1. JM Notes, 6 May 1783, and n. 1; JCC description begins Worthington Chauncey Ford et al., eds., Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789 (34 vols.; Washington, 1904–37). description ends , XXIV, 330.

2. On 2 May 1783 the motion of Eliphalet Dyer (Conn.) was referred to a committee comprising Stephen Higginson (Mass.), chairman, Abraham Clark (N.J.), and John Lewis Gervais (S.C.) (NA: PCC, No. 186, fol. 99; JCC description begins Worthington Chauncey Ford et al., eds., Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789 (34 vols.; Washington, 1904–37). description ends , XXIV, 327). JM had not attended Congress on that day (JM Notes, 5 May 1783, n. 3).

JM summarized rather than quoted the committee’s report, drafted by Higginson. The report recommended that, upon receiving “proper vouchers” from a state which had “settled with the officers and soldiers” of its continental line, Robert Morris, superintendent of finance, should issue to that state “public securities, payable in the same manner and for the same sums as would have been otherwise given” by the treasury of the United States to those troops for their service between 1 August 1780 and the date on which they were paid by their state (JCC description begins Worthington Chauncey Ford et al., eds., Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789 (34 vols.; Washington, 1904–37). description ends , XXIV, 330–31). Contrary to ordinances of Congress, several states had paid the wages overdue to their discontented continental troops with money deducted from the financial quotas requisitioned from those states by Congress. See Papers of Madison description begins William T. Hutchinson, William M. E. Rachal, et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison (7 vols. to date; Chicago, 1962——). description ends , V, 173–75; 175, n. 11; 366, n. 26; VI, 128, n. 39; 171, n. 1; JCC description begins Worthington Chauncey Ford et al., eds., Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789 (34 vols.; Washington, 1904–37). description ends , XXIII, 624–25; 629–31.

3. If a state paid its troops in the old continental paper currency or in state-issued paper currency at a ratio of 40 to 1 of that continental currency, as stipulated by the ordinance of 18 March 1780, the real value of the money the soldiers received would have been far less than Congress had guaranteed to them by a resolution of 10 April 1780 (JCC description begins Worthington Chauncey Ford et al., eds., Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789 (34 vols.; Washington, 1904–37). description ends , XVI, 264, 344–45). See also Burnett, Letters description begins Edmund C. Burnett, ed., Letters of Members of the Continental Congress (8 vols.; Washington, 1921–36). description ends , VI, 386, 413, 546; VII, 20, 153; Charles J. Hoadly et al., eds., The Public Records of the State of Connecticut (11 vols. to date; Hartford, 1894——), III, 21–22, 41, 189–90, 254, 310–12, 523–24; IV, 12–14, 20.

4. JCC description begins Worthington Chauncey Ford et al., eds., Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789 (34 vols.; Washington, 1904–37). description ends , XXIV, 331. The delegates from Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, and New Jersey voted unanimously in favor of the recommendation. Except for Arthur Lee, those from Virginia, North Carolina, and South Carolina were unanimously against it. New Hampshire and New York each had only one delegate in attendance, while Delaware, Maryland, and Georgia had none. The two delegates from Pennsylvania deadlocked in the tally.