1. JM’s service on the Board of Admiralty in 1780 had acquainted him with the problems arising from decentralized naval administration (Papers of Madison description begins William T. Hutchinson, William M. E. Rachal, et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison (2 vols. to date; Chicago, 1962——). description ends , II, 4–36, passim). Whether he actually laid this present proposal before Congress is not clear. Evidently he designed it to be a substitute for the second of three resolutions introduced by his colleague Meriwether Smith on 28 June 1781 (JCC description begins Worthington Chauncey Ford et al., eds., Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789 (34 vols.; Washington, 1904–37). description ends , XX, 707–8). Smith, who had briefly served on the marine committee of Congress in 1778–1779 and had played a prominent part in the debates in March 1781, occasioned by Major General Alexander McDougall’s refusal to accept the secretaryship of the newly created executive department of marine unless he could retain his commission in the continental army, was seeking by his recommendations to remedy the “inefficient and expensive” methods used in managing “the Navy of these United States.” Since Congress had named no one in McDougall’s stead, the control of naval affairs was divided among the Board of Admiralty, the several regional navy boards, and the continental agents of the marine department (JCC description begins Worthington Chauncey Ford et al., eds., Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789 (34 vols.; Washington, 1904–37). description ends , XII, 1147; XIII, 247; XIX, 126–28, 203, 333–34; XX, 634).

Of Smith’s three proposals, the first was to abolish these boards and agents; the second to empower Robert Morris, the superintendent of finance, to appoint “some discreet Agent” to manage the navy under his direction “until a Secretary of Marine be elected”; and the third to direct Morris to have the financial accounts of all the officials mentioned in the first proposal carefully scrutinized and settled. In the Second Continental Congress Morris had shared prominently in the administration of the navy between 1776 and 1778. As recently as 23 June 1781 he had been authorized by Congress to hasten the completing and equipping of the ship “America,” then on the stocks at Portsmouth, N.H. (Clarence L. Ver Steeg, Robert Morris, pp. 7–8; Papers of Madison description begins William T. Hutchinson, William M. E. Rachal, et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison (2 vols. to date; Chicago, 1962——). description ends , II, 9 n.; JCC description begins Worthington Chauncey Ford et al., eds., Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789 (34 vols.; Washington, 1904–37). description ends , XX, 692).

Congress referred Smith’s proposals to a committee under his chairmanship. In the committee’s report, made on 6 July, Smith’s second proposal was modified from “some discreet Agent” to “an agent or agents,” thus incorporating the more flexible formula JM apparently deemed desirable. Only the first recommendation of the committee—namely, that “the election of a secretary of marine be postponed till the first Monday in November next”—came to a vote. The four members of the Virginia delegation, including JM, favored it, but it failed to pass. Thereupon, the rest of the committee’s report was referred to a new committee, with Thomas McKean as chairman and Theodorick Bland as one of its other members. As the McKean committee recommended, Congress on 29 August agreed to appoint “for the present an Agent of Marine” rather than a secretary. On 7 September Congress abolished the Board of Admiralty, navy boards, agents, and “all civil officers under them,” and put naval matters under the jurisdiction of Robert Morris (JCC description begins Worthington Chauncey Ford et al., eds., Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789 (34 vols.; Washington, 1904–37). description ends , XX, 724–26, 764–67; XXI, 919–20, 943), who, in addition to the onerous superintendency of finance, became agent of marine until his resignation from both offices on 1 November 1784 (JCC description begins Worthington Chauncey Ford et al., eds., Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789 (34 vols.; Washington, 1904–37). description ends , XXVII, 653). Although the vote is not recorded, JM no doubt favored this concentration of control under a single, responsible head.