1. For the resolution, see JCC description begins Worthington C. Ford et al., eds., Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789 (34 vols.; Washington, D.C., 1904–37) description ends , 21: 854. The information sent with it has not been identified. Bernardo de Gálvez, known for treating prisoners kindly, gave the British troops who surrendered at Pensacola the choice of going to Charleston, New York, or Europe under parole not to fight against Spain or its allies for the duration of the war. Since Spain had not agreed to an alliance with the United States, these troops could legally have been employed against American forces, thereby making Gálvez’s victory “more prejudicial” to the American cause than his defeat would have been and arousing Congress’s suspicions about Spain’s motives and intent. Congress considered the terms of the capitulation “extraordinary.” Two shiploads totaling about 1,000 men arrived in July at New York, where they bolstered the British defense of the city at a time when a Franco-American attack against it had been contemplated. The plan was, however, abandoned in favor of the Yorktown campaign. On the terms of capitulation and Spain’s response to American complaints about them, see JJ to the President of Congress, 3 Oct., below; LDC description begins Paul H. Smith et al., eds., Letters of Delegates to the Continental Congress, 1774–1789 (26 vols.; Washington, D.C., 1976–98) description ends , 17: 366–67, 422–23, 432, 437, 438, 440–41, 445, 523; Wright, Florida in the Am. Rev. description begins J. Leitch Wright Jr., Florida in the American Revolution (Gainesville, Fla., 1975) description ends , 115; Chavez, Spain and Independence description begins Thomas Chavez, Spain and the Independence of the United States: An Intrinsic Gift (Albuquerque, N.Mex., 2002) description ends , 197.

2. In his letter of 9 July 1781 to the president of Congress, Robert Morris had suggested that JJ be given greater latitude in negotiations with Spain on navigation of the Mississippi to increase the likelihood of an alliance and induce Spain to grant substantial financial aid. Morris’s letter was assigned to a committee consisting of John Mathews (South Carolina), Daniel Carroll (Maryland), and John Sullivan (New Hampshire), all three of whom had served on the committee that suggested revised instructions to the peace commission (see Congress’s instructions of 15 June 1781, above). On 10 Aug., Congress rejected the committee’s recommendations that the instructions of 15 Feb. be repealed and in their place that JJ be given “discretionary power . . . to agree to a further cession of the navigation of the river Mississippi . . . to promote the interest of these states.” See PRM description begins E. James Ferguson et al., eds., The Papers of Robert Morris, 1781–1784 (9 vols.; Pittsburgh, Pa., 1973–99) description ends , 1: 253–56; and JCC description begins Worthington C. Ford et al., eds., Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789 (34 vols.; Washington, D.C., 1904–37) description ends , 21: 853–54.