cede to the Confederacy. The business is referred to a committee who are sufficiently devoted to the policy of gaining the vote of Vermont into Congress. The result will be the subject of a future letter.

The thinness, or rather vacancy, of the Virginia line, and the little prospect of recruiting it, are subjects of a very distressing nature. If those on whom the remedy depends were sensible of the insulting comparisons to which they expose the State, and of the wound they give to her influence in the general councils, I am persuaded more decisive exertions would be made. Considering the extensive interests and claims which Virginia has, and the enemies and calumnies which these very claims form against her, she is perhaps under the strongest obligation of any State in the Union, to preserve her military contingent on a respectable footing; and unhappily her line is perhaps, of all, in the most disgraceful condition. The only hope that remains is, that her true policy will be better consulted at the ensuing Assembly, and that as far as a proper sense of it may be deficient, the expostulations of her friends, and clamors of her enemies, will supply the place of it. If I speak my sentiments too freely on this point, it can only be imputed to my sensibility to the honor and interest of my country.

DEAR SIR,

TO EDMUND RANDOLPH.

Philadelphia, April 9, 1782.

I perceive, by a passage cited in the examination of the Connecticut claim to lands in Pennsylvania, that we have been mistaken in supposing the acquiescence of Virginia in the defalcations of her chartered territory to have been a silent one. It said that "at a meeting of the Privy Council, July 3d, 1633, was taken into consideration the petition of the planters of Virginia, remonstrating that some grants had lately been obtained of a great proportion of the lands and territories within the limits of the Colony there; and a day was ordered for further hearing the parties, (to wit: Lord Baltimore, and said adventurers and planters.)" The decision against Virginia is urged as proof that the Crown did not regard the charter as in force with respect to the bounds of Virginia. It is clearly a proof that Virginia at that time thought otherwise, and made all the opposition to the encroachment which could then have been made to the arbitrary acts which gave birth to the present revolution. If any monuments exist of the transactions of Virginia at the period above mentioned, or any of the successive periods, at which these encroachments had been repeated, you will have an opportunity of searching more minutely into them. It is not probable, however, that after a failure in the first opposition any further opposition will be found to subsequent grants out of Virginia.

DEAR SIR,

TO THOMAS JEFFERSON.

Philadelphia, April 16, 1782.

I entreat that you will not suffer the chance of a speedy and final determination of the Territorial Question, by Congress, to affect your purpose of tracing the title of Virginia to her claims. It is, in the first place, very uncertain when a determination will take place, even if it takes place at all; and in the next it will assuredly not be a final one, unless Virginia means to be passive and silent under aggression on her rights. In every event, therefore, it is proper to be armed with every argument and document that can vindicate her title. Her adversarics will be either the United States, or New York, or both. The former will either claim on the principle that the vacant country is not included in any particular State, and consequently falls to the whole, or will clothe themselves with the title of the latter by accepting its cession. In both cases it will be alleged, that the charter of 1609 was annulled by the resumption of it into the hands of the Crown, and that the subsequent grants to Maryland, &c., denote this to have been the construction of it; that the proclamation of 1763 has constituted the Alleghany ridge the Western limit of Virginia, and that the letter of President Nelson, on the subject of a new Colony on the Ohio, relinquishes on the part of Virginia all interference with the authority of the Crown beyond that limit. In case the title of New York should alone be op posed to that of Virginia, it will be further alleged

against the latter, that the treaties of 1684, 1701, 1726, 1744, and 1754, between the Government of the former and the Six Nations, have annexed to it all the country claimed by these nations and their tributaries, and that the expense of New York in defending and protecting them ought in equity to be reimbursed by this exclusive advantage. The original title of New York is indeed drawn from the charter to the Duke of York in 1663-4, renewed after the treaty of Westminster in 1674. But this charter will not, I believe, reach any territory claimed by Virginia.

Much stress will also be laid on the treaty of Fort Stanwix, particularly as a bar to any corroboration of the claim of Virginia from the treaties of Lancaster and Loggstown. It is under this treaty that the companies of Indiana and Vandalia shelter their pretensions against the claims of Virginia, &c. &c. See the pamphlets entitled "Public Good" and "Plain Facts." As these pretensions can be of no avail, unless the jurisdiction of Congress, or New York at least, can be established, they no otherwise deserve notice than as sources of calumny and influence in the public councils; in both which respects it is the interest of Virginia that an antidote should be applied.

TO EDMUND RANDOLPH.

DEAR SIR,

Philadelphia, April 23, 1782.

Congress have received from the Minister of France some informal communications relative to the issue of the proposed mediation of Vienna and Petersburgh. The answer of the British Court to the preliminary articles is among them. It rejects explicitly that part of the plan which requires concurrent negotiations between her and America, and guaranties the result, as incompatible with the relation of subjects to their sovereign, and the essential interests of the Empire; alleging, at the same time, that a great part of the people are disposed to return to their allegiance, and that such a treaty would supply the rebels with new pretexts for misleading them. The final answer of the mediating Courts professes great impartiality and delicacy toward the belligerent parties; adheres to the expediency of the first plan, and hopes that it may still become, under more favorable circumstances, the basis of a general pacification.

Another letter has come to hand from Mr. Dana. His proposed step was probably taken a few days after the date of it, which was about the middle of October.13

The Committee on the last application from Vermont have reported fully in their favor." The consideration of the report will not be called for, however, till the pulse of nine States beats favora bly for it. This is so uncertain that the agents have VOL. 1.-8*