To James Madison from Joseph Jones, 21 June 1783
From Joseph Jones
RC (LC: Madison Papers). Cover missing.
Richmond 21st. June 1783
Dr. Sir.
Yours of the 10th.1 I have duly received by the Post this week. we are now as usual puting to sleep many of the bills that have employed our time and attention for great part of this Session2 among them, two—one for the benefit of Debtors—the other for regulating the proceedings in the County Courts. these were thought to have some connection and ought to rest together. Mr. Mason introduced and patronised the Debtors bill. I was not in the House when it was read but understand it allowed all Creditors to obtain Judgment, but suspended Execution, rather permitted it for a fifth of the debt annually, for five years comprehending as well foreign as domestic Creditors I came into the house during the debate and from the observations of R. H. L. and those who opposed the bill its principle was severely reprobated. Mr. Mason and C. M. T. warmly supported it and pronounced it indispensably necessary to preserve the people from ruin and the Country independent. the disposition of the members however was so prevalent for lopping of all business not really necessary that the latter Gentlemen were obliged to submit to its being refd. to the next Session.3 this bill at least so far as respected british Creditors wod. have had more advocates but for the late period at which it was introduced and because there already exists and will continue in force untill the 1st. of Decr. a law that prohibits suits for or on accot. of British Subjects.4 The bill Granting revenue to Congress to discharge this states quota of the common debt was taken into consideration yesterday but being very imperfect was postponed untill Monday next.5 my endeavours to get the impost granted as a general revenue will be fruitless so universal is the opposition to giving it otherwise than to be credited to the States.6 the collection too must be by the naval officers and by him pd. to the continental receiver quarterly.7 The land Tax is to be collected by the Sheriffs and paid into the Treasury and by him to the Continental receiver the deficiency if any to be made up out of the poll Tax.8 If the impost was general these funds wod. be adequate. Our people will not submit the Collectors to be amenable to Congress. If both collections were to be paid to the Continental receiver the bond given payable to Congress and judgments to be moved for by the continental receiver, the revenue could not be well diverted to any other purposes, and wod. answer the object, and nearly come up to the plan of Congress. duplicate receipts or settlements might be lodged with the Treasurer9 of the amount of the revenues by the respective collectors and the State thereby informed of the proceeds annually independent of the general communication from Congress. The Letter of the Delegates and the report of the Committee respecting the Cession has been read and refd. to a Committee of the whole. this not being the act of Congress a disposition prevails not to take it up.10 If we have time and the members patience to do it I shall press its being taken up and the Delegates fully instructed to close the matter with Congress if to be effected or the cession be void by a certain day and this I wod. have fixed to some day after the meeting of the next Session.11 The accounts from the Illinois are before the Executive and a Committee of the House appointed to inspect them. they are at present incompleat and any information of the balance must be altogether conjecture or I shod. mention it.12 A bill has passed the Delegates establishing funds for paying the interest and sinking the principal of the debt due to our line of the Army for pay & Depreciation including the State Troops eight years is allotted for extinguishing the debt 9d. on salt 4d. on wine 4d. on spirits with some imposts on malt Liqeur and a duty of 10s per Hhd. on Tobacco exported, are the funds which are thot. adequate to pay the interest and extinguish the principal in that time. the deficiency if any is to come out of the poll Tax.13 We have an empty Treasury or so nearly so as not to have sufficient to pay the Delegates wages and the collection of the Taxes being postponed I think the civil list and Delegates to Congress will be reduced to difficulties.14 I forgot to mention above, that the report of the Com: on the cession has not fully removed the fears of our people respecting Indian purchases & Grants to companies. their jealousy of Congress on that head is very strong.15 Mr. Lee tells me he sets out to day for Philadelphia I expect he will be a fortnight at least before he reaches the City. I may spend two or three months there this fall.16 The new arrangement of the british ministry one would think cannot last long—like oil & water jumbled together they will soon Separate.17 their existence will I hope be extended to the accomplishment of the definitive Treaty. Hartly appears to have been a friend to its conclusion.18 several of the banished Scotsmen and some refugees have returned to this Sta[te] three or four to Petersburg of the former, whose presence has so provoked the people of that neighbourhood they were to meet yesterday to order them away.19 The Cit[izen] bill stands the order of the day for Monday.20 The opponents of this bill think it premature as the definitive Treaty has not appeared. they also assert it to be unwise and impos[sible] to refuse the admission of these or any others disposed [to] settle in the Country. a descrimination will however if the business is brot. on, take place with respect to refugees whatever may be the fate of the banished Merchants the settlement of this business is the more necessary as there is a very severe law in force agt. British Subjects and th[ose] who have left the Country and joined them, which will not I think be repealed unless the Citizen bill be taken up.21 This with the revenue bill for the Continental debt, the cession, the alteration proposed in ascertaining the quota of each State22 & Nathans demand which is to come on next monday23 are the principal matters remaining to be considered, and will be finished in the course of the next week. I shall leave Richmond this day week. your letters after the receip[t] of this please to direct to Fredericksburg.24 Monroe will send Mr. Jefferson his letter.25
Yr. friend & servt.
