From John Jay to George Clinton, 22 May 1779
To George Clinton
Pha May 22 1779
Dr Sir
I have now the Pleasure of enclosing you a Copy of certain Resolutions moved in Congress this Morning respecting the pretended State of Vermont.1 They were introduced by Mr. Morris with a very proper prefatory Speech. on Saturday next Congress ^the House^ will ^be^ resolved themselves into a Com[mitte]e of the whole to take them into Consideration—what will be their Fate is uncertain, tho I am by no means without Hopes of Success. They are temperate & founded on plain Principles. opposition will hence be more difficult, and their Defence more certain—^the Yeas & Nays shall be called on every Question respecting them; and I will furnish^ ^[in margin] you with a minute Detail of the Proceedings of Congress in every stage of the Debates on the Subject.^
It was The Delays attending this Business have been unavoidable we was and rather unpleasant than prejudicial— It will now be pressed forward, and you may rely on our utmost Exertions & Care.
I now send you some Papers & Journals— My best Respects to Mrs. Clinton— I am, Dear Sir very sincerely yours &c.
His Exy Geo Clinton
Dft, NNC (EJ: 7610); LS (not found) printed in , 4: 840–41.
1. On 22 May, Gouverneur Morris introduced a motion calling for congressional endorsement of the principle that no part of a state could “separate therefrom, and become independent thereon, without the express consent and approbation of such state,” and recommending “to the inhabitants of the said pretended State of Vermont, to return peaceably to their former jurisdictions” while Congress examined their grievances. Congress thereupon resolved to take up Morris’s proposal, in a committee of the whole on 29 May. According to Morris, on that day “Mr. Jay and Mr. Duane who had the principal Share in the Debate did full Justice to the Cause and stated the Merits with a Clearness and Force irresistible unless by Prejudice and Blindness.” On 1 June, Congress decided to send a committee to the New Hampshire Grants to “enquire into the reasons why they refused to continue citizens of the respective states which heretofore exercised jurisdiction over the said district,” and to promote an amicable settlement. , 12: 509–10, 553–56; , 14: 631–33, 667–68, 673–75. On the response in New York, see George Clinton to JJ, 7 June, ALS, DNA: PCC, item 67, 2: 190–97 (EJ: 10893); and Egbert Benson to JJ, 23 June, below.