos. 584, 586. to, is doubtful. Gentlemen feel keen resentment for the unprovoked gross affronts which he offered in January last to our worthy Commander in Chief; besides, he has been strongly charged with malconduct in other respects which it seems incumbent on him to answer, before he can expect general countenance in Congress. P. M. 8 the forepart of this day devoted to selling the Bear's skin.' it might have diverted you Sir, to have heard the variety of sentiments delivered in each extreme upon this momentous Subject. the wrangling of two honest Lawyers who both mean the same thing is no novelty, but the manners of two Chief Justices in conducting their debates, were curious enough, and if other people were right they were both wrong. people are anxious to know how we shall dispose of the goods Wares and Merchandize which we shall find in the city. some seemingly Wise, some very foolish and many premature propositions must be expected in a three hour discussion of this nature. a new Report may reconcile all opinions to mine, delivered only here, and which for ought I know may be ranged in the Second Class. take special care to guard against removal of any article after the Enemy shall have withdrawn. When the City is actually in your possession dispose of the Men and remaining property consistantly with Justice, good Policy, and the Laws of the State." " 318. HENRY Laurens to BARON STEUBEN.1 To Maj Genl. Baron Steuben, Sir, YORK-TOWN, June 4th, 1778 I had the honor of your Letter of 27th May by the hands of Mr. Ternant on Sunday last, which I laid before Congress, and had appointed an hour for waiting on that Gentleman, to the Board of War, but some other circumstances engaged his time. it is a very extraordinary thing for me to be a whole hour, from this Table unless I am in Congress, and I was the more concerned at the disappointment, because I had intended to have introduced Mr. Ternant to several of the Delegates, but indeed we are in such a place, and fare so meanly, as to render it painful to have Gentl. introduced, because it is not in our power to shew that respect which we would wish to do to Strangers.2 Mr. Ternant addressed himself to the Board of War, but as his departure was more sudden than I had expected, and no report concerning 6 See nos. 319, 320, post. 7" Catch the bear before you sell his skin". The allusion is to the discussion June 3 relative to the action to be taken upon the evacuation of Philadelphia by the British. Compare the report presented June 3 with the resolutions adopted June 4 See no. 307, ante, and nos. 323, 328, 332, post. 8 William Henry Drayton and Thomas McKean. [318]1 Harvard Univ. Lib., Sparks MSS., XV. 82. 2 The Journals make no mention of Steuben's letter of May 27. Concerning Jean Baptiste Ternant, see a letter from John Laurens to his father Mar. 25, in Army Correspondence, p. 145 (the name appears there, however, as "Ternaut "). His case was again brought before Congress Sept. 11, in a letter_from_Steuben of Sept. 5. He was made lieutenant-colonel Sept. 25. See also Heitman, Hist. Reg. |