Jos: Jones
1. The contents of JM’s missing letter of 10 June to Jones probably resembled those of his letters on that day to Jefferson and Randolph (qq.v.).
2. Between 14 June, when Jones had last written to JM (q.v.) and 20 June, both inclusive, the Virginia House of Delegates had put “to sleep” until the session of October 1783 six petitions or bills relating to an individual’s grievance or the desire of a particular locality, and five general measures. Of the five the three not mentioned by Jones were: (1) “to indemnify all officers of the armies of the United States, and others, for acts necessarily done in execution of military orders”; (2) “to amend the several acts concerning marriages”; and (3) “to make the half-blood inheritable to lands or slaves descended from, or given by, their common ancestors” (, May 1783, pp. 56, 60, 61, 62, 67, 69). See also for (1), , May 1783, pp. 24, 41; JM Notes, 6 May, and n. 1; 7 May 1783. See also for (3) Randolph to JM, 14 June 1783, and n. 7; Beckley to Randolph, 20 June 1783.
3. During the session of May 1783 the members of the Virginia General Assembly were sufficiently in accord to defer the collection of several types of taxes but were much divided on the issue of enacting a stay law for the relief of citizens who apparently could not discharge their overdue obligations to private creditors, both domestic and foreign. The county courts, in entertaining suits brought by creditors, varied in their leniency or harshness of judgment and perhaps, too, in the evidence required to validate a debt. Stevens Thomson Mason had already drafted a “Debtors bill,” when, on 17 June, he was named by the House of Delegates the chairman of a committee to prepare such a measure. Immediately thereafter, as chairman of the Committee for Courts of Justice, he also introduced, “according to order,” a bill “for reforming county courts.” Both these proposals, having been referred to a committee of the whole house on the state of the commonwealth, were deferred on 20 June for further consideration until the session of the General Assembly in October 1783. The vote “putting to sleep” the court bill, not having been demanded by a delegate, is not recorded in the journal, but the result was probably similar to the 66–23 division whereby the House of Delegates tabled the debtors’ bill. In that division Jones did not vote, but “R. H. L.” (Richard Henry Lee) supported the deferral and “C. M. T.” (Charles Mynn Thruston) opposed it (, May 1783, pp. 61, 62, 63, 70). See also Randolph to JM, 9 May, and nn. 4, 5; 15 May, and n. 5; 24 May, and n. 3; Jones to JM, 14 June 1783.
4. Jones referred to the statute of 1 July 1782, as amended on 22 December 1782 (, XI, 176–80; , VI, 416, n. 3). See also Harrison to Delegates, 9 May 1783, and n. 6.
5. On 20 June a committee of the whole house debated the bill “to ascertain certain duties and imposts, and to establish adequate funds for the discharge of this State’s quota of the principal and interest of the debt of the United States,” but “not having time to go through the same” received permission of the House of Delegates to resume the discussion on 23 June. For the failure of the Senate to pass this bill, see Pendleton to JM, 26 May 1783, n. 11.
