1. In his letter to Skinner on 17 Feb., GW provided directions for prisoner exchange negotiations.

2. Skinner enclosed a copy of a “Proposal of an Exchange of Prisoners of the Troops of Convention for a like number of American Prisoners,” dated 1 March at New York, and labeled “(No. 1)” beneath the docket. The proposal, “Settled & Agreed to” by Skinner and Joshua Loring, British commissary general of prisoners, presents a table listing the prisoners’ names and ranks, their corps or regiment, and their individual point value for exchanges (with designated points for each rank). The 33 British prisoners listed in the table totaled 292 points, equal to that of 30 American officers (DLC:GW).

3. Skinner enclosed a copy of a “Proposal of the Exchange of British Officers Claimed by the State of Virginia as Prisoners of War for a number of American Officers Prisoners of War to the British,” dated 1 March at New York and labeled “(No. 2)” beneath the docket. A table set five British prisoners worth 124 points against the same number of American officers with the same value. Skinner and Loring indicated their agreement (DLC:GW). The most prominent man involved in this exchange was Henry Hamilton, former British lieutenant governor of Detroit, whose imprisonment had created many complications (see Thomas Jefferson to GW, 17 July and 1, 2, and 8 Oct. 1779; GW to Jefferson, 6–10 Aug. and 13 Sept. 1779; and William Phillips to GW, 8 Dec. 1780, and n.5 to that document). For Col. George Mathews, see his letter to GW, 30 Oct. 1780.

4. The enclosure labeled “(No. 3)” on the docket is a copy of a letter that Skinner wrote Loring on 2 March 1781: “Having ratified with you the Exchange of the Convention Officers now on their way to Elizabeth Town, and having also adjusted our account of Privates—I am now to propose to you, the Exchange of Lt. General Burgoyne in conjunction with the Balance of 271 Privates acknowledged to be due to me; against and for the Officers now Prisoners with you, and unexchanged, and that if a balance should be due to me on this exchange, the same to be applied towards the relief of American Officers Prisoners to the southward: I shall thank you for your Answer to this proposal” (DLC:GW; “not acceded to, by the British” is written below the docket; see also n.5 below).

5. For the American soldiers taken prisoner in May 1776 at the Cedars, a post on the St. Lawrence River, see John Sullivan’s first letter to GW, 2 March 1778, n.5; see also GW to Samuel Huntington, 4 Jan. and 6–8 March 1780; Huntington to GW, 14 Jan. and 21 Feb. 1780; and n.6 below.

The enclosure labeled “(No. 4)” beneath the docket and dated 3 March 1781 at New York begins: “Proposal of an Exchange of the following German & British Officers of the Troops of Convention for a like number of American Officers Prisoners to the British Rank for rank as far as they will apply and where it will not by Composition agreable to the Tariff as judged reasonable by the Commissioners at their Meeting at Amboy in March 1779 and also of a balance of Privates due to the Americans as ⅌ Account settled 1st Instant.” Two columns—one for the German and British and one for the American—follow with the names and ranks of officers proposed to be exchanged, their regiment or line, and their point values. The columns list 42 Germans, 41 British, and 23 Americans, with the points for each side numbering 957. Small point balances remained due for the British and the Americans. A notation appears beneath the British names: “Due the Americans on settlement of the Account of Privates[:] 271.” Col. George Baylor of the 3d Continental Dragoons and Col. Matthias Ogden of the 1st New Jersey Regiment appear among the Americans. Loring and Skinner approved a concluding statement: “We the British & American Commissaries Genl of Prisoners have examined the list of Officers for Exchanges connected with the above proposals & find it to be correct Rank for Rank as far as it could apply, and then by Composition according to the Tariff heretofore agreed to, it will be refer’d to the respective Commanders in Chief and upon their approving of it become final; should the above Exchanges take place, Brigadier General [James Inglis] Hamilton & Brigadier General Irvin may be exchanged against each other” (DLC:GW; the docket reads: “List of German & British Officers, of the Convention Troops proposed by the Enemy for Exchanges, when Mr. skinner’s proposal for the Exchange of Genl Burgoyne was rejected”). For the commissioners that met at Perth Amboy, N.J., to negotiate a prisoner exchange, see Robert Hanson Harrison to GW, 18 April 1779, and n.3 to that document.

6. GW replied to Skinner from headquarters at New Windsor on 12 April: “I have examined your report of the 10th of March with the papers accompanying it. I do not see with what propriety the enemy could reject your proposition contained in No. 3 or can postpone the exchange of General Burgoigne on their own principles; two thirds of the Convention officers being now exchanged or nearly so, which was all along made by them a condition to the exchange of General Burgoigne. We must adhere to our proposition and proceed no further till his exchange is admitted. It cannot with propriety be connected with any disputable matter; and the affair of the cedars being already determined by Congress cannot be brought into question by me. If the enemy do not accept your proposition respecting General Burgoigne, you are to demand explicitly of them a number of privates equal to those they are in debt for to us, agreeable to the account settled between you and their Commissary. If they have not privates in their hands here, they have them to the Southward, which being under Sir Henry Clintons command ought equally to be applied to the payment of the debt” (Df, in Alexander Hamilton’s writing, DLC:GW; Varick transcript, DLC:GW; see also GW to Huntington, 16–19 April, and notes 4 and 5 above). For changed instructions, see GW to Skinner, 14 April; see also GW to Skinner, 1 May, found at Huntington to GW, 23 April, n.2.