6. For the extensive but ultimately unfavorable attention given to the impost by the House of Delegates during the May session of the General Assembly, see , May 1783, pp. 48, 49, 63, 65, 68, 69, 70, 82, 84–85, 86, 93; Randolph to JM, 15 May, and n. 2; 24 May, and nn. 5, 6; 21 June; 28 June; Jameson to JM, 24 May, and n. 3; Jones to JM, 25 May, and n. 9; 14 June, and n. 7; 28 June; Pendleton to JM, 26 May 1783, and n. 5.
7. Pendleton to JM, 4 May, and n. 8; Randolph to JM, 15 May, and n. 2; Jones to JM, 14 June 1783, and n. 12. The continental receiver general for Virginia was George Webb.
8. In this sentence Jones reverted to the bill which he had mentioned three sentences before. For the fate of this measure, see Jones to JM, 28 June 1783. Before adjourning on 28 June, the May session of the General Assembly enacted into law a measure which early in 1784 might yield some financial benefit to Congress. See Pendleton to JM, 26 May 1783, n. 11.
9. Jacquelin Ambler.
10. On 19 June Governor Harrison had transmitted to the House of Delegates a copy of the report of a congressional committee on Virginia’s offer to cede the lands north and west of the Ohio River (, May 1783, p. 68; JM to Randolph, 10 June, and n. 16; Delegates to Harrison, 17 June, n. 1). See also Randolph to JM, 9 May, and n. 8; 14 June; Jones to JM, 31 May; 14 June, and n. 14; JM Notes, 4 June, and n. 2; 6 June; 10 June 1783.
12. In submitting to the House of Delegates on 29 May and 18 and 25 June preliminary and incomplete financial reports from the commissioners to settle western accounts, Governor Harrison commented that many of the claims were fraudulent and their total amount “exceeds conjecture” (Executive Letter Book, 1783–1786, pp. 137, 156, 162, MS in Va. State Library). See also , VI, 475, n. 3; Jones to JM, 8 June; 14 June, and n. 27. On 19 June the report submitted the day before by Harrison was referred to the select committee, George Nicholas, chairman, appointed 16 June, on the claim of Simon Nathan (, May 1783, pp. 60, 64, 68). This committee apparently confined its recommendations concerning the report to the claims of a few individuals, including Simon Nathan and Oliver Pollock (, May 1783, pp. 83, 94, 97).
13. This bill, which was adopted by the House of Delegates on 20 June and by the Senate four days later, received the signature of the speaker of each chamber on 28 June 1783 (, May 1783, pp. 70–71, 79, 98, 99; , XI, 196–203). In his summary, Jones omitted the impost duties on snuff, hemp, and cordage. In citing ten shillings per hogshead as the export duty on tobacco, he combined the four shillings stipulated by the law with the inspection tax of six shillings required by another statute enacted at the same session of the General Assembly. If the annual income derived from the four-shilling export duty and from the imposts fell short of the sum needed to pay the interest and one-eighth of the principal on the certificates issued to the troops, the deficiency was to be covered by revenue derived from the poll tax on slaves. Holders of the interest certificates could use them in lieu of money or commodities for paying taxes (ibid., XI, 197, 202, 227–28).
14. Randolph to JM, 14 June 1783, and nn. 5, 6. See also Randolph to JM, 9 May, and n. 4; 24 May, and n. 7; Jones to JM, 31 May 1783.
15. JM to Jefferson, 20 May, n. 5; Jones to JM, 8 June; 28 June; JM to Randolph, 10 June 1783, and n. 16.
17. , VI, 504, n. 3; Jones to JM, 8 June 1783, and n. 22.
18. Pendleton to JM, 4 May, and n. 6; Jones to JM, 8 June 1783, and n. 23.
19. The reopening of ocean-borne trade with the British facilitated, and the provisional treaty of peace appeared to some persons to permit, the return of Loyalists and Scottish merchants to Virginia. Among the “banished Scotsmen” were probably the agents of a Glasgow “tobacco lord,” William Cuninghame (d. 1789), who had owned much property in Virginia before 1776 (Robert Renwick, Sir John Lindsay, and George Eyre-Todd, History of Glasgow [3 vols.; Glasgow, 1921–34], III, 242, 246–47). Addressing Governor Harrison from Petersburg, these agents, promising to conform with “the Laws of the State,” claimed his protection while they sought to re-establish Cuninghame’s old commercial ties and reach an accommodation with his numerous debtors (Transcript of the Manuscript Books and Papers of the Commission of Enquiry into the Losses and Services of the American Loyalists … in the Public Record Office of England, 1783–1790, LVIII, 421–32, in the New York Public Library). If there was a meeting at Petersburg on 20 June “to order” these agents “away,” they may have defied that admonition, but they could not disregard Harrison’s proclamation of 2 July, warning all Loyalists and other British subjects to leave Virginia “forthwith” (ibid., LVIII, 432; , III, 499; Randolph to JM, 12 July 1783, and n. 2).
In the main, the proclamation was enforced impartially, even against so prominent a refugee as Captain John Wormeley (, V, 286, n. 14; , III, 276–77). For the exceptional case of Dr. Philip Turpin, see Randolph to JM, 18 July 1783, and n. 6.
20. Jones’s statement makes clear that he wrote the present letter early on 21 June, for he and fifty-five other members of the House of Delegates later that day voted to “put off till the second Monday in October next” a further consideration of the bill “to repeal the act, declaring who shall be deemed citizens of this Commonwealth, and for declaring who shall be deemed such citizens.” Carter Braxton, Richard Henry Lee, and Stevens Thomson Mason were among the twenty-seven members who opposed this decision (, May 1783, pp. 21, 22, 76–77). See also , V, 61, n. 11; Jones to JM, 31 May, and nn. 13, 14; 8 June, and n. 27; 14 June 1783.
21. The Virginia Conventions of December 1775 and May 1776 and several sessions of the Virginia General Assembly adopted ordinances or enacted legislation severely punishing Loyalists with fines, imprisonment, confiscation of property, and banishment (, IX, 101–7, 130–32, 170–71; X, 92–93, 268–70, 310, 386–88, 414). See also , V, 61, n. 12; 81, n. 5; Randolph to JM, 15 May, and n. 5; Jones to JM, 28 June 1783.
22. Pendleton to JM, 26 May, n. 11; Jones to JM, 14 June, and n. 17; Instruction to Delegates, 27 June 1783.
23. On 20 June in the House of Delegates, the committee on the claim of Simon Nathan rendered a report including “several resolutions” and “papers relative to the claim.” These were spread on the journal. The next day the recommendation favoring Nathan’s claim, as judged by Joseph Reed and William Bradford, Jr., the two “referees” in Philadelphia, was rejected on the grounds that they had been unaware of some circumstances adverse to the claim. On 24 June the House of Delegates, and on the next day the Senate, agreed that the issue should be submitted to two new arbitrators—one to be appointed by Nathan and the other by the governor and Council of Maryland. Edmund Randolph, as attorney general, was instructed to attend the arbitration. Virginia guaranteed to abide by the outcome. Nathan also was so to pledge under penalty, if he violated his promise, of forfeiting £15,000 to the state of Virginia (, May 1783, pp. 71, 72, 73–75, 81–82, 84). See also , VI, Index, under Nathan, Simon; Delegates to Gálvez, 4 May, ed. n.; JM to Jefferson, 20 May, and n. 4; Jones to JM, 8 June, and n. 19; 14 June; Randolph to JM, 28 June 1783. Nathan, already in financial straits, had been obliged to terminate his lease of Rock-Hall, a “handsome genteel House” in Philadelphia (Pa. Packet, 3, 7, and 10 June 1783).
24. The location of the post office nearest to Jones’s estate of Spring Hill in King George County.
25. In his missing letter of 10 June to Jones, JM probably had enclosed his letter of the same date to Jefferson (q.v.).